scholarly journals THE USE AND INFLUENCE OF SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY MAKING: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NOVA SCOTIA

2012 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzuette S. Soomai
Keyword(s):  
Nova Scotia ◽  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Coastal Policy ◽  
Strategic Approach ◽  
Science Policy Interface

Governmental organisations produce vast quantities of scientific information on the state of the marine and coastal environment which is often intended to guide policy-making to mitigate or reverse the declining trends in the health of the environment. How scientific information is used and how it influences environmental policy and decision making are however not well understood. The apparent disconnect between the knowledge and information produced by scientists and that used by policy makers is attributed to problems at the science-policy interface. Based on a multi-disciplinary literature review, this paper describes how policy makersseek out and use scientific information within the context of policy design in the 21st century. Best practices for increasing information flows across the science-policy interface are drawn from a study of the awareness, use, and influence of The 2009 State of the Nova Scotia Coast Report in coastal policy making in Nova Scotia.Strategic or rational approaches to policy making can increase the two-way flow of information across the science-policy interface as it facilitates collaboration among multiple actors in information generation, transmis-sion, and use. The production, use, and influence of The 2009 State ofNova Scotia's Coast Report in coastal policy making in Nova Scotia demonstrates the strategic approach to policy making whereby coastal policy is being developed through (i) intergovernmental partnerships, (ii) the use of best available information, (iii) linkages between the policy process and policy output, and (iv) public participation.

scholarly journals When evidence does not matter: The barriers to learning from science in two cases of environmental policy change in Brazil

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavia de Mattos Donadelli
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Barriers To Learning ◽  
Congressional Debates ◽  
Science Policy Interface ◽  
Effective Use

Abstract It is generally accepted in public policy debate that expert knowledge tends to contribute to more effective formulation and implementation of policy. Most of the literature, however, has tended to be exclusively focused on the science–policy interface, ignoring the necessary pre-conditions of the broader national and institutional context for the effective use of scientific evidence. This shortcoming becomes particularly pronounced in analysis of developing in less pluralist countries. This article analyses two cases of Brazilian environmental policy-making and discusses the institutional pre-conditions for learning from science. By textually coding instances of direct and indirect participation of scientists in congressional debates and assessing the extent of their influence in final decisions, this article shows that despite being largely consensual to the scientific community, clearly communicated, and relevant, scientific information had no influence on the policy-decisions taken in two highly-technical areas of environmental policy in Brazil: forestry and pesticides. This article engages with the literature on the necessary institutional structures for learning from science and provides support for the hypothesis that countries with lower levels of political openness, and medium-to-low consensus requirements for decision-making, will tend to have considerable barriers to effectively producing evidence-based policy-making.

scholarly journals When evidence does not matter: The barriers to learning from science in two cases of environmental policy change in Brazil

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavia de Mattos Donadelli
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Barriers To Learning ◽  
Congressional Debates ◽  
Science Policy Interface ◽  
Effective Use

Abstract It is generally accepted in public policy debate that expert knowledge tends to contribute to more effective formulation and implementation of policy. Most of the literature, however, has tended to be exclusively focused on the science–policy interface, ignoring the necessary pre-conditions of the broader national and institutional context for the effective use of scientific evidence. This shortcoming becomes particularly pronounced in analysis of developing in less pluralist countries. This article analyses two cases of Brazilian environmental policy-making and discusses the institutional pre-conditions for learning from science. By textually coding instances of direct and indirect participation of scientists in congressional debates and assessing the extent of their influence in final decisions, this article shows that despite being largely consensual to the scientific community, clearly communicated, and relevant, scientific information had no influence on the policy-decisions taken in two highly-technical areas of environmental policy in Brazil: forestry and pesticides. This article engages with the literature on the necessary institutional structures for learning from science and provides support for the hypothesis that countries with lower levels of political openness, and medium-to-low consensus requirements for decision-making, will tend to have considerable barriers to effectively producing evidence-based policy-making.

scholarly journals When evidence does not matter: The barriers to learning from science in two cases of environmental policy change in Brazil

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavia Donadelli
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Barriers To Learning ◽  
Congressional Debates ◽  
Science Policy Interface ◽  
Effective Use

Abstract It is generally accepted in public policy debate that expert knowledge tends to contribute to more effective formulation and implementation of policy. Most of the literature, however, has tended to be exclusively focused on the science–policy interface, ignoring the necessary pre-conditions of the broader national and institutional context for the effective use of scientific evidence. This shortcoming becomes particularly pronounced in analysis of developing in less pluralist countries. This article analyses two cases of Brazilian environmental policy-making and discusses the institutional pre-conditions for learning from science. By textually coding instances of direct and indirect participation of scientists in congressional debates and assessing the extent of their influence in final decisions, this article shows that despite being largely consensual to the scientific community, clearly communicated, and relevant, scientific information had no influence on the policy-decisions taken in two highly-technical areas of environmental policy in Brazil: forestry and pesticides. This article engages with the literature on the necessary institutional structures for learning from science and provides support for the hypothesis that countries with lower levels of political openness, and medium-to-low consensus requirements for decision-making, will tend to have considerable barriers to effectively producing evidence-based policy-making.

