Book contents
- Environmental Expertise
- Reviews
- Environmental Expertise
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 What Is Science? (And Why Does This Matter?)
- 3 Frames: Beyond Facts Versus Values
- Case A Framing Climate Change
- 4 Science, Politics, and the Public in Knowledge Controversies
- Case B What Does ‘Climategate’ Tell Us About Public Knowledge Controversies
- Case C Whose Deficit Anyway? Institutional Misunderstanding of Fracking-Sceptical Publics
- 5 The Limits to Knowledge
- Case D Angry Bulbs
- 6 Usable Knowledge
- Case E Expertise for European Fisheries Policy
- 7 Interdisciplinarity and the Challenge of Knowledge Integration
- Case F Knowledge Integration in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
- Case G Integrated Assessment for Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
- 8 Lay Expertise
- Case H Lay Expertise and Botanical Science
- Case I The Loweswater Care Project
- 9 Environmental Experts at the Science–Policy–Society Interface
- Case J Groupthink and Whistle Blowers in CO2 Capture and Storage
- 10 Environmental Knowledge in Democracy
- 11 Conclusion
- Index
- References
11 - Conclusion
Science, Reason, and the Environment
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 February 2019
Book contents
- Environmental Expertise
- Reviews
- Environmental Expertise
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 What Is Science? (And Why Does This Matter?)
- 3 Frames: Beyond Facts Versus Values
- Case A Framing Climate Change
- 4 Science, Politics, and the Public in Knowledge Controversies
- Case B What Does ‘Climategate’ Tell Us About Public Knowledge Controversies
- Case C Whose Deficit Anyway? Institutional Misunderstanding of Fracking-Sceptical Publics
- 5 The Limits to Knowledge
- Case D Angry Bulbs
- 6 Usable Knowledge
- Case E Expertise for European Fisheries Policy
- 7 Interdisciplinarity and the Challenge of Knowledge Integration
- Case F Knowledge Integration in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
- Case G Integrated Assessment for Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
- 8 Lay Expertise
- Case H Lay Expertise and Botanical Science
- Case I The Loweswater Care Project
- 9 Environmental Experts at the Science–Policy–Society Interface
- Case J Groupthink and Whistle Blowers in CO2 Capture and Storage
- 10 Environmental Knowledge in Democracy
- 11 Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter discusses the issue of ‘usable knowledge‘. Specifically, it looks at the relation of science to decision making: governments, civil servants, or groups of actors deliberating over collective problems, goals and solutions, and how these should be achieved. A key question that is often asked is how the sciences can best contribute to policy making: with what kinds of attitude or principles, in what kinds of organisations, with what kinds of communication tools? The chapter introduces concepts to characterise and analyse strategies of connecting science and policy. It addresses institutional as well as problem-oriented attempts to connect knowledge production and use. What kinds of arrangements lead to ‘usable knowledge’, or, alternatively phrased, to knowledge that is ‘effective’ or has ‘impact’? And, finally, can we still sensibly figure out some sort of criteria to evaluate the usability and quality of knowledge and of the knowledge production processes?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Environmental ExpertiseConnecting Science, Policy and Society, pp. 257 - 262Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Bijker, W. E., Bal, R., and Hendriks, R. (2009). The Paradox of Scientific Authority: The Role of Scientific Advice in Democracies. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cash, D. W., Borck, J. C., and Patt, A. G. (2006). Countering the Loading-Dock Approach to Linking Science and Decision Making: Comparative Analysis of El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Forecasting Systems. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 31(4), 465–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, A. (2007). Democratizing Technology: Risk, Responsibility and the Regulation of Chemicals. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
De Vries, A., Halffman, W., and Hoppe, R. (2010). Policy Workers Tinkering with Uncertainty: Dutch Econometric Policy Advice in Action. In Colebatch, H. K., Hoppe, R., and Noordegraaf, M., eds., Working for Policy (pp.91–109). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Rationality and Power: Democracy and Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Renn, O., and Klinke, A. (2004). Systemic Risks: A New Challenge for Risk Management. EMBO reports, 5(S1), S41–S46. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400227Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Wynne, B. (1982). Rationality and Ritual: The Windscale Inquiry and Nuclear Decision Making in Britain. Chalfont St Giles: BSHS.Google Scholar