Biedenweg, K., H. Harguth, and K. Stiles. 2017. The science and politics of human well-being: a case study in cocreating indicators for Puget Sound restoration. Ecology and Society 22(3):11. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09424-220311

Simple frameworks that generalize the best metrics of human well-being related to the natural environment have rarely been empirically tested for their representativeness across diverse regions. This study tested the hypothesis that metrics of human well-being related to environmental change are context specific by identifying priority human well-being indicators in distinct regions. The research team interviewed 61 experts and held 8 stakeholder workshops across 3 regions to identify and prioritize locally relevant indicators. Results from the three regions were compared to determine the degree of geographic and demographic variability in indicator priorities. The team found broadly similar domains and attributes of human well-being across the regions, yet measurable indicators were specific to the contexts. Despite this, the congruence of overarching domains suggests that a high-level framework of human well-being can guide a holistic assessment of the human impacts of environmental change across diverse regions.

We considered a common research tool for understanding the mental models behind conservation decisions: cognitive mapping. Developed by cognitive psychologists, the elicitation of mental models with cognitive mapping has been used to understand soil management in Spain, invasive grass management in Australia, community forest management in the Bolivian Amazon, and small‐scale fisheries access in Belize, among others. A generalized cognitive mapping process considers specific factors associated with the design, data‐collection, data‐analyses, and interpretation phases of research. We applied this tool in a study about the integration of social data in shoreline master plans of Washington State. Fourteen policy makers and managers (approximately 85% of the region's potential sample) were asked to identify the factors they considered when making their plans. Researchers coded these factors into mental‐model objects and summarized mental‐object frequency and co‐occurrence trends. Although managers prioritized the perceived needs of social groups in their mental model of shoreline master plans, they focused specifically on tribal and private property rights, even though existing social data identified a diversity of interests around timber harvesting, tourism, and agriculture. Understanding their mental models allowed us to more effectively present this social data so that it could fit within their existing thoughts around planning. Although our case study provides a description of the cognition of a particular policy process, cognitive mapping can be used to understand cognitive processes that influence any conservation planning context.