Suchergebnisse

Partial contents: International relations, international law, and the environment, by Robert Rienow and Clifton Wilson; Environmental policy and public administration, by Lynton K. Caldwell: Environmental policy and constitutional law, by Stuart Nagel; State and local environmental policy, by Paul A. Sabatier; Ecological politics and American national government, by Michael E. Kraft.

Public policy disputes involving complex scientific issues usually entail conflicts not only over those scientific issues, but also over the distribution of gains & losses. The presence of scientific or technical dimensions to a dispute should not be allowed to mask underlying distributional considerations. On the other hand, science-intensive disputes require special attention. The usual adversarial approach that characterizes the handling of such disputes by agencies & courts is less than ideal for creating an understanding of scientific evidence or the resolution of scientific differences. A process of mediation, already applied in a number of significant cases, offers strong promise as a superior approach. HA

AbstractThis article introduces Science Education Policy: A Symposium. The symposium examines trends and issues from the vantage points of individuals from a variety of backgrounds who are concerned with science education in the US. Although optimistic, most of the contributors to this symposium agree that considerable research and evaluation is still needed before we can make informed policy decisions that would have a lasting impact on science education. The expected outcome of the symposium is to stimulate discussions among educators and policymakers.

Romesh Diwan and Dennis Livingston, Alternative Development Strategies and Appropriate TechnologyCharles Kidd, Manpower Policies for the Use of Science and Technology in DevelopmentRobert Morgan with Ellen Irons, Eduardo Perez, Theodore Souie, and Ava Fried, Science and Technology for Development: The Role of U.S. Universities

"Dieses WZB Discussion paper umfasst Beiträge, die sich mit aktuellen Veränderungen im Verhältnis zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik und deren Konsequenzen für Governance-Ansätze der Wissenschaftspolitik beschäftigen. Dietmar Braun analysiert in seinem Beitrag internationale Entwicklungen in öffentlich finanzierten Forschungssystemen. Er diagnostiziert die Herausbildung eines Modells von 'Netzwerk Governance' - ein Politikansatz, der auf dem Management der Interdependenzen von unabhängigen öffentlichen (und privaten) Einrichtungen in horizontalen Beziehungen beruht. Daniel Barben untersucht in einer international komparativen und transnationalen Perspektive Veränderungen im Wissenschafts- und im Politikregime sowie die Interaktionen zwischen beiden. Sein Beitrag unterstreicht den Wert des Regimekonzepts für die Analyse komplexer und interdependenter Transformationen in Wissenschaft und Politik. Henry Etzkowitz diskutiert sein 'Triple Helix'-Modell, das zum Verständnis der wechselseitigen Innovationsprozesse von Wissenschaft, Industrie und Staat entwickelt wurde. Ein spezielles Augenmerk gilt den Folgen von Triple-Helix-Innovationsprozessen für die Politik, wie sie sich etwa in der Wirtschaftspolitik oder auf regionalpolitischer Ebene manifestieren. Peter Weingart schließlich kritisiert die zahlreichen nicht-intendierten Nebenfolgen von Evaluationsverfahren und biliometrischen Messtechniken auf das Wissenschaftssystem. Er fordert eine kritische Reflexion und Reform des Peer-review-Systems zur Verbesserung der Evaluations- und Qualitätssicherungsinstrumente in der Wissenschaft. Die hier versammelten Beiträge stehen für ein viel versprechendes und wachsendes Forschungsfeld, das Ansätze der Science Policy Studies mit solchen der Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung verbindet." (Autorenreferat). Inhaltsverzeichnis: Martin Lengwiler, Dagmar Simon: Shifting boundaries between science and politics - recent work on new governance arrangements in science policy (5-10); Dietmar Braun: How to govern research in the "Age of Innovation": compatibilities and incompatibilities of policy rationales (11-38); Daniel Barben: Changing regimes of science and politics: comparative and transnational perspectives for a world in transition (39-64); Henry Etzkowitz: Meta-Innovation: the optimum role of the state in the Triple Helix (65-80); Peter Weingart: Das Ritual der Evaluierung und die Verführung der Zahlen (81-99).

Social scientists fear that policy research compromises their objectivity. As a result, policy science is becoming a separate discipline which is accorded lower status that other fields of social inquiry. However, the history, sociology and psychology of science show that the elaboration of robust social theory would be aided by a more intimate relation between policy research and academic social science than currently obtains. The traditional canons of value freedom, which have been invoked to justify the independence of social science from policy, misrepresent the relation between facts and values in science. Objective knowledge is consequent on dispute and triangulation by a many‐valued community of fallible social scientists; but it does not eventuate from consensual value neutralism. Social knowledge interacts with social values to change phenomena our theories represent. This self‐restructuring characteristic of social events warrants singular attention by social scientists. Policy researchers are in a particularly opportune position to provide that attention.

Long-range policy planning for international scientific & technological affairs has been hindered by a variety of problems. One is the overall crisis-response nature of foreign policy making, & another is the difficulty of developing technical information needed for sound forecasts. Within the US Dept of State, the record of attempts to establish systematic planning amply demonstrates the problems. Nevertheless, a number of key conclusions can be drawn from the few successful experiments in policy planning: an effective planning staff should combine the skills of both foreign policy specialists & scientists; planners should be closely familiar with, but not involved in, operations; the planning role requires consistent support from senior officials; & the power to influence budgets significantly strengthens the planning function. HA.