|
| |
Introduction
From August 24 through August 26, 1999, nearly 60 social scientists and personnel of
the Minerals Management Service (MMS) Environmental Studies Program (ESP) gathered in Park
City, Utah, to discuss the program’s agenda for socioeconomic research. Their task
was to review past and ongoing research and identify the issues that, in their view, were
most pressing. As Larry Roberts, Chief of the MMS Environmental Studies Program, pointed
out in his opening remarks, in terms of the quantity of research funded, the program has
tripled in size in the past ten to twelve years. While one cannot predict the levels of
funding the program will receive in years to come, he doubted that the need for a strong
socioeconomic studies effort was likely to diminish. Roberts reinforced this point by
observing that research indicates that outer continental shelf (OCS) oil and gas
development has much greater long-term impact in the social and economic sphere than in
the biological sphere. The socioeconomic component of the ESP has grown along with the
rest of the program. The burgeoning of this research effort and the importance of the
issues it addresses, Roberts said, made timely a gathering of minds to review its focus
and direction.
In his opening remarks, Roberts called for an open and candid discussion among the MMS
personnel, research contractors and academic social scientists present. He noted that
while the studies program has limited funds, conference participants should not let that
constrain their dialog or limit their suggestions for useful avenues of research. They
should remember, however, that the program does not fund basic research but must confine
itself to studies relevant to decisions regarding lease sales and permits for oil and gas
development activities.
Roberts posed several broad questions for conference participants to keep in mind:
 | Is the studies program properly focused? |
| Is it doing relevant research? |
| Is it making the most of opportunities to conduct studies that have applications to more
than one of the program’s three geographic regions? |
| Is it making the most of opportunities to leverage funding by collaborating with
academic and business organizations? |
Roberts also stressed the importance of mitigating the social and economic impacts of
oil and gas development and the need to clarify the responsibilities of the MMS in this
regard. He asked conference participants to devote some of their energy to considering
what is known about how to mitigate social and economic impacts.
Rodney Cluck, Environmental Studies Program Social Scientist, in his opening remarks,
seconded Roberts’ call for seeking common research interests among the regions,
whether conceptual or methodological. He also noted the importance of linking macro-level
issues, such as industry trends or public policy shifts, with micro-level concerns, such
as the social constructions of reality and values that inform and affect life in
communities.
The conference owed much of its success to the variety of perspectives represented.
Research contractors and university faculty mixed with MMS personnel from across the
country, and social scientists with a wide variety of specialties brought their
perspectives to bear on MMS research activities. The result was rich and lively discussion
in which conference participants raised dozens of socioeconomic issues for the further
attention of the ESP. The conference was not intended, however, to produce a comprehensive
list of topics for socioeconomic research or a definitive description of the socioeconomic
component of the ESP. Rather, it contributes the perspectives of the distinctive group
assembled in Park City to the larger process of planning the ESP's research agenda and
developing its National Strategic Plan. (The latter, which is updated annually, identifies
ESP programmatic directions for the coming two to four years. The planning process
includes preparing Annual Studies Plans (ASPs) in each region. In preparing their ASPs,
the regions solicit ideas for studies not only from within the MMS but also from a broad
range of interested parties outside the agency, including non-profit organizations,
private sector groups, environmental activists, scientific experts and state and local
government entities.)
To provide essential background for considering the results of conference discussions,
the report begins with a description of the legal mandate for MMS environmental, including
socioeconomic research and a description of the activities of the conference. The next
section summarizes the outcomes of the conference proceedings, providing a synopsis of the
issues identified, and a summary of observations on the proceedings offered by two members
of the Environmental Studies Program’s Scientific Committee. The following section
presents more detailed descriptions of the issues identified by conference participants;
this section constitutes the bulk of the report.
Appendices contain written versions of the presentations made on the first day of the
conference (Appendix A), background descriptions of the MMS
socioeconomic studies effort in each of its three geographic regions (Appendix
B) and the text of an MMS document outlining the nature and purpose of applied social
science in the MMS (Appendix C).
For more information, contact Rodney Cluck.
|
|
