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.     

Understanding the use of science in decision-making on cockle fisheries and gas mining in the Dutch Wadden Sea: Putting the science–policy interface in a wider perspective

The use of science to inform and underpin decision-making on natural resources is not self-evident as stakeholders often use science in a selective and strategic way. Scientific analyses of science utilisation often focus on how the science–policy interface is organised and from this perspective provide recommendations to scientists about how they can increase their contribution to decision-making. Yet in this paper we argue that a wider perspective on the science–policy interface, in particular by analysing the roles and interactions of actors other than those directly involved, provides both additional explanations and new points of application for strategies aimed at enhancing science utilisation. We illustrate our claim by means of an analysis of decision-making on cockle fisheries and gas mining in the Dutch Wadden Sea between the 1990s and 2004. For many years, scientific studies addressing the ecological effects of these activities were not used to meaningfully contribute to decision-making. In 2004 this situation changed radically. Explanations include the role of intermediaries between scientists, stakeholders and decision-makers and new legislation. Scientists could enhance the chances of knowledge utilisation both by creating a more open science–policy interface and by reframing the policy problems at issue.     

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.     

The neglected heart of science policy: reconciling supply of and demand for science

The funding of scientific research is almost always justified in terms of the potential for achieving beneficial societal outcomes. In pursuing a particular societal outcome, how can we know if one research portfolio is better than another? In this paper we conceptualize: (1) science in terms of a “supply” of knowledge and information, (2) societal outcomes in terms of a “demand” function that seeks to apply knowledge and information to achieve specific societal goals, and (3) science policy decision-making as a process aimed at “reconciling” the dynamic relationship between “supply” and “demand.” The core of our argument is that “better” science portfolios (that is, portfolios viewed as more likely to advance desired societal outcomes, however defined) would be achieved if science policy decisions reflected knowledge about the supply of science, the demand for science, and the relationship between the two. We provide a general method for pursuing such knowledge, using the specific example of climate change science to illustrate how research on science policy could be organized to support improved decisions about the organization of science itself.     

Noisy and definitely not normal: responding to wicked issues in the environment,energy and health

Attempts by researchers and policy-makers to address the ‘wicked’ issues which pervade environmental policy usually revolve around attempting – or recommending – both more participatory and transparent, and more systematic and evidence-based, policy-making. Post-normal science (PNS), with its ‘extended peer community’, has emerged as one approach, whilst others focus on procedural reforms of the policy process, particularly on enhancing democratic decision-making. This paper applies a novel analytical framework to a primarily documentary analysis of three cases we argue are wicked—Canadian regulatory review of health products and food, European union (EU) environmental thematic strategies, and United Kingdom (UK) energy and climate change policy. It explores how various responses to wicked issues are implemented, through the ‘lenses’ of PNS and, more generally, ‘democratic and effective decision-making’. It finds such responses are often limited by practical and fundamental barriers relating to handling of uncertainty, issue framing, participation, power, politics, and attitude to evidence. We draw conclusions about future research on PNS, particularly the need to more clearly relate theory to different strands of literature on the evidence–policy-making relationship, and to continue empirical testing.     

Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban environmental governance—Lessons from Rotterdam,Netherlands and Berlin,Germany

Challenges for a sustainable urban development are increasingly important in cities because urbanization and related land take come up with negative challenges for the environment and for city residents. Searching for successful solutions to environmental problems requires combined efforts of different scientific disciplines and an active dialogue between stakeholders from policy and society. In this paper, we present a comparative assessment of the way policy-science dialogues have achieved knowledge co-production about strategic urban environmental governance action using the cities of Berlin in Germany and Rotterdam in the Netherlands as case studies. The ecosystem services framework is applied as a lens for policy–science interaction and a ‘knowledge co-production operating space’ is introduced. We show how policy officers, urban planners, practitioners and scientists learned from each other, and highlight the impact of this knowledge co-production for governance practice. We found that the concerted collaboration and co-creation between researchers and policy officers have led to mutual learning and establishment of relationships and trust in both cities. Not only the policy-relevance of research and its policy uptake were achieved but also new insights for research blind spots were created. In our conclusions we reflect on co-production processes with two types of conditions that we introduced to be most influential in the way knowledge can be co-created. These are conditions that relate to the way knowledge co-production processes are set-up and, conditions that relate to the expected value or benefit that the co-produced knowledge will bring across society, policy and practice.     

