Will Allen
Related Authors
Nicholas Jordan
University of Minnesota
Frank Vanclay
University of Groningen
Stewart Lockie
James Cook University
Jane Mills
University of Gloucestershire
Andrew Campbell
Charles Darwin University
Sue Kilpatrick
University of Tasmania
Justin Mog
University of Louisville
Chris Short
University of Gloucestershire
InterestsView All (15)
Uploads
Papers by Will Allen
ecological processes and human benefits. Some argue that these relationships should be specified through
expert-derived analytical (i.e., top-down) frameworks, in order to organize accumulated knowledge and create
ready-made framings for communities on the ground. In contrast, arguments for the participatory construction
of ES assessments emphasize the need for place-sensitive and deliberative (i.e., bottom-up) approaches. In this
paper, we draw on a novel water planning exercise in New Zealand to examine the tensions that arise when
expert-produced categories intersect with diverse stakeholder worldviews and aspirations. Expert-derived ES
categories and analyses intervene in local valuation contexts in a range of ways, narrowing the scope of which
ecological processes might be considered as relevant or legitimate (bounding), aswell as affecting howthese processes
are described and compared (measuring). The practices of bounding and measuring ES in scientific and
planning assessments should thus be conceptualized as involving political work and not just scientific judgment.
This reframes the role of ecological science and scientists in ES debates, and this presents cautions as well as opportunities
for future ES work relating to policy.
practice and identify lessons around how to collaborate more effectively. This approach is provided here as a guide that can be used to support reflective research practice for engagement in other integration-based initiatives. This paper is set in the context of an integrated wildlife management research case study in New Zealand. We illustrate how multi-, inter- and trans-disciplinary approaches can provide a framework for considering the
different conversations that need to occur in an integrated research program. We then outline rubrics that list the criteria required in inter- and trans-disciplinary collaborations, along with
examples of effective engagement processes that directly support integration through such efforts. Finally, we discuss the implications of these experiences for other researchers and
managers seeking to improve engagement and collaboration in integrated science, management and policy initiatives. Our experiences reaffirm the need for those involved in integrative initiatives to attend to the processes of engagement in both formal and informal settings, to provide opportunities for critical reflective practice, and to look for measures of success that acknowledge the importance of effective social process.
ecological processes and human benefits. Some argue that these relationships should be specified through
expert-derived analytical (i.e., top-down) frameworks, in order to organize accumulated knowledge and create
ready-made framings for communities on the ground. In contrast, arguments for the participatory construction
of ES assessments emphasize the need for place-sensitive and deliberative (i.e., bottom-up) approaches. In this
paper, we draw on a novel water planning exercise in New Zealand to examine the tensions that arise when
expert-produced categories intersect with diverse stakeholder worldviews and aspirations. Expert-derived ES
categories and analyses intervene in local valuation contexts in a range of ways, narrowing the scope of which
ecological processes might be considered as relevant or legitimate (bounding), aswell as affecting howthese processes
are described and compared (measuring). The practices of bounding and measuring ES in scientific and
planning assessments should thus be conceptualized as involving political work and not just scientific judgment.
This reframes the role of ecological science and scientists in ES debates, and this presents cautions as well as opportunities
for future ES work relating to policy.
practice and identify lessons around how to collaborate more effectively. This approach is provided here as a guide that can be used to support reflective research practice for engagement in other integration-based initiatives. This paper is set in the context of an integrated wildlife management research case study in New Zealand. We illustrate how multi-, inter- and trans-disciplinary approaches can provide a framework for considering the
different conversations that need to occur in an integrated research program. We then outline rubrics that list the criteria required in inter- and trans-disciplinary collaborations, along with
examples of effective engagement processes that directly support integration through such efforts. Finally, we discuss the implications of these experiences for other researchers and
managers seeking to improve engagement and collaboration in integrated science, management and policy initiatives. Our experiences reaffirm the need for those involved in integrative initiatives to attend to the processes of engagement in both formal and informal settings, to provide opportunities for critical reflective practice, and to look for measures of success that acknowledge the importance of effective social process.