Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T12:09:40.237Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS AND CASE STUDIES: The Science-Policy Disconnect: Language Issues at the Science-Policy Boundary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2013

Andrew J. Wright ,
E.C.M. Parsons ,
Naomi A. Rose  and
Erin Witcomb-Vos
Andrew J. Wright*
Affiliation:
Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Roskilde, Denmark; and Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
E.C.M. Parsons
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
Naomi A. Rose
Affiliation:
Humane Society International, Washington, DC
Erin Witcomb-Vos
Affiliation:
St. Ives, Cambridgeshire, England; and Durham, North Carolina
*
Andrew J. Wright, Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030; (phone) 703-993-1043; (e-mail) [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The language barrier between science and policy is as large and often underestimated as that between British and American English. Although most of the words are the same, they often carry different meaning. One good example of this is the term theory, which has caused much trouble for policy makers in relation to school curricula on evolution. However, there are many other words that have one specific meaning when used by scientists and another more common meaning in everyday use. Translation difficulties may also arise from the particular phraseology and writing conventions used by scientists. These are often more subtle but can create just as much, if not more, trouble in the sound-bite world of mass media, especially in high-profile subject areas such as the effects of noise on marine mammals. Using an excerpt from a report in this subject area by the US National Research Council as a case study, the authors will provide some examples of where scientific language use can be misunderstood (and potentially even intentionally misused) by policy makers and stakeholders and offer some possible solutions to these issues. The intent is to facilitate communication between scientists and policy makers to order to improve management efforts.

Environmental Practice 15:79–83 (2013)

Type
Features
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 79 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beale, C.M. 2007. The Behavioral Ecology of Disturbance Responses. International Journal of Comparative Psychology 20(2-3):111–120.Google Scholar
Beale, C.M., and Monaghan, P.. 2004. Behavioural Responses to Human Disturbance: A Matter of Choice? Animal Behaviour 68(5):1065–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bejder, L., Samuels, A., Whitehead, H., and Gales, N.. 2006a. Interpreting Short-Term Behavioural Responses to Disturbance within a Longitudinal Perspective. Animal Behaviour 72(5):1149–1158.Google Scholar
Bejder, L., Samuels, A., Whitehead, H., Gales, N., Mann, J., Connor, R., Heithaus, M., Watson-Capps, J., Flaherty, C., and Kürtzen, M.. 2006b. Decline in Relative Abundance of Bottlenose Dolphins Exposed to Long-Term Disturbance. Conservation Biology 20(6):1791–1798.Google ScholarPubMed
Brumfiel, G. 2008. S.v. “significant” [Language: Disputed Definitions]. Nature 455(23):1023–1028. Available at http://www.nature.com/news/2008/081022/pdf/4551023a.pdf.Google Scholar
Bryant, P.J., Lafferty, C.M., and Lafferty, S.K.. 1984. Reoccupation of Laguna Guerrero Negro Baja California, Mexico, by Gray Whales. In The Gray Whale, robustus, Eschrichtius, Jones, M.L., Swartz, S.L. and Leatherwood, S., eds. Academic Press, Orlando, FL, 376–386Google Scholar
Energy Producers Caucus. 2006. Energy Producers Caucus Statement. In Marine Mammals and Noise: A Sound Approach to Research and Management—A Report to the US Congress from the Marine Mammal Commission. US Marine Mammal Commission, Bethesda, MD, Appendix 1. Available at http://www.mmc.gov/reports/workshop/pdf/fullsoundreport.pdf.Google Scholar
Fidler, F., Burgman, M.A., Cumming, G., Buttrose, R., and Thomason, N.. 2006. Impact of Criticism of Null-Hypothesis Significance Testing on Statistical Reporting Practices in Conservation Biology. Conservation Biology 20(5):1539–1544Google Scholar
Gill, J.A., Norris, K., and Sutherland, W.J.. 2001. Why Behavioural Responses May Not Reflect the Population Consequences of Human Disturbance. Biological Conservation 97(2):265–268.Google Scholar
Harrington, F.H., and Veitch, A.M.. 1992. Calving Success of Woodland Caribou Exposed to Low-Level Jet Fighter Overflights. Arctic 45(3):213–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassol, S.J. 2008. Improving How Scientists Communicate about Climate Change. Eos 89(11):106–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbet, M.C., and Scheufele, D.A.. 2009. What's Next for Science Communication? Promising Directions and Lingering Distractions. American Journal of Botany 96(10):1–12.Google ScholarPubMed
Olson, R. 2009. Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style. Island Press, Washington, DC, 216 pp.Google Scholar
Sand-Jensen, K. 2007. How to Write Consistently Boring Scientific Literature. Oikos 116(5):723–727.Google Scholar
Stillman, R.A., and Goss-Custard, J.D.. 2002. Seasonal Changes in the Response of Oystercatchers Haematopus ostralegus to Human Disturbance. Journal of Avian Biology 33(4):358–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todd, S., Stevick, P., Lien, J., Marques, F., and Ketten, D.. 1996. Behavioural Effects to Underwater Explosions in Humpback Whales (Megaptera novaeangliae). Canadian Journal of Zoology 74(9):1661–1672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Congress. 1972. Marine Mammal Protection Act, as Amended. 16 USC 1361 et seq. US Congress, Washington DC. Available at http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/16C31.txt.Google Scholar
US National Marine Fisheries Service (US NMFS). 1996. Environmental Assessment on Conditions for Lethal Removal of California Sea Lions at the Ballard Locks to Protect Winter Steelhead. Environmental Assessment Report. US NMFS, Seattle, WA, 81 pp.Google Scholar
US National Research Council (US NRC). 2005. Marine Mammal Populations and Ocean Noise: Determining When Noise Causes Biologically Significant Effects. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 115 pp.Google Scholar
Ward, B. 2008. Communicating on Climate Change: An Essential Resource for Journalists, Scientists, and Educators, Menezes, S., ed. Metcalf Institute for Marine & Environmental Reporting, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI, 74 pp.Google Scholar
Wright, A.J. 2006. A Review of the NRC's “Marine Mammal Populations and Ocean Noise: Determining When Noise Causes Biologically Significant Effects” Report. Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy 9(1):91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, A.J. 2010. Scientific Talk on Climate Change [Opinion]. Politico, November 29. Available at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45651.html.Google Scholar