Abstract
Long-term regional environmental monitoring, coupled with shorter-term and more localized monitoring carried out under regulatory permitting processes, is foundational to identifying, understanding, and effectively managing cumulative environmental effects. However, monitoring programs that emerge to support cumulative effects science are often short-lived initiatives or disconnected from land use planning and regulatory decision making. This paper examines the history and evolution of environmental monitoring in the Lower Athabasca region of Alberta, Canada, and the enabling and constraining influences of institutional arrangements. Methods involved a review of regional-scale monitoring programs based on an analysis of monitoring agency mandates, performance reports, and external program reviews, supplemented by discussions with monitoring program or agency key informants to triangulate results. Results show that monitoring to support cumulative effects understanding in the Lower Athabasca has advanced considerably, especially since the mid-1990s, but its relevance to, and impact on, cumulative effects management and decision making has been stifled by institutional arrangements. Monitoring has been episodic, reflecting shifting priorities and competing mandates; criticized by stakeholders based on concerns about transparency, credibility, influence over decision making; and characterized by short-lived commitments by the agencies involved. This has generated significant uncertainty about the stability of institutional arrangements to support long-term environmental monitoring, and tensions between the need for scientific autonomy for credible science whilst ensuring the pursuit of monitoring questions that are relevant to the day-to-day needs of regulatory decision makers. Regional monitoring programs require, at a minimum, clear vision and agreed-upon monitoring questions that are of scientific and management value, meaningful and balanced stakeholder engagement, and a clear governance process to ensure credibility and influence of monitoring results on decision making.
Accepted Version (Free)
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
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.