IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v34y2014i4d10.1007_s10669-014-9522-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Out of the Land of Oz: the importance of tackling wicked environmental problems without taming them

Author

Listed:
  • Cynthia H. Stahl

    (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

Abstract

Struggling with complex environmental decision making often makes us feel that only the wizard in the movie, “The Wizard of Oz” (Fleming in Wizard of Oz, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, California, 1939) can produce agreeable solutions. However, this need not be the case if we distinguish between the technical information used in decision making versus the process of decision making. Making environmental decisions is a wicked problem, meaning that values are imposed, whether or not we explicitly acknowledge or understand what those values are. Classic wicked problems are those such as how to choose among potential ozone control policies, climate change policies or developing a sustainability plan. In contrast, tame problems are those where there is a knowable truth. Classic tame problems are those such as estimating the ground level ozone level given source emissions and meteorology within a chosen spatial and temporal scale such as that stipulated by assessing compliance with the federal ozone standard. Lack of understanding that environmental decision making utilizes tame problem information while remaining a wicked problem is a barrier to finding policy solutions. Hence, we challenge environmental professionals to rethink their processes of decision making with the tame/wicked insight offered here.

Suggested Citation

  • Cynthia H. Stahl, 2014. "Out of the Land of Oz: the importance of tackling wicked environmental problems without taming them," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 473-477, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:34:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-014-9522-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-014-9522-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-014-9522-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-014-9522-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bohringer, Christoph & Jochem, Patrick E.P., 2007. "Measuring the immeasurable -- A survey of sustainability indices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-8, June.
    2. Clark, Judy & Burgess, Jacquelin & Harrison, Carolyn M., 2000. ""I struggled with this money business": respondents' perspectives on contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 45-62, April.
    3. Frame, Bob & Brown, Judy, 2008. "Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 225-241, April.
    4. Cynthia H. Stahl & Alan J. Cimorelli, 2005. "How Much Uncertainty is Too Much and How Do We Know? A Case Example of the Assessment of Ozone Monitor Network Options," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 1109-1120, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mary A. Fox & L. Elizabeth Brewer & Lawrence Martin, 2017. "An Overview of Literature Topics Related to Current Concepts, Methods, Tools, and Applications for Cumulative Risk Assessment (2007–2016)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-28, April.
    2. Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow, 2021. "Cultural Theory's Contributions to Risk Analysis: A Thematic Review with Directions and Resources for Further Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 429-455, March.
    3. Zachary A. Collier & Igor Linkov & James H. Lambert, 2014. "Tools and strategies for climate change decision making," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 471-472, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    2. Blackburn, Nivea & Brown, Judy & Dillard, Jesse & Hooper, Val, 2014. "A dialogical framing of AIS–SEA design," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 83-101.
    3. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    4. Michael Ahlheim & Oliver Frör & Antonia Heinke & Alwin Keil & Nguyen Minh Duc & Pham Van Dinh & Camille Saint-Macary & Manfred Zeller, 2008. "Landslides in mountainous regions of Northern Vietnam: Causes, protection strategies and the assessment of economic losses," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 298/2008, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    5. Annika Styczynski & Jedamiah Wolf & Somdatta Tah & Arnab Bose, 2014. "When decision-making processes fail: an argument for robust climate adaptation planning in the face of uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 478-491, December.
    6. Ray L. Ison & Kevin B. Collins & Ben L. Iaquinto, 2021. "Designing an inquiry‐based learning system: Innovating in research praxis to transform science–policy–practice relations for sustainable development," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 610-624, October.
    7. Daniela Cristina Momete & Manuel Mihail Momete, 2021. "Map and Track the Performance in Education for Sustainable Development across the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-14, November.
    8. Duck Bong Kim, 2019. "An approach for composing predictive models from disparate knowledge sources in smart manufacturing environments," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1999-2012, April.
    9. Zhicheng Lai & Lei Li & Zhuomin Tao & Tao Li & Xiaoting Shi & Jialing Li & Xin Li, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Influencing Factors of Ecological Well-Being Performance from the Perspective of Strong Sustainability: A Case Study of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-25, January.
    10. Szabó, Zoltán, 2011. "Reducing protest responses by deliberative monetary valuation: Improving the validity of biodiversity valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 37-44.
    11. Svatava Janoušková & Tomáš Hák & Bedřich Moldan, 2018. "Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    12. Ernest Reig‐Martínez & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo, 2011. "Ranking farms with a composite indicator of sustainability," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(5), pages 561-575, September.
    13. Kajsa Borgnäs, 2017. "Indicators as ‘circular argumentation constructs’? An input–output analysis of the variable structure of five environmental sustainability country rankings," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 769-790, June.
    14. Lundgren, Jakob, 2022. "Unity through disunity: Strengths, values, and tensions in the disciplinary discourse of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    15. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    16. Shelby D. Hunt, 2017. "Strategic marketing, sustainability, the triple bottom line, and resource-advantage (R-A) theory: Securing the foundations of strategic marketing theory and research," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(1), pages 52-66, June.
    17. Rickels, Wilfried & Weigand, Christian & Grasse, Patricia & Schmidt, Jörn Oliver & Voss, Rüdiger, 2018. "Does the European Union achieve comprehensive blue growth? Progress of EU coastal states in the Baltic and North Sea, and the Atlantic Ocean against sustainable development Goal 14," Kiel Working Papers 2112, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    18. Becken, S. & Simmons, D., 2008. "Using the concept of yield to assess the sustainability of different tourist types," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 420-429, October.
    19. Richard R. Shaker & Joseph Aversa & Victoria Papp & Bryant M. Serre & Brian R. Mackay, 2020. "Showcasing Relationships between Neighborhood Design and Wellbeing Toronto Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    20. Tumaneng-Diete, Tessie & Page, Ashley & Binney, Jim, 2005. "Assessing the economic values of exotic invasive plants on areas of conservation significance in Queensland," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 139287, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:34:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-014-9522-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.