{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03537906137184116, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009386281588447653, 'mean_word_length': 5.2152466367713, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Enabling problem-solving between science and politics in water conflicts: impasses and breakthroughs in the Everglades, Florida, USA

Abstract Water conflicts, such as the one in the Everglades, Florida, USA, are complex and dynamic, and there is no theory that yet provides a comprehensive and sufficient explanation for when and how science may be more or less effective. Using both the literature and the water conflict in the Everglades, it is argued that science is most influential in political negotiations when it is created with, not for, stakeholders. The stakeholder negotiators need to know, give feedback on, and eventually vet all stages of the scientific process, which is generating data and possible solutions for them. Such close cooperation is not easy, however. Each group has different goals, jargons, objects to represent phenomena and concepts, and different procedures for working through problems. This paper argues that the political negotiations and technical groups need to jointly create “a common playing field,” with a shared purpose supported by a negotiated set of concepts, “boundary objects,” and procedures and norms that they use to coordinate their work. Citation Fuller, B. (2011) Enabling problem-solving between science and politics in water conflicts: impasses and breakthroughs in the Everglades, Florida, USA. Hydrol. Sci. J. 56(4), 576–587.