Abstract

Environmental decision makers are required to understand complex ecological processes and ecological computer models are designed to facilitate this understanding. A set of interviews reveals three main perceptions affecting senior environmental decision makers’ trust in ecological computer models as decision facilitation tools: an ecological computer model is perceived as (i) a ‘black box’, (ii) processing poorly documented, sparse and out-of-date input data, and (iii) whose sensitivity to model parameters enables manipulation to produce desired outcomes justifying pre-conceived decisions. This leads to lack of trust towards both ecological computer models and model-users, including other scientists and decision makers. Model acceptance appears to depend on the amount, currency and geographical origin of input data. This is at odds with modellers’ communication style, which typically places more emphasis on highlighting the ecological computer model’s features and performance, rather than on describing the input data. Developing ‘big data’ capabilities could deliver the large, real-time, local data that may enhance acceptance. However, the size and complexity of ‘big data’ requires automated pre-processing, using modelling and algorithms that are even more inscrutable than current ecological computer models. Future trust in ecological computer models will likely depend on how this dilemma is resolved, which is likely to require improved communication between modellers and decision makers.

Highlights

  • At its core, effective decision making aimed at supporting environmental sustainability requires an understanding of the interplay of multiple processes interacting at different scales to promote desirable outcomes [1]

  • To what extent do these different perceptions depend on the understanding of what an ecological computer model is and how it functions? When a decision maker talks about an ecological computer model, what mental representation does (s)he employ? A machine? A diagram? A picture? Does it affect the decision maker’s will to account for model results in the decision making process? We explored these issues in a series of interviews with senior environmental decision makers involved in a range of large environmental projects addressing the sustainability of marine and coastal ecological systems

  • The interviews highlighted some common themes amongst decision maker responses in terms of: limited understanding about what an ecological computer model is and what it does; uncertainty about the reliability of input data used in the ecological computer model; and lack of trust regarding manipulation of model parameters and the subsequent reliability of model outputs

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Effective decision making aimed at supporting environmental sustainability requires an understanding of the interplay of multiple processes interacting at different scales to promote desirable outcomes [1]. Some decision makers believe that ecological computer models are an effective tool to understand these complex interplays. When a decision maker talks about an ecological computer model, what mental representation does (s)he employ? We explored these issues in a series of interviews with senior environmental decision makers involved in a range of large environmental projects addressing the sustainability of marine and coastal ecological systems. The decision makers were scientists with little to no technical background in modelling. The interviews provided some novel insights on how to improve communication in relation to acceptance of ecological computer models as decision facilitation tools

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.