Making science relevant to environmental policy

Implementation of current environmental and natural resource policy has created an era of regulatory discontent, and has prompted calls for new approaches to management that can achieve both long-term ecological sustainability and improved policy performance. These new approaches, such as ecosystem management, emphasize the importance of holistic and integrated science, meaningful public involvement to reflect changing societal goals and objectives, collaborative decisionmaking, and flexible and adaptable institutions. Implementing such approaches will require significant institutional change in all institutions, including the institution of science. Attributes of the scientific culture — including adherence to the myth of objective, value-free science, preference for technical solutions as first-order solutions, and advancement of the scientific method and scientific rationality as preferred logic — have often worked to separate scientists from citizens and science from the policymaking process. They have also fostered undemocratic processes and results. Changes in the institution and culture of science, including embracing more holistic and integrated scientific processes, creating a more civic science, and rethinking the role of scientific advocacy in the policy process, will be required to move toward democratic as well as ecological sustainability.     

Public ecology: an environmental science and policy for global society

Public ecology exists at the interface of science and policy. Public ecology is an approach to environmental inquiry and decision making that does not expect scientific knowledge to be perfect or complete. Rather, public ecology requires that science be produced in collaboration with a wide variety of stakeholders in order to construct a body of knowledge that will reflect the pluralist and pragmatic context of its use (decision context), while continuing to maintain the rigor and accountability that earns scientific knowledge its privileged status in contemporary society. As such, public ecology entails both process and content. The process is that of a post-modern scientific method: a process that values the participation of extended peer communities composed of a diversity of research specialists, professional policy-makers, concerned citizens and a variety of other stakeholders. The content of public ecology is a biocultural knowledge of dynamic human ecosystems that directly relates to and results from the participatory, democratic processes that distinguish public ecology as a citizen science. The primary goal of public ecology is to build common ground among competing beliefs and values for the environment. The purpose of this paper is to help unify and establish public ecology as a distinctive approach to environmental science and policy in global society.     

Adaptive management intentions with a reality of evaluation: Getting science back into policy

In Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin water reform has been contentious as government attempts to reconcile historical over allocation of water to irrigation with the use of water for environmental outcomes. However, in many aspects, scientific knowledge of the environment is either imperfect, incomplete or environmental responses are unpredictable, with this uncertainty preventing definitive policy and closure of political arguments. In response to uncertainty and knowledge gaps, adaptive management has been written into the legislation, along with provisions for periodic evaluation.This research ascertains how adaptive management is understood by policy makers, with this indicative of future implementation of adaptive management. The way in which adaptive management is constructed by policy makers is determined through legislation, public speeches, government reports and semi-structured interviews. The findings demonstrate that adaptive management has been subsumed by evaluation. The loss of adaptive management as a distinct concept is seen as a loss of science and discovery from the policy process, with the dominance of evaluation discussed as limiting innovation and reinforcing a ‘muddling through’ of policy.     

Forests and climate change adaptation policies in Cameroon

Nowadays, adaptation has become a key focus of the scientific and policy-making communities and is a major area of discussion in the multilateral climate change process. As climate change is projected to hit the poorest the hardest, it is especially important for developing countries to pay particular attention to the management of natural resources and agricultural activities. In most of these countries such as Cameroon, forest can play important role in achieving broader climate change adaptation goals. However, forest generally receives very little attention in national development programme and strategies such as policy dialogues on climate change and poverty reduction strategies. Using a qualitative approach to data collection through content analysis of relevant Cameroon policy documents, the integration of climate change adaptation was explored and the level of attention given to forests for adaptation analysed. Results indicate that, with the exception of the First National Communication to UNFCCC that focused mostly on mitigation and related issues, current policy documents in Cameroon are void of tangible reference to climate change, and hence failing in drawing the relevance of forest in sheltering populations from the many projected impacts of climate change. Policies related to forest rely on a generalized concept of sustainable forest management and do not identify the specific changes that need to be incorporated into management strategies and policies towards achieving adaptation. The strategies and recommendations made in those documents only serve to improve understanding of Cameroon natural resources and add resilience to the natural systems in coping with anthropogenic stresses. The paper draws attention to the need to address the constraints of lack of awareness and poor flow of information on the potentials of forests for climate change adaptation. It highlights the need for integrating forest for adaptation into national development programmes and strategies, and recommends a review of the existing environmental legislations and their implications on poverty reduction strategy and adaptation to climate change.     

