Suchergebnisse

The paper takes the case study on policy programmes of the European Forum on Integrated Environmental Assessment (EFIEA) as starting point for a more general reflection on science-policy interfaces in the context of European policymaking. First, the European Union is described as a challenging context in which scientific expertise is met with changing expectations by the public, the policymakers, and by scientists. Second, the paper analyses the challenges of science-policy interfaces and suggests criteria for evaluating organised attempts to create such interfaces. Finally, the experiences of the EFIEA policy programmes are analysed with the aim to suggest options to institutionalise Integrated Environmental Assessment as a tool for improved policymaking at the EU level.

I contrast my picture of the relationship between the science and policy of animal sentience with that of Marian Stamp Dawkins, who thinks "the science of animal sentience and the politics of animal welfare should be kept separate" because they involve irreconcilably different standards of evidence. On my alternative picture, (i) the science of animal sentience, like any other empirical science, delivers evidence but not certainty; (ii) this evidence allows us to make better practical decisions, both within and outside science and (iii) the quality standards we apply to the evidence should be high in all contexts, including the formulation of public policy.

I contrast my picture of the relationship between the science and policy of animal sentience with that of Marian Stamp Dawkins, who thinks "the science of animal sentience and the politics of animal welfare should be kept separate" because they involve irreconcilably different standards of evidence. On my alternative picture, (i) the science of animal sentience, like any other empirical science, delivers evidence but not certainty; (ii) this evidence allows us to make better practical decisions, both within and outside science and (iii) the quality standards we apply to the evidence should be high in all contexts, including the formulation of public policy.

Quantitative information is one of the means used to interface science with policy. As a consequence, much effort is invested in producing quantitative information for policy and much criticism is directed toward the use of numbers in policy. In this paper, I analyze five approaches drawn from such criticisms and propose alternative uses of quantitative information for governance: (i) valuation of ecosystem services, (ii) social multicriteria evaluation, (iii) quantification of uncertainty through the Numeral, Unit, Spread, Assessment, Pedigree approach, (iv) Quantitative Story-Telling, and (v) the heuristic use of statistics. The analysis shows the varied ways that numbers are conceptualized and how different conceptualizations matter for the science–policy interface. Alternative conceptualizations of numbers are used to challenge the model of science-speaking truth to power. Uncertainty, complexity, pluralism, malpractice, and values are mobilized to redefine the relations between science and policy. Alternative quantification may produce alternative facts, but reflexive approaches that use numbers to discuss the relevance of equity, positionality, and quality in science for policy may offer a remedy.

Die Autoren setzen sich sowohl theoretisch wie auch empirisch mit einer Entwicklung auseinander, die neben der ABS-Problematik ("access and benefit sharing") zentral zu werden scheint und ebenfalls eng mit den konstatierten Implementierungsdefiziten zusammenhängt: Die Frage nach der angemessenen Bereitstellung von wissenschaftlichem Wissen für einen effektiveren Prozess der "Convention on Biological Diversity" (CBD) bzw. für die Biodiversitätspolitik insgesamt. Durch die offensichtliche "Überpolitisierung" des wissenschaftlichen Gremiums der CBD - der "Subsidiary Body for Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice" - stellt sich seit 2005 die Frage, inwieweit Alternativen dazu entwickelt werden können. Theoretisch eingebettet in den Begriff des Macht-Wissen-Dispositivs von Michel Foucault und zeitdiagnostisch in die neueren Diskussionen um eine sich entwickelnde Wissensgesellschaft wird gezeigt, dass es einen politischen Willen für ein institutionalisiertes "Science-Policy Interfaces" (SPI) gibt. Der Wille zu gesichertem Wissen entwickelt sich angesichts der großen bestehenden Unsicherheiten, dem nicht-gebündelten Wissen, bestehender informeller SPI und nicht zuletzt zur Legitimation des politischen Handelns. Die Autoren zeigen die komplexen Selektions- und Marginalisierungsprozesse der Wissensproduktion auf und diskutieren die Frage, inwieweit die Wissenschaft politisch instrumentalisiert wird und/oder ein eigenständiger Akteur in der internationalen Biodiversitätspolitik ist. (ICI2)

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. ; Peer reviewed

The forest policy research with quantitative approaches is limited especially in the research fields of policy transfer and science-policy interface at the local government level. As a context of the citizen science and the science-policy interface, the attitudes of the Japanese local governments vary from municipality to municipality. For example, certain local governments proactively introduce participation of citizen in forest policy making and its implementation, while such attitudes or policies are absent for others. Where comes such differences amongst municipalities? This study conducts empirical analysis at local policy level, which has been largely overseen. In concrete terms, trends of adoption of local ordinances of forest planning in Japanese prefectures and participatory monitoring activities in forest lands are reviewed and analyzed. This study examines the relationships between political factors, social economic factors, and policy diffusion. We have looked at the various factors including local demographics, size of administrative areas, government structure, percentage of forest lands and net forestry production in local government to examine the differences. The results reveal the significant impacts of behavior of neighboring local governments. In other words, if a neighboring body acts, others will follow. The perceptions of the governors who are not from conservative political party seems to be a factor to motivate local governments to introduce the local ordinances of forest planning which encourage citizen to participate forest managements and forest policy making processes. Furthermore, participatory monitoring is a useful tool in citizen science and the number of biodiversity monitoring activities is increasing in Japan as well as other Asian countries such as Korea. The local ordinances of forest planning can influence the monitoring activities. The focus of recent monitoring activities based on citizen science in Japan is changing from "scientists use citizens as data collectors" to "citizens as scientists" under the recent development of data science. Alternatively, sharing, collecting and analyzing data in effective manner with participations remains as future challenges for data science.