Evidence,politics and power in public policy for the environment

Despite a recent emphasis on ‘evidence based policy’ accompanied by an abundance of ‘green’ policy instruments, experience from the European Union and OECD countries shows that decisions which truly aim to balance environmental considerations with social and economic ones remain thin on the ground. Moreover, many policies seem to fall short of, or directly contradict what the available ‘evidence’ suggests is required. This is a synthesis paper bringing together literature from the fields of political science, geography, sociology and science and technology studies to outline some of the obscurities relating to the use of scientific evidence in environmental decision-making. In this paper, we suggest that an exploration of three key inter-related issues is necessary to develop a richer understanding of why evidence and policy interact as they do. These are the nature of evidence itself; the normative, moral or ethical ‘politics’ of policy-making; and the operation of power in the policy process. Our primary goal is to bring various literatures together to better conceptualise the evidence–policy relationship. In so doing, we outline specific challenges for knowledge producers who set research priorities, and design and direct research projects. We also highlight significant implications for policy decision-making processes.     

Uncertainty,complexity and controversy in dolphin threat management: A role for post-normal science?

Managing fishing threats to populations of endemic, threatened Hector’s and Māui dolphins around New Zealand is a complex and controversial issue, underpinned by uncertain scientific knowledge. As such, it can be argued that it falls into the realm of post-normal science, which advocates transparency about uncertainties and stakeholder peer review of knowledge feeding into decision-making. This paper focuses on selected examples of modelling and risk assessment research relating to Hector’s and Māui dolphin threat management. It explores how knowledge is developed, shared and utilised by decision-makers, finding that uncertain scientific knowledge may be shared in ways that make it appear more certain, with some of the subjectivities involved in knowledge production hidden from view. Interviews with stakeholders illustrate how some stakeholders are aware of the subjectivities involved when uncertain knowledge underpins decision-making, so a lack of transparency may be leading to erosion of social trust in decisions made. This in turn can lead to a lack of support for dolphin conservation measures from key stakeholders such as the commercial fishing industry. The paper concludes that while moves towards increasing transparency and stakeholder involvement are apparent, a deeper embrace of post-normal science approaches to knowledge production and dissemination would contribute to effective dolphin threat management in New Zealand.     

Technical knowledge,discursive spaces and politics at the science–policy interface

This special issue contributes to a better understanding of science–policy interactions in environmental governance, by assembling studies based on interpretative policy analysis. We introduce the theory and use of interpretative approaches in the analysis of science–policy interactions and draw on Stone's Policy Paradox (2002) to demonstrate how policy discourses are constituted by expertise but also by interests and rhetoric. This enables us to show how policy discourses are shaped by, but also shape their environment, especially when they become dominant and suppress alternative discourses and related knowledge claims and governance practices. In particular, we highlight the role of scientific and other technical expertise in the establishment and interpretation of policy discourses in different settings and argue that current environmental policy discourses afford considerable space for science and expertise to calculate the state of the environment, evaluate the sustainability of policies and forge solutions for green economic growth. In the conclusion we underscore the importance of reflexivity on the part of scientists working at the science–policy interface regarding the political choices implicit in the policy discourses they both work within and help to establish.     

Accommodating consensus and diversity in environmental knowledge production: Achieving closure through typologies in IPBES

How can a diversity of perspectives be accommodated in scientific and political consensus on environmental issues? This paper adopts a science and technology studies (STS) approach to examine how the pursuit of consensus-based knowledge and diverse participation, as seemingly contradictory commitments, have been converted into practice in the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Through a series of negotiations, these commitments have been translated into a set of situated practices that now dominate this expert panel. Consensus has been achieved through the pursuit of closure, in which meetings of expert and administrator groups produce texts, tables and images that stabilise ostensibly collective decisions. Within this framework, diverse perspectives have been accommodated through the production of typologies, such as lists of comparable options, which allow for the coexistence and commensurability of a range of knowledges and experts. However there is a politics to typologies, which requires specific attention to how decisions are made (deliberation), who participates in them (participation), and the extent to which these participants are representative of broader knowledge and policy communities (representation). While the potential of typologies to accommodate consensus and diversity offers the hope of realising ‘unity in diversity’ for both environmental knowledge and policy, recognising the politics of their production is important for more equitable processes of environmental governance.     