Ecological knowledge and North Sea environmental policies

In an analysis of North Sea eutrophication science and policies, focusing on the period 1980–2005, it was investigated how scientific information was used in policy-making. The analysis focused on the central assumptions of the rational policy-making model, i.e. that scientific information can be used to formulate decisions, based upon objective scientific information (rational decision-making), and secondly, can support implementing these decisions (rational management). In general terms, the following was concluded:

• •More knowledge has increased rather than reduced uncertainty;
• •In order to handle the problem of dealing with complexity and uncertainty at the political level, a simplification of facts has occurred, in this case focusing on nutrients as the main cause of the problem, at the same time excluding other possible causes;
• •Both the limited scientific view (i.e. the nutrient view) and the exaggeration of the seriousness of the problem (impacts, scope) have been used as an authoritative basis for the justification of political decisions. Both were not supported by the majority of the scientific community;
• •New scientific knowledge, not in support of existing policies, has been excluded from the policy process;
• •The science–policy interface, mainly consisting of “civil-servant scientists”, that emerged and increased its influence over the period of investigation, has been the central element in the simplification and exclusion process.

The main lesson learned is that work at the interface of science and policy must be subject to democratic principles, i.e. be transparent and involving all parties with a stake in the issue under consideration.     

The use of word-based models to describe the development of UK acid rain policy in the 1980s

Understanding how environmental policy decisions were reached in the past might help predict policy development in the future. This paper evaluates how well two existing frameworks for decision analysis fit acid rain policy development of the UK Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) in the 1980s. Decision tree analysis assumes a rational approach to decision-making and overlooks the dynamic nature of the decision making process. Trudgill's model identifies barriers to policy development, but it is not possible to identify which are most important. Both concentrate on the role of scientific uncertainty in the acid rain debate. An alternative approach is presented which identifies all possible influencing factors and assesses their relative influence. Whilst confirming the importance of the resolution of scientific uncertainty in this case study, it identifies a number of alternative pressure sources, including independent scientific review, rises in SO₂ emissions, European environmental legislation, and influences within the Government. In all three models, ascribing predictive values to all possible options is a major problem. All models are limited in their ability to describe complex and dynamic environmental problems, and hence have limited predictive powers. Decision tree analysis and Trudgill's barriers model identify how scientific uncertainty is dealt with within organisations, whilst the influencing factors approach puts decisions in a broader, political framework.     

Science in Wadden Sea policy: from accommodation to advocacy

Policies and management for the Wadden Sea, like for so many other nature areas, have to find a balance between important natural values on the one hand and economic functions on the other hand. Scientific experts play an important role in these processes. In the case of the Wadden Sea, scientific experts have been involved in the development of trilateral ecological targets for the Wadden Sea as well as in the implementation of these targets in the Netherlands as took place in the controversial decision making processes regarding cockle fisheries and gas mining. Drawing on concepts and insights from policy analysis and science and technology studies, this article analyses the different roles scientific experts play in these policy processes. We show how the role of science shifts from an accommodating role in policy development to a role as advocacy in controversial policy implementation processes. The article concludes with some implications for organising effective science–policy interactions in the field of nature conservation.     

The Nature of ecosystem management: postmodernism and plurality in the sustainable management of the boreal forest

Ecosystem management, by seeking to emulate natural disturbance, has been proposed by the ecological and forest management community as a means of maintaining the biodiversity and productivity of boreal forests, key components of sustainable forest management (SFM). However, it is argued that ecosystem management overlooks the paradox inherent in the concept of Nature, limiting the scope of the SFM debate by maintaining a binary opposition between Nature and Society, humans and the environment. Nature is paradoxical because humans are part of Nature, by the theory of evolution, while at the same time Nature is a social construction created by humans, and thus artificial. Recourse is made to postmodernism in order to examine the metaphysical and sociopolitical implications of the deconstruction of this paradox. Based on a review of the philosophy of Foucault and Derrida, the concept of Nature is demonstrated to be socially mediated, an entwinement of reason and power. In order to address metaphysical challenges of the Nature–Society dualism identified above, I refer to Habermas’s theory of communicative action and cite results from a case study in this regard. Results from this case study prompt a critical examination of the legitimacy of a discourse ethic about Nature, making use of the negative dialectics of Adorno. As a result, at the metaphysical level, a different role for ecologists and forest managers in public participation procedures is proposed, one whereby ecologists talk through Nature to the evolutionary agents to which it is intended to refer as a means of discussing whether specific management options will contribute to sustainable development. It is argued that at the sociopolitical level SFM will necessitate improved transparency and participation in forestry, criteria that can be attained through community-based ecosystem management. Both elements require a science more actively engaged with civil society.     

