The science and politics of human well-being: a case study in cocreating indicators for Puget Sound restoration

• Published in: Ecology and society 2017-09, Vol.22 (3), p.11, Article art11
• Main Authors: Biedenweg, Kelly, Harguth, Haley, Stiles, Kari
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Case studies; Collaboration; Communities; Decision making; decision-making criteria; Ecosystem assessment; Ecosystem recovery; Ecosystem restoration; Ecosystems; Environmental conservation; Environmental justice; Environmental policy; Environmental restoration; Environmentalism; Human ecology; indicators; integrating science and policy; justice; Literature reviews; Natural environment; Policy making; Policy science; Scientists; Social sciences; Studies; United States environmental policy; Vital signs; Well being; Wellbeing
• ISSN: 1708-3087; 1708-3087
• DOI: 10.5751/ES-09424-220311

Across scientific fields, there have been calls to improve the integration of scientific knowledge in policy making. Particularly since the publication of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, these calls increasingly refer to data on human well-being related to the natural environment. However, policy decisions involve selective uptake of information across communities with different preferences and decision-making processes. Additionally, researchers face the fact that there are important trade-offs in producing knowledge that is simultaneously credible, legitimate, socially relevant, and socially just. We present a study that developed human well-being indicators for Washington State’s Puget Sound ecosystem recovery agency over 3 years. Stakeholders, decision makers, and social scientists were engaged in the identification, modification, and prioritization of well-being indicators that were adopted by the agency for tracking progress toward ecosystem recovery and strategic planning. After substantial literature review, interviews, workshops, and indicator ranking exercises, 15 indicators were broadly accepted and important to all audiences. Although the scientists, decision makers, and stakeholders used different criteria to identify and prioritize indicators, they all agreed that indicators associated with each of 6 broad domains (social, cultural, psychological, physical, economic, and governance) were critical to assess the holistic concept of well-being related to ecosystem restoration. Decision makers preferred indicators that mirrored stakeholder preferences, whereas social scientists preferred only a subset. The Puget Sound indicator development process provides an example for identifying, selecting, and monitoring diverse concepts of well-being related to environmental restoration in a way that promotes recognition, participation, and a fair distribution of environmental benefits across the region.