When/Where: M-W, 4:00-5:15 Pm, Lapham 258

Conservation & Environmental Science/ Global Studies /Freshwater Sci. 461 Politics and Policy of Sustainability Spring 2015

When/Where: M-W, 4:00-5:15 pm, Lapham 258 Instructor: Kathleen Williams Office: 364E Lapham Hall Office Hours: M-W, 2:30-3:40 pm, or by appointment Phone: 414-303-3078 E-mail: [email protected] Course Co-instructor: Timothy Ehlinger, PhD

Course description: The ideas of sustainable development have been evolving for over 40 years from early ideas of steady-state resource management toward concepts of dynamic social-ecological systems. The primary goal of this course is to develop a functional literacy with the concepts, patterns, and processes relating to human-environmental systems, feedbacks among biophysical and social domains, as well as some of the obstacles to achieving sustainability.

We will consider the practical interconnections among the “Three Pillars” (i.e. “People, Planet, Prosperity” or “Equity, Environment, Economy”) through ongoing experimentation with and reflection on the ways that science and policy speak to, or past, each other. Because addressing the problems of sustainability, resilience, and vulnerability of the ecosystem services upon which society depends will require not only new policy frameworks, but a fundamental rearrangement of societal institutions that are capable of adaptive learning.

Readings: There will be a mix of readings for this course. The textbook and a suggested text are listed below. Text readings will be supplemented with others from a variety of sources, which will be posted on D2L.

 Chapin, F. S., Kofinas, G. P., & Folke, C. (2009). Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship: Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World (2009 edition.). New York: Springer.  Suggested text: Adger, W.N. and Jordan. A. (2009). Governing Sustainability. (Required readings from this book will be posted on D2L. Additionally, the book will be on reserve in the library.)  Additional supplies: Index cards (approximately 30)

Learning Outcomes:

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 1 of 10 Through participating in lecture, discussion, and course assignments, all students will be able to:

1. Identify and distinguish the roles of governments, non-governmental organizations, corporations, science, and stakeholders in developing and contesting environmental policies on national and global scales; 2. Demonstrate an understanding of the form and function of agreements, pacts, treaties, laws and regulations as they relate to international, national, regional and local environmental governance and resource management; 3. Utilize a systems thinking approach to describe and analyze the interactions among ecological, legislative and socio-economic processes that contribute to environmental problems and solutions for specific case studies.

The material covered in this course assumes you already have taken introductory courses in environmental science (e.g. CES 210) and interdisciplinary thinking about sustainability (e.g. GLOB 361). This course satisfies a core requirement for the Global Studies degree in the Sustainability Track.

Expectations: What you can expect from me: The trans-disciplinary scope of topics and material that make up the evolving discipline of social-ecological systems and sustainable development is large – well beyond what can be covered in a one-semester course. Instructors who teach this course will bring their own distinct perspectives and expertise that represent their respective disciplines (e.g. biology, economics, geography, anthropology, business, history).

For example, as a geographer who studies the politics of environmental decision making, I constantly examine the complicated relationships between science, policy, people, and place. My approach to the readings and course activities reflects my view that sustainability is a political problem where society and its values must be considered in any political or technical solutions.

My role in this class is to help you understand the key concepts, major patterns, and processes involved in sustainability and resilience of socio-ecological systems. I hope by the end of the course, you will be able to more fully describe the challenges of integrating the social and natural sciences in the pursuit of sustainability, and apply that knowledge to propose policy solutions that consider both nature and society.

What I expect of you: The organizing principle for this course is that sustainability is a participatory process. To that end, the readings and course activities are designed to experiment with ideas and observations about how people and ecosystems can be connected through participation and policy.

Your preparation for each class will be important. This is a reading-writing intensive course. Further, the course is designed to demonstrate how people from different disciplinary perspectives can learn together. In general, course sessions will include a mix

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 2 of 10 of reviewing the readings for the week (see the reading outline assignment below), lectures, and activities. The activities will range from debriefs of the different components of the major course assignment, short readings and reaction, film clip review, or simulations of resource management problems.

A general rule-of –thumb is spending 3 hours outside of class per credit. You should plan to spend about 9 hours per week taking notes on readings, doing assignments, exploring online resources and discussing the readings in preparation for weekly classes.

