Abstract
Abstract This study investigates the subjective perspectives of participants in natural resource management for the purpose of overcoming gridlock and persistent conflict. Our results indicate that participants share many beliefs about the descriptive aspects of science and the contingency of knowledge. However, substantial and real disagreement persists regarding what roles science, expertise, politics, and values ought to play in the planning process. This study uses two patterns of perspectives derived from case studies, scientific management and adaptive governance as a basis for investigating subjective perspectives. Based on these theoretical perspectives, we developed a Q sort, presented it to respondents, and cluster analyzed their rankings to investigate actual and perceived differences in beliefs. The information about perspectives generated by this study can help managers overcome persistent conflict by identifying issues for consensus building as well as highlighting areas of actual conflict.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