When evidence does not matter: The barriers to learning from science in two cases of environmental policy change in Brazil

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-321
Author(s):  
Flavia Donadelli
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Barriers To Learning ◽  
Congressional Debates ◽  
Science Policy Interface ◽  
Effective Use

Abstract It is generally accepted in public policy debate that expert knowledge tends to contribute to more effective formulation and implementation of policy. Most of the literature, however, has tended to be exclusively focused on the science–policy interface, ignoring the necessary pre-conditions of the broader national and institutional context for the effective use of scientific evidence. This shortcoming becomes particularly pronounced in analysis of developing in less pluralist countries. This article analyses two cases of Brazilian environmental policy-making and discusses the institutional pre-conditions for learning from science. By textually coding instances of direct and indirect participation of scientists in congressional debates and assessing the extent of their influence in final decisions, this article shows that despite being largely consensual to the scientific community, clearly communicated, and relevant, scientific information had no influence on the policy-decisions taken in two highly-technical areas of environmental policy in Brazil: forestry and pesticides. This article engages with the literature on the necessary institutional structures for learning from science and provides support for the hypothesis that countries with lower levels of political openness, and medium-to-low consensus requirements for decision-making, will tend to have considerable barriers to effectively producing evidence-based policy-making.

scholarly journals Enhancing the resilience of coupled human and natural systems of alpine rangelands on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau

2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. i ◽  
Author(s):  
Shikui Dong ◽  
Ruth Sherman
Keyword(s):  
Tibetan Plateau ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Sustainable Management ◽  
Environmental Changes ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Rangeland Management ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Natural Systems ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Science Policy Interface

This special issue covers a wide range of topics on the protection and sustainable management of alpine rangelands on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau (QTP), including Indigenous knowledge of sustainable rangeland management, science-policy interface for alpine rangeland biodiversity conservation, adaptations of local people to social and environmental changes and policy design for managing coupled human-natural systems of alpine rangelands.

Polar policy making: Two ethnographic accounts of Polar field scientists interacting with Polar governance and policy

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 552-559
Author(s):  
Laura Ferguson
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Support Staff ◽  
Research Station ◽  
Polar Regions ◽  
Ethnographic Observation ◽  
Science Policy Interface

This review article discusses the recent publications Studying Arctic Fields by Richard C Powell and The Technocratic Antarctic by Jessica O’Reilly. Both books are ethnographic accounts of scientists working in the Polar Regions that analyse interactions at the science–policy interface. Studying Arctic Fields is a detailed story of Canada’s Resolute research station, based on immersive ethnographic observation and communicated through an engaging narrative of colourful stories from Powell’s two summers among the scientists and support staff there. The Technocratic Antarctic treads new ground in its examination of Antarctic social science, presenting the findings of a wide-ranging and thorough research project that engages with the themes of territory, security, processes, practice, problems and science communication. Both publications make valuable contributions to Polar social science and will also appeal to many beyond this.

scholarly journals From marine climate change impacts to marine legislation: lessons from the science-policy interface

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Frost ◽  
John Baxter ◽  
Paul Buckley ◽  
Stephen Dye ◽  
Bethany Stoker
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The Body ◽  
Scientific Integrity ◽  
Marine Biodiversity ◽  
Science Policy Interface ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Marine Climate

In recent decades, the body of evidence on climate change including that for marine impacts has grown rapidly leading to a number of challenges, including the need to collate and summarise a large volume of information and to be able to analyse and interpret complex messages for a wide variety of stakeholders from scientists to policy-makers and the wider public. The Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership (MCCIP) has been functioning at the science-policy interface for over ten years collating, assessing and interpreting information on marine climate change impacts. This experience, and the fact that the MCCIP model is being more widely adopted nationally and globally, provides an opportunity to look at lessons learned in working in the science-policy interface with a focus on the Scientific Integrity and Independence Risk Management Scheme (SIIRMS). This scheme was developed by MCCIP as a framework for providing climate information and advice to policy and decision-makers. Examples are provided of the impact of MCCIP on policy and the development of marine legislation along with other examples of how marine biodiversity information being utilized for policy needs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document