A unit of Lasting Forests
Sustained forests; sustained profits
evolving since March 30, 1999

of an Alternative Wildlife Resource Management

The Epistemology of Omega

It is possible and often useful to try to understand epistemology as a study of the criteria by which we know things. Criteria can be defined with ease as objectives and thus we arrive at a point of view that we know something when it meets well a set of objectives. Classical philosophy applies: we can never know (certainty); we deal with levels of probability; nothing can be proven; alpha and beta probabilities relating to acceptance and rejection apply, etc.)These objectives are common and include to be observable (sensory epistemology); to be useful (pragmatism); derived from the evidence (induction); generalized from principles (deduction; etc.

The literature on decision making virtually insists upon starting a decision process with formulating objectives. We understand this and have worked within this premise for years. We now observe that

1. There are few sets of objectives written for agencies
2. There is little use of the objectives that have been written
3. Leadership is needed to develop and use objectives; they may be a bottom-up effort but use, support, and promulgation depends on upper level actions
4. Published lists are out of date before the printed copies are delivered
5. People are very reluctant to write their objectives because
   1. Their personal emphases and/or biases become evident
   2. They are unsure how they will be used
   3. Debates over "goals" and "objectives" and their differences are unending
   4. Rarely are weights of importance, risks and discount rates, units of demand, or substitutability included for use with the stated objectives
   5. Current programs may be evaluated and may be deficient when judged against the previously unwritten objectives...and others
6. They have been altered to characterize and justify existing programs
7. Stating objectives is very difficult
8. In public natural resource situations, there are many objectives (typically over 100) and few people know how to use these statements to arrive at an optimum (or make other uses)
9. Without a reasonable budgetary and agency context, the hard work required becomes meaningless
10. Powerful political players (their sets of objectives) "top" well-formulated objectives thus reducing incentives for future work
11. Leaders advocating objectives are transient, thus support for improving and using the objectives is usually passing
12. The evidence of past failures in formulating and developing objectives suggests the need for alternatives.
13. Methodological issues (such as formulating objective functions and selecting optimization software) can overpower the work put forth in developing the statements

We believe that there is a new situation. We believe that there is no decision-situation as in the past (if there ever was one for the public natural resource agency). We believe that classical decision does not apply in such situations. We are actively trying to describe the current situation and to articulate a means to arrive at satisfactory conditions (Omega). We believe that these happen, that alternatives can be imagined, that they can be informed by people today, and they the imagined satisfactory condition can happen more frequently under Omega Theory than might occur by chance.

The criteria for Omega Theory (how we will know that we have a reasonable, efficient, rational, robust theory that is consistent with our current knowledge of ecology, energetics, esthetics, economics, and enforcement are as follows:

under development

1. It can be developed for a proposed project of major change in reasonable time
2. It can be developed at reasonable costs
3. It is reasonable consistent with the current language used within natural resource management
4. It can be taught at sufficient levels to 80% of resource agency staff within less than 6 months
5. It can be explained to 80% of relevant staff of members of Congress
6. It can be developed as a legislative or policy mandate for use
7. Under development

Go to the top.

Last revision January 17, 2000.