摘要 :
Abstract In this commentary, using the UK as our example, we focus on what we describe as the borderlands of the science–policy interface (SPI) and use two case studies to sketch out where we think there are further opportunities...
展开
Abstract In this commentary, using the UK as our example, we focus on what we describe as the borderlands of the science–policy interface (SPI) and use two case studies to sketch out where we think there are further opportunities for geographers and others interested in advocating and engaging. As authors we bring to the topic different professional backgrounds and experiences at the SPI, ranging from ex‐Deputy Chief Scientist at Natural England with a recent secondment to Defra to two academic geographers who have worked with and for Defra to other roles including acting as specialist adviser to the Houses of Parliament. As geographers and environmental scientists, we believe that there is much to be gained by working with both policy development and practice in the pursuit of positive outcomes for economy, society and environment.
收起
摘要 :
The conservation and sustainable management of forests is a topic of significant interest for scholars and policy makers alike. Yet, this is a multifaceted issue that raises important questions related to different societal and sc...
展开
The conservation and sustainable management of forests is a topic of significant interest for scholars and policy makers alike. Yet, this is a multifaceted issue that raises important questions related to different societal and scientific perspectives, while values of the multiple services that forest ecosystems deliver for society must also be taken into account. However, perspectives on forest conservation may differ with regard to region and scale. This paper summarizes the contributions of a special issue on forest conservation that brings together diverse disciplinary and regional perspectives. First, we explore the necessity for interdisciplinary perspectives on forest conservation, and particularly the urgent need to bridge between social and natural science views in order to better understand complex socio-ecological systems. Second, we discuss a variety of case studies on forest conservation in different spatial and socio-economic contexts. Third, we focus on the science-policy and science-management interface as the critical "zone" where knowledge about forest conservation is exchanged. Finally, we emphasize again the diversity of possible perspectives on the issue, and conclude by identifying some possible ways of thinking about issues such as integrative versus segregative forest conservation, and science-policy-management interactions.
收起
摘要 :
There is growing interest - and need - among researchers and research organizations to contribute societally relevant work as well as to demonstrate the policy impact of their research. Diverse science-policy interfaces (SPIs) aim...
展开
There is growing interest - and need - among researchers and research organizations to contribute societally relevant work as well as to demonstrate the policy impact of their research. Diverse science-policy interfaces (SPIs) aim for scientifically informed policymaking by connecting scientists with policymakers. Effective SPIs need to be grounded in credibility, relevance and legitimacy; at the same time, however, they become part of the complex, politicised web of public policymaking. In this article we examine how forest researchers who participate in diverse SPIs in the context of the Global South navigate this complexity. We apply the concepts of credibility, relevance and legitimacy to explore the tensions researchers experience, as well as the strategies that researchers apply when responding to them. The research is based on in-depth interviews with 23 forest researchers and highlights (i) the tensions related to ensuring both policy and political relevance particularly in the context of research led SPIs; and (ii) tensions arising from the need to maintain credibility in the face of contestation and pressure to omit research critical of existing policies and practice and also the legitimacy of 'experts' operating within the SPI. Ensuring SPI effectiveness (research impact) also emerged as an additional source of tension. While multiple response strategies were identified, including knowledge co-production and strategic engagement with key policy actors, some of the tensions led to compromises, which we discuss. We conclude by highlighting the need to understand power relations in terms of both planning but also evaluating effective SPIs.
收起
摘要 :
For decades now, scholars have grappled with questions about how knowledge producers can enhance the influence of their knowledge on users and improve policy making. However, little attention has been paid to how policy experiment...
