SYMP 3-3
Cassandra’s curse, Heraclitus’ horror, and Polyanna’s games: Leading an interagency ecological program in times of conflict and change
I am the Lead Scientist for the Interagency Ecological Program (IEP) for the San Francisco Estuary (SFE) in California. Over the last 160 years, the SFE has been rapidly transformed from vast wetlands and bays to an urban and agricultural population center and the central hub of California’s water supply infrastructure. The IEP is a consortium of six Federal and three California State agencies that was initiated in 1970 when the ecological effects of these transformations became a concern. The mission of the IEP is to provide and integrate relevant and timely ecological information for management of the SFE ecosystem and the water that flows through it. The IEP accomplishes its mission through long-term monitoring, shorter-term studies, and integrative analyses and syntheses of the resulting data and information. The IEP Lead Scientist position was created in 2009 in recognition of the critical role of science in achieving California’s “co-equal” policy goals of providing a more reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring, and enhancing the SFE ecosystem. The IEP Lead Scientist is expected to guide and lead the IEP’s scientific efforts and serve as a bridge between science and policy. Since taking on this role in 2009, I have been trying to find answers to the question of how to best do this in a setting that includes a highly stressed ecosystem, a naturally variable water supply in a semi-arid state with a rapidly growing human population, many agencies with different missions and responsibilities, influential stakeholders with a wide range of views, and very high expectations for science and scientists without a similarly high level of support and understanding of what science can and cannot do. I will share some of the lessons I have learned in this talk.
Results/Conclusions
Like people elsewhere, the people of California desire stable and abundant resources, including fresh water, but this cannot be achieved in the desired manner. Scientists are often left to feel like Cassandra or Heraclitus, while asked to play Polyanna’s “glad game” and serve as “guides" – while blindfolded. Scientific credibility, relevance, and legitimacy must be maintained and balanced. Adaptive and collaborative approaches that bring together scientists, decision makers, and stakeholders may help, but they require a strong and sustained commitment and investments by all parties. I will illustrate these points with recent examples from my work.