谨慎应对科学不确定性:地下水游戏实验

IF 1.8 3区 经济学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES International Journal of the Commons Pub Date : 2024-04-17 DOI:10.5334/ijc.1347
Minwoo Ahn, Elizabeth Baldwin, Dylan Girone
{"title":"谨慎应对科学不确定性:地下水游戏实验","authors":"Minwoo Ahn, Elizabeth Baldwin, Dylan Girone","doi":"10.5334/ijc.1347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Understanding and managing uncertainty is critical for robust governance. In groundwater management, where collaborative, community-based governance is increasingly common, scientific uncertainty about hydrological conditions could pose challenges to effective and equitable resource management. This study bridges two literatures – collaborative governance and collective action – to examine whether scientific uncertainty about hydrologic conditions undermines the performance of groups that engage in collaborative governance of shared groundwater resources. We conducted a modified groundwater game experiment, based on Meinzen-Dick et al. (2016), where participants engage as resource users in a crop choice game over multiple rounds. But unlike the original game, where participants had full information about recharge rate, two treatments introduced scientific uncertainty in water recharge: uncertainty framed as a range of estimates about groundwater recharge, and uncertainty framed as competing hydrological models predicting different groundwater recharge rates. We also expand on the original game by exploring a wider range of outcomes that include not only sustainable resource use but also group earning and equitable distribution of earnings across players. Analyzing data from 30 group games, our findings suggest that scientific uncertainty can help safeguard shared groundwater resources by prompting users to exercise caution in the face of uncertain recharge rates. This effect was more consistent for the range of estimates treatment than for the competing hydrological models treatment. To unpack the mechanisms behind the experimental result, we also analyzed participants’ communications during the game to understand the strategies that collaborative groups use to cope with uncertainty. In the presence of scientific uncertainty, collaborative processes foster cautious behavior and protect shared resources.","PeriodicalId":47250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of the Commons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Caution as a Response to Scientific Uncertainty: A Groundwater Game Experiment\",\"authors\":\"Minwoo Ahn, Elizabeth Baldwin, Dylan Girone\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/ijc.1347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Understanding and managing uncertainty is critical for robust governance. In groundwater management, where collaborative, community-based governance is increasingly common, scientific uncertainty about hydrological conditions could pose challenges to effective and equitable resource management. This study bridges two literatures – collaborative governance and collective action – to examine whether scientific uncertainty about hydrologic conditions undermines the performance of groups that engage in collaborative governance of shared groundwater resources. We conducted a modified groundwater game experiment, based on Meinzen-Dick et al. (2016), where participants engage as resource users in a crop choice game over multiple rounds. But unlike the original game, where participants had full information about recharge rate, two treatments introduced scientific uncertainty in water recharge: uncertainty framed as a range of estimates about groundwater recharge, and uncertainty framed as competing hydrological models predicting different groundwater recharge rates. We also expand on the original game by exploring a wider range of outcomes that include not only sustainable resource use but also group earning and equitable distribution of earnings across players. Analyzing data from 30 group games, our findings suggest that scientific uncertainty can help safeguard shared groundwater resources by prompting users to exercise caution in the face of uncertain recharge rates. This effect was more consistent for the range of estimates treatment than for the competing hydrological models treatment. To unpack the mechanisms behind the experimental result, we also analyzed participants’ communications during the game to understand the strategies that collaborative groups use to cope with uncertainty. In the presence of scientific uncertainty, collaborative processes foster cautious behavior and protect shared resources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of the Commons\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of the Commons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1347\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of the Commons","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1347","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

了解和管理不确定性对于强有力的治理至关重要。在地下水管理中,以社区为基础的合作治理日益普遍,而水文条件的科学不确定性可能会对有效和公平的资源管理构成挑战。本研究在协作治理和集体行动这两个文献之间架起一座桥梁,研究水文条件的科学不确定性是否会影响参与共享地下水资源协作治理的团体的绩效。我们在 Meinzen-Dick 等人(2016 年)的基础上进行了一个修改过的地下水游戏实验,参与者以资源使用者的身份参与多轮作物选择游戏。但与原始游戏不同的是,在原始游戏中,参与者拥有关于补给率的全部信息,但有两种处理方法引入了补给水量的科学不确定性:不确定性是指对地下水补给量的估计范围,以及不确定性是指预测不同地下水补给率的相互竞争的水文模型。我们还在原有游戏的基础上进行了扩展,探索了更广泛的结果,其中不仅包括资源的可持续利用,还包括参与者之间的集体收益和收益的公平分配。通过分析 30 个小组游戏的数据,我们的研究结果表明,科学的不确定性可以促使用户在面对不确定的补给率时保持谨慎,从而有助于保护共有的地下水资源。与相互竞争的水文模型相比,这种效应在估计范围处理中更为一致。为了揭示实验结果背后的机制,我们还分析了参与者在游戏过程中的交流,以了解合作小组应对不确定性的策略。在存在科学不确定性的情况下,合作过程会促进谨慎行为,保护共享资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Caution as a Response to Scientific Uncertainty: A Groundwater Game Experiment
Understanding and managing uncertainty is critical for robust governance. In groundwater management, where collaborative, community-based governance is increasingly common, scientific uncertainty about hydrological conditions could pose challenges to effective and equitable resource management. This study bridges two literatures – collaborative governance and collective action – to examine whether scientific uncertainty about hydrologic conditions undermines the performance of groups that engage in collaborative governance of shared groundwater resources. We conducted a modified groundwater game experiment, based on Meinzen-Dick et al. (2016), where participants engage as resource users in a crop choice game over multiple rounds. But unlike the original game, where participants had full information about recharge rate, two treatments introduced scientific uncertainty in water recharge: uncertainty framed as a range of estimates about groundwater recharge, and uncertainty framed as competing hydrological models predicting different groundwater recharge rates. We also expand on the original game by exploring a wider range of outcomes that include not only sustainable resource use but also group earning and equitable distribution of earnings across players. Analyzing data from 30 group games, our findings suggest that scientific uncertainty can help safeguard shared groundwater resources by prompting users to exercise caution in the face of uncertain recharge rates. This effect was more consistent for the range of estimates treatment than for the competing hydrological models treatment. To unpack the mechanisms behind the experimental result, we also analyzed participants’ communications during the game to understand the strategies that collaborative groups use to cope with uncertainty. In the presence of scientific uncertainty, collaborative processes foster cautious behavior and protect shared resources.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of the Commons
International Journal of the Commons ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
17
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Crossing Gender Studies With the Commons: A Bibliometric Analysis Caution as a Response to Scientific Uncertainty: A Groundwater Game Experiment Actor Resistance Influences Effectiveness of Ostrom’s Design Principles for Governing Contested Landscapes Polycentric Groundwater Governance: Insights from the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area Governing Landscape Simplification in Rapid Commercialization Contexts – the Case of the Dike-Pond System in the Pearl River Delta, China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1