It will be important to regularly read D2L and class emails. While many of the readings are posted below, there will be additional (shorter) articles assigned for discussions.

Examinations and Grading: There are a total of 200 possible points for the course. There are essays (exams), a scenario-writing assignment, reading outlines, participation assignments, and participation in regular class activities. There may be a possibility of extra credit points for participation in activities outside of class.

Participation: You will notice that participation in-class activity is worth as much as some of the other course assignments. That is because your participation in the in-class activities is vital to your success in the course. Politics and policy are not spectator sports. Because of the rapidly changing and developing nature of sustainability policy, current events are a component of the course. We will explore current or recent events through discussion, video or news article case study during each course session.

Reading outlines:

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 3 of 10 You will be required to outline two of the readings for distribution to the class through D2L. There will be a sign-up posted as a Google doc. You will be required to outline the readings and identify three concepts to be explored further in class. The outlines are due to be posted on D2L at noon the day before the topic is covered to ensure time for everyone to look at the outlines before class. An example is posted on D2L. (LATE ASSIGNMENTS: -25% credit if submitted by 11:59 the night before the topic is covered, 50% if posted between midnight and noon, and no credit if submitted after.)

Students will share their assessment of the three most important take-away messages of the reading, followed by a short discussion.

Scenario-writing assignment: You will be deepening your understanding of sustainable environmental management throughout the semester. To that end, there is an assignment that will be completed over the course of the semester. A detailed description of this assignment will be available in class and on D2L.

Public participation and citizen science assignments: Detailed instructions will be posted on D2L. Undergraduates will submit one or the other. Graduate students must complete both assignments. No late assignments will be accepted.

Essay assignments: The examinations will be an in-depth essay assignment (two for graduate students). The essay(s) will require students to apply theories explored in the coursework. You will receive the questions two weeks in advance to ensure you have time to contemplate your responses. No late assignments will be accepted (unless prior arrangements are made).

For graduate students: The final examination will be an essay where you have an opportunity to apply the course concepts you have developed over the semester. This essay will require you to compare and contrast the three models of participation we studied (and experienced). Because participation always depends on the cultural context, you will be asked to examine how participation changes in another context. More details will be given towards the end of the semester.

Extra credit: There are opportunities for extra credit. Because this is a class based on participation….please, go out and participate. For any event, submit a summary and analysis worth 5 points. You may submit synopses for two events. Alternatively, undergraduates may attend an additional public meeting. Submit the completed assignment to the extra credit dropbox. Additional details can be found on D2L.

All assignments should be submitted on D2L – no emailed assignments will be accepted.

Grading scheme (UG):

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 4 of 10 Activity Points % of Grade Participation (23 x 1.3 pts) 30 15 Reading outlines (2 x 10 pts) 20 10 Participatory model exercises 30 15 (1x30) Scenario analysis simulation 60 30 assignment Scenario analysis: List of drivers 5 2.5 and data sources Scenario analysis: Source of 10 5 uncertainty and explanation Scenario analysis: Scenario outline 10 5 Scenario analysis: Final scenario 10 5 presentation Final scenario analysis debrief 25 12.5 Essay exams (1 x 60 pts) 60 30 TOTAL 200 100

Grading scheme (G):

Activity Points % of Grade Participation (23 x 1.3 pts) 30 15 Reading outlines (2 x 10 pts) 20 10 Participatory model exercises (2x15) 30 15 Scenario analysis simulation 60 30 assignment Scenario analysis: List of drivers 5 2.5

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 5 of 10 and data sources Scenario analysis: Source of 10 5 uncertainty and explanation Scenario analysis: Scenario outline 10 5 Scenario analysis: Final scenario 10 5 presentation Final scenario analysis debrief 25 12.5 Essay exams (2 x 30 pts) 60 30 TOTAL 200 100

Grading Scale:

Grades A B C D F + A 93 – 100% B+ 87 - 89% C+ 77 - 79% D+ 67 - 69% F 0 – 59

A- 90 – 92% B 83 - 86% C 73 - 76% D 63 - 66% _ B- 80 - 82% C- 70 - 72% D- 60 - 62%

Readings not in the text books:

Week 2 - Understanding the Challenges:  Redman, C. L., Grove, J. M., & Kuby, L. H. (2004). Integrating Social Science into the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network: Social Dimensions of Ecological Change and Ecological Dimensions of Social Change. Ecosystems, 7(2), 161–171.