Towards better integration of environmental science in society: Lessons from BONUS,the joint Baltic Sea environmental research and development programme

Integration of environmental science in society is impeded by the large gap between science and policy that is characterised by weaknesses in societal relevance and dissemination of science and its practical implementation in policy. We analyse experiences from BONUS, the policy-driven joint Baltic Sea research and development programme (2007–2020), which is part of the European Research Area (ERA) and involves combined research funding by eight EU member states. The ERA process decreased fragmentation of Baltic Sea science and BONUS funding increased the scientific quality and societal relevance of Baltic Sea science and strengthened the science-policy interface. Acknowledging the different drivers for science producers (academic career, need for funding, peer review) and science users (fast results fitting policy windows), and realising that most scientists aim at building conceptual understanding rather than instrumental use, bridges can be built through strategic planning, coordination and integration. This requires strong programme governance stretching far beyond selecting projects for funding, such as coaching, facilitating the sharing of infrastructure and data and iterative networking within and between science producer and user groups in all programme phases. Instruments of critical importance for successful science-society integration were identified as: (1) coordinating a strategic research agenda with strong inputs from science, policy and management, (2) providing platforms where science and policy can meet, (3) requiring cooperation between scientists to decrease fragmentation, increase quality, clarify uncertainties and increase consensus about environmental problems, (4) encouraging and supporting scientists in disseminating their results through audience-tailored channels, and (5) funding not only primary research but also synthesis projects that evaluate the scientific findings and their practical use in society – in close cooperation with science users − to enhance relevance, credibility and legitimacy of environmental science and expand its practical implementation.     

Identifying uncertainties in judging the significance of human impacts on Natura 2000 sites

In European nature conservation law, Natura 2000 sites are protected towards ensuring biodiversity through the conservation of natural habitat types and of wild fauna and flora. Anyone planning a potentially harmful activity needs to assess significant effects on a site's conservation objectives. While EU case law currently demands certainty provided by science, we will show that science can never rule out uncertainty. We distinguish three sources of uncertainty: ignorance (inadequate understanding), unpredictability of ecological system behaviour and ambiguity in the science–policy interface. Only ignorance can be solved by science alone. We will specify sources of uncertainty encountered in the significance decision procedure as part of the assessment of article 6 Habitats Directive. We will explore how they affect the use of knowledge during the three steps of the assessment process, i.e. identification of site conservation objectives, predicting the impact of the planned activity and assessing the significance of any effects on the Natura 2000 site. The claim that certainty has to be provided by science is unrealistic, because policy causes a good deal of uncertainty affecting how science can operate. This is discussed in the light of a common learning process by science and society. The European precautionary principle should not be limited to ignorance alone. Within the precautionary principle risk reduction measures can be allowed and thus uncertainties could be accepted, including those uncertainties caused by unpredictability and ambiguity. Finally we propose strategies to manage uncertainty in nature conservation and law planning.     

Uncertainty in dispersion modelling and urban air quality mapping

The ADMS-urban atmospheric dispersion modelling system has been applied to review of air quality in central London in 1996/1997 and assessment of future air quality against air quality objectives in 2005. Model performance is assessed by in situ validation against monitoring data. This case study illustrates how scientific uncertainty needs to be considered when using model output in such a policy context. Model precision, carefully defined, is ±10% with bias between 0 and +12% (model over-prediction) for annual mean nitrogen dioxide and respirable particulate (PM₁₀) concentrations and for the 90th percentile of daily mean PM₁₀. As expected, the model is less accurate for the maximum and 99.8th percentile of hourly mean nitrogen dioxide concentrations and for total NO_x. We propose probabilistic mapping techniques should be used to formalise and clarify how uncertainty is translated into the definition of an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) on a map. This also identifies the extent to which air quality objectives have been defined for which current dispersion model performance is inadequate. It is recommended that the capabilities of modelling alongside measurement need to be considered at an early stage in the formulation of future air quality management policy.     

