Peter J. Balint is an associate professor of environmental policy in the Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason University, in Fairfax, Virginia.

Ronald E. Stewart, now retired, spent 30 years with the USDA Forest Service, ending his career as Deputy Chief for Programs and Legislation before serving five years on the faculty of Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University.

Anand Desai is a Professor at the John Glenn School of Public Affairs at the Ohio State University, in Columbus.

Lawrence C. Walters is Stewart Grow Professor of Public Policy and Management in the Romney Institute, Brigham Young University, in Provo, Utah.

The Challenge of Wicked Problems

For almost a century, advocates for preservation and for development have argued about the effects of human actions on the environment. These arguments have been made more difficult to resolve because there are still considerable uncertainties in science, and because it takes a long time for the effects of human actions to show up in the environment. Both sides, and other groups who fall along a continuum between them, have exploited these uncertainties in appeals and litigation. The logical result was for government agencies to produce more complex documents justifying their decisions and to include and advocate for more science, causing many to assume these disputes were based in science. But we believe the evidence shows that the underlying differences in stakeholder positions are not so much related to uncertainties in science or failure to consider particular aspects of the scientific literature, but rather to conflicting values and preferences, and therefore differing views on desirable outcomes. These elements of the argument are rarely, if ever, considered in the decision-making process. As a result, most environmental arguments continue to produce more detailed documents and longer processes without resolving the underlying issues.

Wicked Problems

The clashing interests of environmentalists, developers, and others have elevated many environmental problems that require decisions at the federal and state level from simple, to complex, to "wicked" (Salwasser 2004; Lackey 2007). A wicked problem is characterized by a high degree of scientific uncertainty and deep disagreement on values (Allen and Gould 1986; Committee of Scientists 1999). The definition of a wicked environmental problem itself is in the eye of the beholder, or the stakeholder, and therefore there is no single correct formulation of any particular problem (Rittel and Webber 1973; Allen and Gould 1986). Consequently, there is no single, correct, optimal solution. The decision maker must come to a conclusion without knowing if all feasible and desirable options have been explored, and any management choice will ultimately be better or worse rather than true or false.

In this book, we examine the class of wicked problems, including proper identification of such problems and how they have been dealt with in the past. We propose a modified decision-making approach that blends current thinking on addressing wicked problems and stakeholder participation with our understanding of the best practices already implemented by agencies to address such problems. Our approach relies on developing a learning networkamong the stakeholders, using an adaptive, iterative, deliberative, analytical participatory process. An important component of this method is incorporating stakeholder preferences into the ecological models that resource management agencies currently use to support decision making. We also suggest that since wicked problems have no single best solution, decision makers must seek management policies and processes that are "satisficing"—that is, potentially broadly acceptable and implementable—rather than optimal. Herbert Simon (1957) coined the term satisfice, combining the words "satisfy" and "suffice." A satisficing strategy accepts an outcome or judgment as good enough or satisfactory without an expectation that it is in any sense optimal or best.

In this book we also touch on the important consequences of properly or improperly identifying a wicked problem. Not all problems rise to the level of wicked, but when they do, the processes used become critical. Although environmental dilemmas may occasionally meet the criteria for wicked problems, such problems are by no means confined to the environment. Whenever interest groups with strongly divergent values are well organized and highly motivated, and uncertainties in the science may be exploited, an issue can move into the realm of a wicked problem.

Historical Perspective of Environmental Controversy

In this book, we introduce and discuss case studies of wicked environmental problems in the United States, Europe, and Africa. Our key case study, however, focuses on national forest management in the Sierra Nevada region of California. In presenting a brief summary of political conflicts over the environment in this section, we emphasize the origins of these disputes in the context of public lands in the western United States. While the details of the social and historical trends leading to environmental conflict differ across our case studies, there are also, as we discuss in the book, significant common factors, including, most importantly, scientific uncertainty and profound differences in perceptions, attitudes, and values among key stakeholders.

From today's perspective, many view the age of environmental controversy as beginning in the 1960s. However, the battle over environmental management among prodevelopment, propreservation, and other interest groups in the United States has a history more than a century long. Unfortunately, the resulting political compromises have not addressed the fundamental and underlying differences in public values represented by these positions. Because these value differences were not taken into consideration, stakeholders have continued to press their arguments through the courts using the laws passed in the 1960s and 1970s that opened the federal and state decision-making processes to public participation.

The US environmental movement had its roots in battles over the public domain in the western part of the country. The initial philosophy of Congress and the federal government during the mid- to late 1800s was to encourage settlement and development by disposal of these lands to railroads, farmers, and others. Various acts of Congress encouraged mining and oil production to meet the needs of a growing population and economy. However, a significant change in attitude toward the remaining public lands began to emerge in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. Publication of the Report Upon Forestry (Hough 1878) and meetings of the American Forestry Association demonstrated a growing concern about the overharvesting of forests and overgrazing of public lands. The establishment of Yellowstone, the first national park, on March 1, 1872, and passage of the Forest Reserve Act of 1891 signaled the end of disposal to private interests and the beginning of federal ownership for protection of natural resources. The Forest Reserve Act allowed the president of the United States to...