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 6 of 10  Endter-Wada, J., Blahna, D., Krannich, R., & Brunson, M. (1998). A framework for understanding social science contributions to ecosystem management. Ecological Applications : A Publication of the Ecological Society of America (USA). (suggested)

Week 4 - Ecosystem services:  Daniel, T. C., Muhar, A., Arnberger, A., Aznar, O., Boyd, J. W., Chan, K. M. A., Contanza, R., Flint, C.G., Gobster, P.H., Gret-Regamey, A., Lave, R., Muhar, S., Penker, M., Ribe, R.G., Schauppenlehner, T., Sikor, T., Soloviy, I., Spiererenburg, M., Taczanowska, K., Tam, J., and von der Dunk, A. (2012). Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.  Robertson, M. (2012). Measurement and alienation: making a world of ecosystem services. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(3), 386–401.

Week 5 – Frameworks for decision making:  Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., & Stern, P. C. (2003). The Struggle to Govern the Commons. Science, 302(5652), 1907–1912.  Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.  Ostrom, E. (2009). A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science, 325(5939), 419–422.

Week 6 - Policy and Sustainability:  Cruickshank, A. and Grover, V. (2012). General Overview of IWRM. In Grover, V. I., & Krantzberg, G. (Eds.). (2012). Great Lakes: Lessons in Participatory Governance. Science Publishers. pp. 167-183.  Rosenbaum, W. A. (2007). Chapter 2 - Making Policy: The Process. In Environmental Politics and Policy (7th ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press. pp. 27-62.

Week 7 – Fostering interdisciplinary collaboration:  Lele, S., & Norgaard, R. B. (2005). Practicing Interdisciplinarity. BioScience, 55(11), 967– 975.  Petts, J., Owens, S., & Bulkeley, H. (2008). Crossing boundaries: Interdisciplinarity in the context of urban environments. Geoforum, 39(2), 593–601. (suggested)

Week 8 - Introduction to science – policy interface:  Lee, K. N. (1994). Taking Measures. In Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment (Reprint edition.). Island Press. pp. 7-18.  Van den Hove, S. (2007). A rationale for science–policy interfaces. Futures, 39(7), 807- 826.  Robbins, P. (2004). Political Ecology: A Critical Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. (suggested)

Week 9 – Public participation and civil society:  Evans, J. P. (2012). Environmental Governance. Milton Park Abingdon, Oxon ; New York: Routledge.  Jolley, G.J., (2007). Public Involvement Tools in Environmental Decision-Making: A Primer for Practitioners. Journal of Extension. 45(2):TOTT3 Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2007april/tt3.php

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 7 of 10  Backstrand, K. (2003). Civic Science for Sustainability: Reframing the Role of Experts, Policy-Makers and Citizens in Environmental Governance. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 24–41. (suggested)

Week 10 – Models of participation:  Bonney, R., Shirk, J. L., Phillips, T. B., Wiggins, A., Ballard, H. L., Miller-Rushing, A. J., & Parrish, J. K. (2014). Next Steps for Citizen Science. Science, 343(6178), 1436-1437.  Gura, T. (2013). “Citizen Science: Amateur experts.” Nature (496) 259-261.  Haywood, B. K. (2014). A “Sense of Place” in Public Participation in Scientific Research. Science Education, 98(1), 64–83.  Riesch, H., & Potter, C. (2014). Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions. Public Understanding of Science, 23(1), 107–120.

Week 11 – Models of participation:  Seppelt, R., Lautenbach, S., & Volk, M. (2013). Identifying trade-offs between ecosystem services, land use, and biodiversity: a plea for combining scenario analysis and optimization on different spatial scales. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(5), 458–463.  Maack, J. (2001). Scenario analysis: a tool for task managers. In Social Development Paper no. 36. Social Analysis: Selected Tools and Techniques. Washington DC: World Bank. Retrieved from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPSIA/Resources/490023- 1121114603600/13053_scenarioanalysis.pdf  Walker, B., S. Carpenter, J. Anderies, N. Abel, G. S. Cumming, M. Janssen, L. Lebel, J. Norberg, G. D. Peterson, and Pritchard., R. (2002). Resilience Management in Social- ecological Systems: a Working Hypothesis for a Participatory Approach. Conservation Ecology, 6(1). (suggested)