The Norwegian Red List between science and policy

This article explores how science and policy interact using the Norwegian Red List 2006 as a case example. The paper draws on concepts from the sociology of science, interviews with key informants, as well as analysis of a Norwegian newspaper debate about a controversial conservation issue.The paper highlights how the relationship between science and policy can best be described as an interaction rather than simply a transmission of knowledge from one to the other. In addition, the study focuses on the active construction and communication of the science–policy relationship. Regulators, scientists and NGOs, it is argued, strategically define the relationship between science and policy as more straightforward than it really is.The paper suggests that the shaping, simplification and communication of scientific knowledge is best understood as a social process that occurs in three stages, which may overlap to varying degrees. The shaping of scientific knowledge for policy occurs first within the scientific domain. The shaping, we suggest, is the result of both the broader institutional context and a more specific micro-level social context, but it is also the outcome of requirements inherent in the genre of science communication. In the second stage, regulators and actors in the public debate redefine and simplify scientific knowledge to make it better suited to the policy arena. In the final stage, scientists, regulators and NGOs actively seek to define science as objectively true, and independent of the policy arena. By doing so, they are able to strengthen their arguments, regardless of their position on particular issues. But they also contribute to shrouding the social nature of scientific production.     

Negotiating future climates for public policy: a critical assessment of the development of climate scenarios for the UK

Climate scenarios serve a number of functions in helping society manage climate change—pedagogic, motivational or practical (for example, in engineering design, spatial planning and policy development). A variety of methodologies for scenario construction have been experimented with, all of them to a greater or lesser extent depending on the use of climate models. Yet the development of climate scenarios involves much more than climate modelling. The process of scenario development is one of negotiation between relevant stakeholders—funding agencies, policy communities, scientists, social actors and decision-makers in a variety of sectors. This process of negotiation is illustrated through an analysis of four generations of UK climate scenarios—published in 1991, 1996, 1998 and 2002. Using ideas from science and technology studies and the sociology of scientific knowledge to guide our analysis, we reveal complex relationships between the interests of UK science, policy and society. Negotiating climate scenarios involves compromise between the needs of policy, science and decision-maker in relation to, for example, the selection of the development pathway(s) and emissions scenario(s), the choice of climate model(s), the assessment and communication of uncertainty and the presentational devices used. These insights have a significant bearing on the way in which climate scenarios should be viewed and used in public discourse, strategic planning and policy development.     

西藏阿里地区的林业资源及其发展方向探讨

该文对西藏阿里地区林业资源的类型、数量、质量特征和生产现状进行了深入分析,同时,探讨了该地区林业生产存在的“资源结构简单、后续资源极端贫乏;资源分布不均,水平和垂直分异突出;宜林荒山荒地资源面积大,造林任务艰巨、生态环境破坏严重”等主要问题,提出了如下的对策和建议:①健全林业行政管理体制,加强林业资源管理;②节省薪柴,保护生态环境;③实行林地承包制,大力兴办林业;④加强林业科技投入,以科技兴林,走林业可持续发展之路。     

Citizen science for policy development: The case of koala management in South Australia

Citizen science involves the engagement of non-scientists in scientific research. Citizen science projects have been reported to be useful in policy development but there is little detail of how projects have contributed. The citizen science project, the Great Koala Count (GKC) collected ecological data about koalas and social data that have been used in the initial stages of the development of a South Australian Government koala management and conservation policy. After the GKC, we conducted an online survey of people who participated in the project and a control group. The survey focussed on opinions towards possible management options for koalas in South Australia. GKC participants were also asked about project-related changes in knowledge and opinions. We received 970 valid surveys and found some differences in opinions between GKC participants and the control group. Therefore, the GKC did not provide a representative sample of the entire South Australian population. However, we contend that the data from the citizen scientists are still valuable for policy development as it has been provided by people who are highly engaged in the topic (koala management in this case). It can be difficult to engage the public in the policy development process, and the citizen science project enabled the collection of a wide range of opinions, helping to discover and define relevant issues. Additionally, many people learnt about koalas and koala-related management issues, and some changed their opinions regarding koala management, also useful outcomes from the project in the policy development context. Our findings suggest that citizen science is useful for policy makers because projects provide the opportunity for dialogue with the people most interested in the topic of the project.     

