1. Ashby, J., Introduction: Uniting science and participation in the process of innovation—research for development, in Managing Natural Resources for

Sustainable Livelihoods: Uniting Science and Participation, B. Pound, S. Snapp, C. McDougall, and A. Braun, Eds., Earthscan Press, London, 2003, 1-18.

2. Berkes, F., Colding, J., and Folke, C., Introduction, in Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change, F. Berkes, J. Colding, and C. Folke, Eds., Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003, 1-29.

3. Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S., Eds., in Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems, Island Press, Washington, DC, 2002, 507.

4. Brunner, R.D., Steelman, T.A., Coe-Juell, L., Cromley, C.M., Edwards, C.M., and Tucker, D.W., Eds., in Adaptive Governance: Integrating Science, Policy, and Decision Making, Columbia University Press, New York, 2005, 319.

5. Koontz, T.M., Steelman, T., Carmin, J., Korfmacher, K., Moseley, C., and Thomas, C., Collaborative Environmental Management: What Roles for Government? Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 2004.

6. Williams, P., The competent boundary spanner, Public Administration, 80,103, 2002.

7. Dooley, K.L., A complex adaptive systems model of organization change, Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 1, 69, 1997.

8. Walker, B., Carpenter, S., Anderies, J., Abel, N., Cumming, G., Janssen, M., Lebel, L., Norberg, J., Peterson, G.D., and Pritchard, R., Resilience management in social-ecological systems: A working hypothesis for a participatory approach, Conservation Ecology, 6, art14, 2002, Available at: (accessed on December, 2005).

9. Holling, C.S. and Meffe, G.K., Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management, Conservation Biology, 10, 328, 1996.

10. Ozawa, C.P. and Susskind, L., Mediating science-intensive policy disputes, Journal of Policy Analysis and Manangement, 5, 23, 1985.

11. Adler, P.S., Barrett, R.C., Bean, M.C., Birkhoff, J.E., Ozaawa, C.P., and Rudin, M., Managing Scientific and Technical Information in Environmental Cases: Principles and Practices for Mediators and Facilitators, Resolve, Inc., Portland, OR, 2000.

12. Sarewitz, D., Science and environmental policy: An excess of objectivity, in Earth Matters: The Earth Sciences, Philosophy, and the Claims of Community, R. Frodemen, Ed., Prentice Hall, Saddle River, NJ, 2000, 79-98.

13. Westley, F., Carpenter, S.R., Brock, W.A., Holling, C.S., and Gunderson, L.H., Why systems of people and nature are not just social and ecological systems, in Panarchy, Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems, L.H. Gunderson and C.S. Hollings, Eds., Island Press, Washington, DC, 2002, 103-120.

14. Addleson, M., Resolving the spirit and substance of organizational learning, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9, 32, 1996.

15. Kraft, M.E., Environmental Policy and Politics, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley Ed. Pub. Inc., New York, 2001.

16. Taylor, B., Green, W., and Cooper, R., Illuminated or Blinded by Science? A Discussion Paper on the Role of Science in Environmental Policy and Decision-Making, Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Wellington, NZ, 2003.

17. Dolan, R.J., Emotion, cognition, and behavior, Science, 298, 1191, 2002.

18. Lemerise, E.A. and Arsenio, W.F., A integrated model of emotion processes and cognition in social information processing, Child Development, 71, 107, 2000.

19. Bechara, A., Damasio, H., and Damasio, A.R., Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex, Cerebral Cortex, 10, 295, 2000.

20. Damasio, H., Grabowski, T., Frank, R., Galaburda, A.M., and Damasio, A.R., The return of Phineas Gage: Clues about the brain from the skull of a famous patient, Science, 264, 1102, 1994.

21. Oatley, K. and Jenkins, J.M., Understanding Emotions, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, 1996.

22. Cortner, H.J., Making science relevant to environmental policy, Environmental Science and Policy, 3, 21, 2000.

23. Rapport, D.J., Transdisciplinarity: Transcending the disciplines, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 289, 1997.