展开
For decades now, scholars have grappled with questions about how knowledge producers can enhance the influence of their knowledge on users and improve policy making. However, little attention has been paid to how policy experiments, a flexible and ex ante method of policy appraisal, obtain influence over political decision-making. To address this gap, an exploratory framework has been developed that facilitates systematic analysis of multiple experiments, allowing hypotheses to be tested regarding how an experiment’s institutional design can influence the views of political decision-makers. Cash’s categories of effectiveness are used to describe an experiment’s conceptual influence; being how credible, salient, and legitimate decision-makers perceive an experiment to be. The hypotheses are tested using 14 experiment cases found relevant to climate adaptation in the Netherlands, with complete survey responses from over 70 respondents. The results show that although, in general, the experiments had medium to high influence on decision-makers, institutional design does have a noticeable impact. Organisers should make choices carefully when designing an experiment, particularly in order to maintain relevance during an experiment’s implementation and to build community acceptance. Suggestions for future research include a comparison of experiment effects with the effects of non-experimental forms of appraisal, such as piloting or ex ante impact assessment.
收起
摘要 :
There is a need to move towards a view of urban environmental quality and allied concepts that can draw together, in a practical way, the strands of related work from different fields. Perhaps not so obvious is that an important f...
展开
There is a need to move towards a view of urban environmental quality and allied concepts that can draw together, in a practical way, the strands of related work from different fields. Perhaps not so obvious is that an important factor in the usefulness of any such work is consideration of who might use the output and how they might use it. Based on experience in the environmental field, this paper suggests that one of the major challenges is to bridge the divide between the environmental quality/well-being/quality-of-life specialists and the players who make urban policy and who shape our physical and social environments-in other words the engineers, planners, architects, service delivery specialists, etc. It might be argued that the issue is how to ensure integrated models and concepts improve environmental quality information available to these key players, but the more immediate issue is how to ensure, if it gets to them at all, can any of it be used? Several propositions are put forward by which environmental quality specialists can hope to maximise the utility of urban environmental quality information and its offspring indicators. Firstly, the environmental quality specialists must understand how urban policy, urban development, and decision-making processes, function. Secondly, they require an understanding of the language, the tools and the thought processes that are used by the development players. Thirdly, they must adopt approaches in which the environmental quality information assists the development players to propose and test scenarios, particularly novel paths of action, that could shift urban development in preferred directions.
收起
摘要 :
Abstract In August 2021, while the world was grappling with the release of the IPCC WGI report, a group of activist scientists called Scientist Rebellion leaked parts of the Working Group III contribution to the Sixth Assessment R...
展开
Abstract In August 2021, while the world was grappling with the release of the IPCC WGI report, a group of activist scientists called Scientist Rebellion leaked parts of the Working Group III contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) prior to intergovernmental approval. Although Scientist Rebellion are not the first to leak an IPCC report, they are the most vocal leaker with a particular political agenda: to generate disruptive climate action by curtailing the carefully orchestrated intergovernmental process of the IPCC. I take this case of science in activism involving the IPCC interface as an example to examine the increasingly intricate relationship between science, activism and responsibility. The salient sense of urgency around climate action, the growing prevalence of the climate crisis narrative in both public and scientific spheres, and the increased policy‐relevance of science‐policy interfaces put strong pressures on (climate) scientists that need to be disentangled to be understood without premature judgment. I show that the leak is symptomatic of the novel responsibility to act(ivism) scientists are increasingly confronted with and I highlight some of the tensions that come with this responsibility. Emphasizing the centrality of the question of responsibility in, and of, science, I discuss the (ir)responsibility of leaking IPCC draft materials. I end on a call for more interdisciplinary attentiveness to the nexus of science, activism and responsibility and the cases in which they become entangled. This article is categorized under: The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Climate Science and Social Movements The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Climate Science and Decision Making
收起
摘要 :
This special issue contains a selection of papers presented during the 2014 Bergen meeting, complemented with short perspectives by young PNS-inspired scholars, presented at a mini symposium "Post-normal times? New thinking about ...
展开
This special issue contains a selection of papers presented during the 2014 Bergen meeting, complemented with short perspectives by young PNS-inspired scholars, presented at a mini symposium "Post-normal times? New thinking about science and policy advice" held on 21 October 2016 in celebration of Silvio Funtowicz' 70th birthday, also in Bergen. In addition, the issue includes two more extended commentaries on the present crisis in science and the post-fact/ post-truth discourse, one from Europe (Saltelli and Funtowicz, this issue) and one from Japan (Tsukahara, this issue). Far from being a complete representation of the discussions at both symposia, the six papers, three short perspectives on PNS and two extended commentaries on the present crisis, represent relevant reflections on the current state and possible future scope of PNS in the context of the rapidly changing role of science in governance.