Understanding socio-cultural dimensions of environmental decision-making: A knowledge governance approach

Sociological critiques of scientific research processes and their application have developed nuanced understandings of the social, cultural and political forces shaping relationships between science and decision-making. Simultaneously, environmental researchers have sought to construct more engaged, dynamic modes of conducting research to facilitate the application of science in decision-making and action. To date, however, there are relatively few theoretically-oriented approaches that have been able to draw productive connections between the sociological critique and the practical applications that can aid in navigating this complex and diverse milieu. In this article, we propose that the concept of “knowledge governance” can bring together targeted inquiry into the socio-political context in which environmental science is situated, alongside analysis of specific interventions that change knowledge-to-action relationships. Drawing together Jasanoff’s (2005) concept of civic epistemology with Cash et al.’s (2003) knowledge systems for sustainability approach, this knowledge governance inquiry framework offers an integrative lens through which to critically reflect on knowledge-based processes, and incorporate that deeper understanding into intervention efforts. We briefly illustrate its application with reference to a pilot project examining conservation decision-making in the Western Pacific island nation of Palau.     

Effective risk governance for environmental policy making: A knowledge management perspective

Effective risk management within environmental policy making requires knowledge on natural, economic and social systems to be integrated; knowledge characterised by complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity. We describe a case study in a (UK) central government department exploring how risk governance supports and hinders this challenging integration of knowledge. Forty-five semi-structured interviews were completed over a two year period. We found that lateral knowledge transfer between teams working on different policy areas was widely viewed as a key source of knowledge. However, the process of lateral knowledge transfer was predominantly informal and unsupported by risk governance structures. We argue this made decision quality vulnerable to a loss of knowledge through staff turnover, and time and resource pressures. Our conclusion is that the predominant form of risk governance framework, with its focus on centralised decision-making and vertical knowledge transfer is insufficient to support risk-based, environmental policy making. We discuss how risk governance can better support environmental policy makers through systematic knowledge management practices.     

The role of environmental statisticians in environmental policy: the case of performance measurement

Environmental statisticians often experience the difficult task to provide clear results for environmental policy objectives on the basis of complex science, limited data, and many sources of uncertainty. This paper highlights the particularly challenging situation of environmental statistics in developing countries before focusing on the role of statisticians working at the nexus of environmental statistics and policy within the context of measuring environmental performance. Three issues create particular tension at the environmental science-policy junction: (1) the general complexity of environmental problems (including scientific uncertainty and insufficient data) and the often negative perceptions associated with their solution, (2) the comparatively recent introduction of quantitative methods and information to the environmental policy process and continued skepticism and ideologically motivated resistance to their routine integration, and (3) the language barriers between policymakers and statisticians as well as between statisticians and other scientists engaged in environmental research. Based on the case study of the 2006 Pilot Environmental Performance Index (EPI) developed by an interdisciplinary team at the universities Yale and Columbia the paper examines how the EPI tackles these tensions while aiming to be a fact-based, statistically sound policy tool that helps countries achieve environmental objectives by tracking progress, identifying environmental “best practices”, and providing strategic peer-group analyses. In conclusion, the paper suggests some remedies for the deficiencies in the co-operation between policymakers and environmental statisticians.     

Promoting pro-environmental behaviour: existing evidence and policy implications

This paper describes a recent study in the UK aimed at identifying how policy makers might more effectively encourage pro-environmental behaviours amongst their target audiences. The study included analysis and synthesis of theories and models of behaviour change, a range of current policy programmes and instruments and ‘real world’ practices of individuals, households, groups and organisations.The paper highlights some important considerations for future policy within the UK and, more widely, for other countries aiming to introduce comprehensive and multi-level policy programmes to encourage pro-environmental behaviours. To this end, it emphasises the complex and non-linear nature of environmental behaviours and, thus, the importance of adopting multi-levelled and multi-instrument integrated policies across whole systems of delivery.     

Transitioning to sustainable production – part II: evaluation of sustainable machining technologies

This paper presents a case-study that highlights the importance of sustainable machining technologies in achieving sustainable development objectives. A technology evaluation was undertaken to understand the likely impacts of the use of technology on sustainability performance measures. The evaluation is more than an experimental method for supporting the design of technology and an instrument for supporting decision-making. It is also a tool for supporting technology policy and for encouraging its adoption and application in industry. More specifically, a sustainability evaluation of cryogenic and high pressure jet-assisted machining in comparison to conventional machining is examined. Sustainability performance measures refer to environmental impact, energy consumption, safety, personal health, waste management, and cost. The case-study refers to the machining of high-temperature Ni-alloy (Inconel 718). It is shown that tooling costs represent the major contribution to the overall production cost, which contradicts previous analyses, and that sustainable machining alternatives offer a cost-effective route to improving economic, environmental, and social performance in comparison to conventional machining.     