Regulating carbon emissions from indirect land use change (ILUC): U.S. and California case studies

As lifecycle emissions accounting becomes more widely used in policy, it is important to understand how it has been applied. This paper analyses policy-making for two U.S. fuel regulations—the federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)—that were pioneering not only in using life cycle assessment (LCA) in performance-based environmental regulations, but especially for including emissions from indirect land use change (ILUC). The case studies in this paper focus, in particular, on the decision to include ILUC in lifecycle emissions accounting. Tracing the development of these policies shows the key role of environmental policy entrepreneurs in advocating for ILUC emissions accounting during policy formulation. Moreover, it highlights a paradox in the use of science: although ILUC policy proponents were motivated by best available research, they were also politically enabled by scientific uncertainty and lack of understanding. Understanding this political dimension of decision-making is valuable for scholars as well as practitioners facing similar decisions.     

Uncertainties in the assessment of “significant effect” on the Dutch Natura 2000 Wadden Sea site – The mussel seed fishery and powerboat race controversies

Natura 2000, the nature network based on the European Bird and Habitat Directives, is explicitly grounded on ecological science. To acquire a permit under the Dutch Nature Conservation Act, an appropriate assessment of significant effects must be conducted based on the best available scientific knowledge. In this way the scientific and policy world are directly linked. This article focuses on ‘significant effect’ as a boundary object to analyse how science–policy interactions shape the meaning and assessment of significant effect and how these interpretations influence the decision-making process. To this end, two conflicts over significant effect are investigated: the conflict over the 2006-spring permit for the mussel seed fishery, and the 2011 permit for the planned World Championship powerboat races. In both cases nature organisations started a court process against the government-granted permits in protest to the “no significant effect” claim, stating that there was insufficient certainty for this conclusion. These conflicts are approached as controversies between discourse coalitions with different interpretations of the ecological knowledge. We show how significant effect became a focal point in the controversies, limiting the debate to ecological arguments and science-based expertise, but also creating options for parties to advance their protest by articulating uncertainties. Only uncertainty of incomplete knowledge was explicitly addressed, excluding ambiguity of values and unpredictability of the actual ecosystem. We suggest that acknowledging the value aspect in disputes on significant effect would leave more space for effective solutions of the problems under debate.     

日本森林管理的最新发展——以日本神奈川县林业政策过程为例

为了追求更好的森林管理效果，对相关森林政策的实施，不是仅仅停留在传统的狭义的行政管理部门上，同时还要涉厦到经营者、市民以及当地居民等利益相关者。使他们都要以相互协调的方式参与到森林管理当中来。它是建立在一定的森林价值观基础上，基于科学原理井突破以往的技术层面而对森林进行的一系列更加合理的管理措施体系。本文以日本神奈川县的林业政策形成过程为例对森林治理问题进行了讨论。     

森林生态效益补偿的研究现状与展望

由于森林的生态效益外部性和公共物品的特性,较大部分难以通过传统的市场实现其经济价值。如何通过适当的措施将森林生态效益外部性内部化,部分或全部地实现森林生态效益的价值,对森林生态效益的提供者进行补偿,吸引全社会参与森林的保护与培育,即如何用经济杠杆解决森林生态效益的外部性和公平性,是急需解决的问题,也是当前国内外生态经济学研究的一个热点和难点问题。通过综合分析相关文献,理清生态效益补偿的概念,对森林生态效益补偿展开研究和探讨。对发达国家的森林生态效益补偿的理论和实践经验进行总结归纳,为我国建立森林生态效益补偿机制提供借鉴。分析国内森林生态效益补偿的具体实践,得出我国森林生态效益补偿制度中需要完善的方面。最后,提出我国今后森林生态效益补偿制度工作的研究方向。     

Wildfire policy and use of science in the context of a socio-ecological system on the Aegean Archipelago

This paper summarizes the results of a primarily qualitative (with certain quantitative elements) socio-ecological study on three Greek islands of the Aegean Archipelago to characterize fire science and policy at regional and local levels, and perceptions of fire risk. Among the most important factors influencing dynamics of fire regimes on the islands are changing land use patterns and practices, and changes in climate and fuel conditions. While use of scientific information is not widespread, there are individuals in all three islands who regularly consult scientific sources. Although fire policy is largely controlled at the national and European Union levels, local activity also occurs, most notably through the volunteer fire fighting organizations, interactions with local officials, and public education efforts. However, though seen as important, significant lack of financial support and resources exist to support prevention and pre-suppression programs. Prevention of fires on the islands, including the use of prescribed burning, is relatively inadequate, and while an intense interest in preventing the loss of communities and ecosystems is frequently encountered, public participation in fire prevention remains limited. The findings suggest that relying on local knowledge, in combination with fire managers’ decision-making abilities, could improve fire management options and reduce wildfire suppression costs and ecological disasters.