Exploring SETAC's roles in the global dialogue on sustainability--an opening debate.

A combination platform-debate session was held at the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) North America annual meeting in Boston (November 2011). The session was organized by members of the Advisory Group on Sustainability, newly formed and approved as a global entity by the SETAC World Council just prior to the meeting. The platform portion of the session provided a historical backdrop for the debate that was designed to explore SETAC's role in the sustainability dialogue. The debate portion presented arguments for and against the proposition that "Science is the primary contribution of SETAC to the global dialogue on sustainability." Although the debate was not designed to achieve a definitive sustainability policy for SETAC, the audience clearly rejected the proposition, indicating a desire from the SETAC membership for an expanded role in global sustainability forums. This commentary details the key elements of the session, identifies the contribution the Advisory Group will have at the World Congress in Berlin (May 2012), and invites interested persons to become active in the Advisory Group.

A demonstration of the necessity and feasibility of using a clumsy decision analytic approach on wicked environmental problems.

Because controversy, conflict, and lawsuits frequently characterize US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) decisions, it is important that USEPA decision makers understand how to evaluate and then make decisions that have simultaneously science-based, social, and political implications. Air quality management is one category of multidimensional decision making at USEPA. The Philadelphia, Pennsylvania metropolitan area experiences unhealthy levels of ozone, fine particulate matter, and air toxics. Many ozone precursors are precursors for particulate matter and certain air toxics. Additionally, some precursors for particulate matter are air toxics. However, air quality management practices have typically evaluated these problems separately. This approach has led to the development of independent (and potentially counterproductive) implementation strategies. This is a methods article about the necessity and feasibility of using a clumsy approach on wicked problems, using an example case study. Air quality management in Philadelphia is a wicked problem. Wicked problems are those where stakeholders define or view the problem differently, there are many different ways to describe the problem (i.e., different dimensions or levels of abstraction), no efficient or optimal solutions exist, and they are often complicated by moral, political, or professional dimensions. The USEPA has developed the multicriteria integrated resource assessment (MIRA) decision analytic approach that engages stakeholder participation through transparency, transdisciplinary learning, and the explicit use of value sets; in other words, a clumsy approach. MIRA's approach to handling technical indicators, expert judgment, and stakeholder values makes it a potentially effective method for tackling wicked environmental problems.

Toward sustainability: a case study demonstrating transdisciplinary learning through the selection and use of indicators in a decision-making process.

The purpose of this article is to use a case study example to demonstrate how a transparent, transdisciplinary approach to decision making allows the US Environmental Protection Agency Region III (USEPA Region III) to fulfill its decision-making responsibilities while taking critical steps toward engaging in sustainability discussions. The case study goals were to use information about environmental condition to inform staff and fiscal resource prioritization and allocation for the federal 2010 fiscal year. This article will use a select group of 3 indicators to show 1) that data are not the same as indicators, 2) the feasibility of using disparate data in the same analysis, and 3) specific discussions about indicators can lead to transdisciplinary learning, supporting more informed decision making. We show that, when used in a transdisciplinary learning process, these indicator lessons provide a stepping stone for organizations like USEPA Region III to consider sustainability as more than just a lofty, ethical concept. Instead, these kinds of organizations can more routinely and substantively address sustainability through a progression of individual decisions. We discuss how sustainability can be linked to decision making through a process that requires stakeholders to articulate and confront their values. In this process, selecting indicators and understanding what those choices imply regarding the issues that are highlighted and the population affected is part of the assessment of environmental condition, which is the focus of the case study.

How much uncertainty is too much and how do we know? A case example of the assessment of ozone monitor network options.

Limited time and resources usually characterize environmental decision making at policy organizations such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In these climates, addressing uncertainty, usually considered a flaw in scientific analyses, is often avoided. However, ignoring uncertainties can result in unpleasant policy surprises. Furthermore, it is important for decisionmakers to know how defensible a chosen policy option is over other options when the uncertainties of the data are considered. The purpose of this article is to suggest an approach that is unique from other approaches in that it considers uncertainty in two specific ways-the uncertainty of stakeholder values within a particular decision context and data uncertainty in the light of the decision-contextual data-values relationship. It is the premise of this article that the interaction between data and stakeholder values is critical to how the decision options are viewed and determines the effect of data uncertainty on the relative acceptability of the decision options, making the understanding of this interaction important to decisionmakers and other stakeholders. This approach utilizes the recently developed decision analysis framework and process, multi-criteria integrated resource assessment (MIRA). This article will specifically address how MIRA can be used to help decisionmakers better understand the importance of uncertainty on the specific (i.e., decision contextual) environmental policy options that they are deliberating.