Pure science or policy involvement? Ambiguous boundary-work for Swedish carbon cycle science

In theory, the interaction between the worlds of environmental science and policy may seem straightforward. From a realm outside politics and power, scientists provide relevant knowledge about nature upon which informed policy decisions could be based. However, in reality this linear model tends to be replaced by a much more complex relationship where the distinction between facts and values, knowledge and interests is less clear cut. In this paper, I explore links between science, policy and power through an interview study conducted with Swedish carbon cycle scientists and government negotiators to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Drawing on a co-production model of science–policy interplay this paper addresses the implications of a mutually constitutive relationship between carbon cycle science and climate policy.     

Renaturing cities using a regionally-focused biodiversity-led multifunctional benefits approach to urban green infrastructure

If a ‘Renaturing of Cities’ strategy is to maximise the ecosystem service provision of urban green infrastructure (UGI), then detailed consideration of a habitat services, biodiversity-led approach and multifunctionality are necessary rather than relying on the assumed benefits of UGI per se. The paper presents preliminary data from three case studies, two in England and one in Germany, that explore how multifunctionality can be achieved, the stakeholders required, the usefulness of an experimental approach for demonstrating transformation, and how this can be fed back into policy. We argue that incorporating locally contextualised biodiversity-led UGI design into the planning and policy spheres contributes to the functioning and resilience of the city and provides the adaptability to respond to locally contextualised challenges, such as overheating, flooding, air pollution, health and wellbeing as well as biodiversity loss. Framing our research to encompass both the science of biodiversity-led UGI and co-developing methods for incorporating a strategic approach to implementation of biodiversity-led UGI by planners and developers addresses a gap in current knowledge and begins to address barriers to UGI implementation. By combining scientific with policy learning and defined urban environmental targets with community needs, our research to date has begun to demonstrate how nature-based solutions to building resilience and adaptive governance can be strategically incorporated within cities through UGI.     

Evaluating the best available social science for natural resource management decision-making

Increasing recognition of the human dimensions of natural resource management issues, and of social and ecological sustainability and resilience as being inter-related, highlights the importance of applying social science to natural resource management decision-making. Moreover, a number of laws and regulations require natural resource management agencies to consider the “best available science” (BAS) when making decisions, including social science. Yet rarely do these laws and regulations define or identify standards for BAS, and those who have tried to fill the gap have done so from the standpoint of best available natural science. This paper proposes evaluative criteria for best available social science (BASS), explaining why a broader set of criteria than those used for natural science is needed. Although the natural and social sciences share many of the same evaluative criteria for BAS, they also exhibit some differences, especially where qualitative social science is concerned. Thus we argue that the evaluative criteria for BAS should expand to include those associated with diverse social science disciplines, particularly the qualitative social sciences. We provide one example from the USA of how a federal agency − the U.S. Forest Service − has attempted to incorporate BASS in responding to its BAS mandate associated with the national forest planning process, drawing on different types of scientific information and in light of these criteria. Greater attention to including BASS in natural resource management decision-making can contribute to better, more equitable, and more defensible management decisions and policies.     

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.     

The influence of science on Canada's foreign policy on persistent organic pollutants (1985–2001)

The role of science in environmental foreign policymaking has received little attention in the international environmental politics literature, and systematic, in-depth case studies of the influence of science on environmental foreign policy with respect to persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are entirely missing. We present a case study of the influence of science on Canada's foreign policy on POPs from the discovery of the transboundary nature of the POPs problem around 1985 to the signing of the United Nations Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants in 2001. Influence was analyzed in terms of a knowledge–action methodology that focused on the types of scientific knowledge and the actions taken by scientists that were influential. Data were collected through interviews and extensive document analysis. We conclude that, while individual knowledge types and actions were influential during various periods (single-factor explanations), it was an increasingly layered and integrated “package” of knowledge types and actions, with human health impacts as its touchstone and partnering between scientists and non-scientists as its watchword, that propelled and sustained Canada's foreign policy on the POPs issue.