收起
摘要 :
We argue that science concerned with natural resource policy analysis is entering a new phase. In response to policy demands for triple-bottom-line assessments, developing transdisciplinary endeavours has been a primary focus, cat...
展开
We argue that science concerned with natural resource policy analysis is entering a new phase. In response to policy demands for triple-bottom-line assessments, developing transdisciplinary endeavours has been a primary focus, catalysing methodological innovations. However, the period of innovation has increased the divergence between a science domain characterised by increasing complexity of communicated analytical outputs and a policy domain that generally remains impelled towards single metric outcomes. We argue that this new phase will see the focus shift from method innovation towards the design of research processes to correct the discrepancy. This paper describes the Challenge-and-Reconstruct Learning framework (ChaRL) for designing sustainability-focused research processes to better align science contributions and policy aspirations in complex decision making arenas. This paper provides evidence for how the ChaRL framework can (1) establish and maintain an effective science-policy interface despite high levels of complexity and high levels of contested values and (2) challenge and reconstruct existing knowledge, providing a robust foundation to evidence-based decision making. Critical for these achievements is that the design of the engagement process starts with the cognitive elements critical to the decision making processes, that is individuals' causal beliefs and values.
收起
摘要 :
In early 2009, few would have expected that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would come under such massive attack. The IPCC had enjoyed a pristine reputation and had even advanced to become a role model for bio...
展开
In early 2009, few would have expected that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would come under such massive attack. The IPCC had enjoyed a pristine reputation and had even advanced to become a role model for biodiversity and food security assessments (Loreau et al. 2006; Watson 2005). However, public trust and, with it, the organization's credibility eroded dramatically after November 2009 with the events that became known as 'climategate'. This article seeks to contribute to current debates about how to reform the IPCC. It argues that there are major flaws in the design of the IPCC which are rooted in the linear model of expertise and which are helping to stoke the backlash against the IPCC. The article analyzes the ways in which the IPCC's activities conform to the linear model of expertise and considers the consequences of this for integrating adaptation into the IPCC assessments. It explains why adaptation played only a marginal role up until the IPCC Third Assessment Report. It then demonstrates why the use of the linear model of expertise constrains the scientific and political debate about adaptation and leads to proxy debates about scientific evidence, which result in depoliticizing the politics of adaptation and politicizing science. Finally, the article calls for the debate to be opened up to accommodate alternatives that are both politically more feasible and at the same time more appropriate to the specific needs of adaptation policies at different levels of decision-making.
收起
摘要 :
Thematic Network projects are increasingly viewed as promising mechanisms for improving the link between science and policy, particularly in light of further improving air quality that will require substantial financial investment...
展开
Thematic Network projects are increasingly viewed as promising mechanisms for improving the link between science and policy, particularly in light of further improving air quality that will require substantial financial investments. As the literature identifying principles or guidelines for planning and implementing such network projects is limited, this paper describes the experience of the European Commission (Directorate General Research) funded Thematic Network on Air Pollution and Health (AIRNET). In its 3-year duration (2002–2004), AIRNET used a variety of activities (international conferences, national network days, website, air pollution project inventory, database of air pollution research, newsletters, multi-disciplinary work groups) to increase the range of stakeholders involved so that research findings could be better integrated, communicated and interpreted to support policy. Despite the limitations of this type of project and the challenge of improving the communication between scientists and policy makers, the activities of the network have contributed to the development of a multi-disciplinary air pollution and health network in Europe with wide stakeholder involvement. The AIRNET experience indicates that Thematic Networks do not develop spontaneously and that a variety of impulses are needed to link the different players. Communication is key and should be considered as a joint responsibility of all parties involved—including scientists, policymakers, health care professionals and representatives from industry and non-governmental organisations.
收起
原文获取