24. Gibbons , M. , Limoges , C. , Nowotny, H. , Schwartzman, S. , Scott, P. , andTrow, M. , TheNew Production of Knowledge, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1994.

25. Bossel, H., Assessing viability and sustainability: A systems-based approach for deriving comprehensive indicator sets, Conservation Ecology, 5, art12, 2001, Available at: http://

26. Clayton, A.M.H. and Radcliffe, N.J., Sustainability: A Systems Approach, Earthscan, London, 1996.

27. Laszlo, E., The contribution of the systems sciences to the humanities, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 14, 5, 1997.

28. Jamieson, D., Problems and prospects for a Forest Service program in the human dimensions of global changes, in Breaking the Mold: Global Change, Social Responsibility, and Natural Resource Management, K. Geyer and B. Shindler, Eds., USDA Forest Service, Portland, OR, 1994, 23-28.

29. Mohrman, S.A., Gibson, C.B., and Mohrman, A.M. Jr., Doing research that is useful to practice: A model and empirical exploration, Academy ofManagement Journal, 44, 357, 2001.

30. Miller, A., Environmental Problem Solving: Psychosocial Barriers to Adaptive Change, Springer, New York, 1999.

31. Lowndes, V. and Wilson, D., Social capital and local governance: Exploring the institutional design variable, Political Studies, 49, 629, 2001.

32. Rogers, E.M., Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed., Free Press, New York, 2003.

33. Anderson, A.R., Marketing Social Change: Changing Behavior to Promote Health, Social Development, and the Environment, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA, 1995.

34. Genschel, P., The Dynamics of Inertia: Institutional Persistence and Institutional Change in Telecommunications and Health Care, MPIFG Discussion Paper 95/3, Max-Planck-Institut fur Gesellschaftsforschung, Köln, 1995.

35. Yearley, S., Environmental challenges to science studies, in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, S. Jasanoff, E. Markle, J.C. Petersen, and T. Pinch, Eds., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1995, 457-479.

36. MIT-USGS Science Impact Collaborative, Available at: music/ (accessed on December, 2005).

37. Karl, H., personal communication, 2004.

38. Holling, C.S., Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management, Chichester, New York, 1978.

39. Walters, C., Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources, McMillan, New York, 1986.

40. Gunderson, L., Resilience, flexibility and adaptive management—antidotes for spurious certitude? Conservation Ecology, 3, art7, 1999, Available at: http://www. (accessed on December, 2005).

41. Halbert, C.L., How adaptive is adaptive management? Implementing adaptive management in Washington State and British Columbia, Reviews in Fisheries Science, 1, 261, 1993.

42. Walters, C., Challenges in adaptive management of riparian and coastal ecosystems, Conservation Ecology, 1, art1, 1997, Available at: art1 (accessed on December, 2005).

43. Ludwig, D., Hilborn, R., and Walters, C.J., Uncertainty, resource exploitation, and conservation: Lessons from history, Science, 260, 36, 1993.

44. Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S., and Light, S.S., Eds., in Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems and Institutions, Columbia University Press, New York, 1995.

45. Castleberry, D.T., Cech, J.J., Erman, D.C., Hankin, D., Healey, M., Kondolf, G.M., Mangel, M. et al., Uncertainty and instream flow standards, Fisheries, 21, 20, 1996.

46. Van Winkle, W., Coutant, C.C., Jager, H.I., Mattice, J.S., Orth, D.J., Otto, R.G., Railsback, S.F., and Sale, M.F., Uncertainty and instream flow standards; perspectives based on hydropower research and assessment, Fisheries, 22, 21, 1997.

47. Lee, K.N., Appraising adaptive management, in Biological Diversity: Balancing Interests Through Adaptive Collaborative Management, L. Buck, C.C. Geisler, J. Schelhas, and E. Wollenberg, Eds., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2001, 3-26.

48. Innes, J.E., Gruber, J., Neuman, M., and Thomopson, R., Coordinating Growth and Environmental Management Through Consensus Building, CPS Report: A Policy Research Program Report, University of California at Berkeley, California Policy Seminar, 1994.