Week 12 – Models of participation:  Johnson, M. S. (2008). Public participation and perceptions of watershed modeling. Society and Natural Resources, 22(1), 79-87.  Petts, J., & Brooks, C. (2006). Expert conceptualisations of the role of lay knowledge in environmental decisionmaking: challenges for deliberative democracy. Environment and Planning A, 38(6), 1045–1059.  Chilvers, J. (2008). Deliberating Competence Theoretical and Practitioner Perspectives on Effective Participatory Appraisal Practice. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33(2), 155–185. (suggested)

Week 14 – Why does it matter?  McLaughlin, C., & Krantzberg, G. (2012). An appraisal of management pathologies in the Great Lakes. Science of the Total Environment, 416, 40–47.  Pahl-Wostl, C. (2009). A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi- level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Global Environmental Change, 19(3), 354–365.

Important Information:

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 8 of 10  How to Succeed & Learn: Instructors ask students to organize concepts, explore connections between the concepts, and reflect on and evaluate their understanding. Be prepared and ready to engage. Be respectful of different learning styles, beliefs, backgrounds, and perspectives.  Participation by students with disabilities: If students with disabilities need special accommodations in order to meet any of the requirements of this course, please contact me early in the semester. Students who require special accommodation for any component of course assessment should supply a copy of their VISA from SAC. The contents of this VISA will remain confidential.  Accommodation for religious observances: Students will be allowed to complete examinations or other requirements that are missed because of a religious observance, but you must notify me in advance.  Gender-related harassment is reprehensible and will not be tolerated by the University. It subverts the mission of the University and threatens the careers, educational experience, and well being of students, faculty, and staff.  Honesty – Instructors expect students to do their own work and to do their best. Any cheating, plagiarism, or acts of misconduct will result in a severe penalty to the student(s) per UWS/UWM Policies (http://www4.uwm.edu/acad_aff/policy/academicmisconduct.cfm).

Academic integrity: Each student has an obligation to act with honesty and integrity, and to respect the rights of others in carrying out all academic assignments. Academic Misconduct may result in the immediate failure of the course in which the misconduct occurs. Academic misconduct will be reported to the Investigating Officer of the College of Letters and Science and additional sanctions may be recommended. A student may be found to have violated this obligation and to have engaged in academic dishonesty if during or in connection with any academic evaluation, if he/she: A. Engages in any form of academic deceit, (including cheating, fabrication, and plagiarism); B. Refers to materials or sources or employs devices (e.g., audio recorders, crib sheets, calculators, solution manuals, or commercial research services) not authorized by the instructor for use during the academic evaluation; C. Possesses, buys, sells, obtains, or uses, without appropriate authorization, a copy of any materials intended to be used for academic evaluation in advance of its administration; D. Acts as a substitute for another person in any academic evaluation; E. Uses a substitute in any academic evaluation; F. Depends on the aid of others to the extent that the work is not representative of the student's abilities, knowing or having good reason to believe that this aid is not authorized by the instructor. G. Provides inappropriate aid to another person, knowing or having good reason to believe the aid is not authorized by the instructor; H. Engages in plagiarism; I. Permits his or her work to be submitted by another person without the instructor's authorization; or

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 9 of 10 J. Attempts to influence or change any academic evaluation or record for reasons having no relevance to class achievement.

"Fabrication" involves the "intentional and unauthorized falsification or invention of any information or citation in an academic exercise. Examples: a) Fabricating data and/or creating a scientific lie; b) Creating quotations or inventing a journal article, book reference, etc.

"Plagiarism" means using another's words, ideas, materials or work without properly acknowledging and documenting the source. Students are responsible for knowing the rules governing the use of another's work or materials and for acknowledging and documenting the source appropriately. Examples: a) Failing to cite any major idea created by some other person or entity; b) Failing to cite and/or enclose in quotation marks all words, phrases or sentences copied from another source’ c) Failing to cite paraphrased work of others; d) Acquiring a paper or project from a research service or another source and submitting it as your own work for academic evaluation.

CES/GS/FS 461 Page 10 of 10