Crossing boundaries between science and policy: Two case studies illustrate the importance of boundary organizations in the Great Lakes Basin |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Water Resources Division, Constitution Hall, 525 West Allegan Street, P.O. Box 30458, Lansing, MI 48909-7958, USA;2. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Charlevoix Fisheries Research Station, 96 Grant Street, Charlevoix, MI 49720, USA;3. Great Lakes Commission, 1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350, Ann Arbor, MI 48108, USA;4. Ohio Lake Erie Commission, 347 North Dunbridge Road, Bowling Green, OH 43402, USA;5. School for Environment and Sustainability, The University of Michigan, Dana Building, 440 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;1. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Salmon Region. 99 Hwy 93 N. Salmon, ID 83467, United States;2. University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, College of Natural Resources, 800 Reserve St., Stevens Point, WI 54481, United States;3. Patrick Schmalz Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Research, Duluth Field Office, 5351 North Shore Dr., Duluth, MN 55804, United States;4. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Duluth Field Office, 5351 North Shore Dr., Duluth, MN 55804, United States;5. Paul Piszczeck Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Lake Superior Fisheries Unit, 1701 N 4th St. Superior, WI 54880, United States;6. Brian Borkholder Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Resource Management Division, 28 University Road, Cloquet, MN 55720, United States;1. University Savoie Mont Blanc, INRAE, CARRTEL, Thonon-les-Bains, France;2. Purdue University, Department of Forestry and Natural Resources and Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA;3. Estonian University of Life Sciences, Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, Tartu 51006, Estonia;4. Segula Technologies, Barcelona, Spain;5. Department of Sustainable Agro-ecosystems and Bioresources, Research and Innovation Centre, Fondazione Edmund Mach, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all’Adige, Italy;6. Ecole des Ponts ParisTech, Marne-la-Vallée, France;7. Environment and Climate Change Canada, 867 Lakeshore Road, Burlington, ON, Canada;1. Division of Atmospheric Sciences, Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland;2. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland;3. Department of Built Environment, Aalto University, Finland;4. Helsinki University Center for Environment, HENVI, University of Helsinki, Finland;5. Department of Geography and Geology, University of Turku, Finland |
| |
Abstract: | Boundary organizations are institutions that interface between science and policy by facilitating interactions between scientists, policy specialists, and other stakeholders to inform collaborative decision-making. Natural resource management in the Great Lakes Basin is complex and a shared exercise among two federal governments, eight states, two provinces, and over 200 sovereign Tribes, First Nations, and Métis. Many governmental agencies have recognized a need to effectively engage with other jurisdictions in order to bridge the gaps between scientific knowledge and policy decisions. As a result, boundary organizations have emerged to facilitate planning and implementation of collaborative governance frameworks. This commentary highlights how decades of shared governance of the world’s largest freshwater surface water system is augmented and assisted by boundary organizations in addressing two key Great Lakes management issues – Western Lake Erie Basin nutrient levels and Lake Michigan fisheries – which are complex, broad in scale, and pose challenges that must be addressed collaboratively across jurisdictions. While there are many governmental and non-governmental entities that engage in boundary organization-like behaviors, this commentary will be centered on three key institutions: The Great Lakes Executive Committee’s Annex 4 (Nutrients) Subcommittee, the Great Lakes Commission, and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. We illustrate how each organization procedurally engages stakeholders, especially within state and provincial jurisdictions, to produce information and products that add breadth and capacity to manage the ecosystems of the Great Lakes. We also highlight areas of success and opportunities for improvement in collaborative governance frameworks now and into the future. |
| |
Keywords: | Boundary organization Nutrients Fisheries Lake Erie Lake Michigan Great Lakes governance |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|