49. Van Cleve, F.B., Simenstad, C., Goetz, F., and Mumford, T., Application of "Best Available Science" in Ecosystem Restoration: Lessons Learned from Large-Scale Restoration Efforts in the U.S. Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project, 2003, Available at: (accessed on December, 2005).

50. Tompkins, E.L. and Adger, W.N., Does adaptive management of natural resources enhance resilience to climate change? Ecology and Society, 9, art10, 2004, Available at: (accessed on December, 2005).

51. Chess, C., Evaluating environmental public participation: Methodological questions, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43, 769, 2000.

52. Moore, J.L., What is stopping sustainability? Examining the barriers to implementation of "Clouds of Change", in Fatal Consumption: Rethinking Sustainable Development, R.F. Woollard and A.S. Ostry, Eds., UCB Press, Vancouver, WA, 2000, 101-129.

53. Willtshire, K., Scientists and policy-makers: Towards a new partnership, International Social Science Journal, 53, 621, 2001.

54. McDougall, C. and Braun, A., Navigating complexity, diversity and dynamism: Reflections on research for natural resource management, in Managing Natural Resources for Sustainable Livelihoods: Uniting Science and Participation, B. Pound, S. Snapp, C. McDougall, and A. Braun, Eds., Earthscan Press, London, 2003, 20-47.

55. de Bruihn, J.A. and ten Heuvelhof, E.F., Scientific expertise in complex decisionmaking processes, Science and Public Policy, 26, 179, 1999.

56. Davidson-Hunt, I.J. and Berkes, F., Nature and society through the lens of resilience: Toward a human-in-ecosystem perspective, in Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change, F. Berkes, J. Colding, and C. Folke, Eds., Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003, 53-82.

57. Holling, C.S., Cross-scale morphology, geometry, and dynamics of ecosystems, Ecological Monographs, 62, 447, 1992.

58. Bardach, E., Getting Agencies to Work Together: The Practice and Theory of Managerial Craftsmanship, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, 1998.

59. Guston, D.H., Stabilizing the boundary between U.S. politics and science: The role of the office of technology transfer as a boundary organization, Social Studies ofScience, 29, 87, 1999.

60. Guston, D.H., Clark, W., Keating, T., Cash, D., Moser, S., Miller, C., and Powers, C., Report of the Workshop on Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Discussion Paper 2000-32, Harvard University, Cambridge, 2000.

61. Cash, D.W., 'In (Order to Aid in Diffusing Useful and Practical Information.': Cross-Scale Boundary Organizations and Agricultural Extension, Belfer Center for Sconce and International Affairs, Discussion Paper 2000-10, Harvard University, Cambridge, 2000.

62. Schneider, S.H., The role of science: Guidance and service, in Sustainable Development: The Challenge of Transition, J. Schmandt and C.H. Ward, Eds., Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000, 131-152.

63. Orr, W., personal communication, 2004.

64. Andrews, C.J., Humble Analysis: The Practice of Joint Fact Finding, Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT, 2002.

65. Adler, P. and Birkhoff, J., Building Trust: When Knowledge From "Here" Meets Knowledge From "Away,", The Policy Consensus Center, Portland State University, Portland, OR, 2003.

66. Susskind, L., McKearnan, S., and Thomas-Larmer, J., Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1999.

67. Kabala, S., personal communication, 2004.

6b. Myung, S.-J., personal communication, 2004.

69. Bierle, T.C. and Konisky, D.M., Values, conflict, and trust in participatory environmental planning, Journal ofPolicy Analysis and Management, 19, 5B7, 2000.

70. Cash, D.W., Clark, W.C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N.M., Eckley, N., Guston, D.H., Jager, J., and Mitchell, R.B., Knowledge systems for sustainable development, PNAS, 100, 8086, 2003.

Negotiating Essentials

Negotiating Essentials

Always wanted to get a better deal but didn't have the needed negotiation skills? Here are some of the best negotiation theories. The ability to negotiate is a skill which everyone should have. With the ability to negotiate you can take charge of your life, your finances and your destiny. If you feel that others are simply born with the skill to negotiate, you should know that everyone can learn this wonderful skill.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment