Science, Policy Advocacy, and Marine Protected Areas

Abstract:  Much has been written in recent years regarding whether and to what extent scientists should engage in the policy process, and the focus has been primarily on the issue of advocacy. Despite extensive theoretical discussions, little has been done to study attitudes toward and consequences of such advocacy in particular cases. We assessed attitudes toward science and policy advocacy in the case of marine protected areas (MPAs) on the basis of a survey of delegates at the First International Marine Protected Areas Congress. Delegates were all members of the international marine conservation community and represented academic, government, and nongovernmental organizations. A majority of respondents believed science is objective but only a minority believed that values can be eliminated from science. Respondents showed only partial support of positivist principles of science. Almost all respondents supported scientists being integrated into MPA policy making, whereas half of the respondents agreed that scientists should actively advocate for particular MPA policies. Scientists with a positivist view of science supported a minimal role for scientists in policy, whereas government staff with positivist beliefs supported an advocacy or decision-making role for scientists. Policy-making processes for MPAs need to account for these divergent attitudes toward science and advocacy if science-driven and participatory approaches are to be reconciled.     

土地利用/土地覆被变化研究范式的转变

土地利用/土地覆被变化(LUCC)研究的形成和发展经历了从前科学(无范式)到科学(以范式为标志)的历史过程.认识LUCC研究范式及其转变的内涵和实质对其理论和应用的发展与完善具有极为重要的意义,并有助于提高解释和预测能力.本文以库恩的“范式”和“范式转变”为基本脉络,剖析了LUCC研究中的实证主义范式、科学人文主义范式、结构功能主义范式以及复杂性范式,并指出范式及其转变主要在本体论、认识论和方法论三个层面表现出来.实证主义范式强调决定论以及主客体分离,认为应把经验与逻辑分析作为客观地认识现实的基础,它贯穿1UCC不同发展阶段,在初期发挥了重要作用,至今仍主导着LUCC研究；科学人文主义在科学主义或实证主义的基础上强调了人的主体性,修正了它们的片面性；结构功能主义为我们提供了一种可资参考的系统分析方法,在宏观层面的许多重要理论见解和研究方法,值得LUCC研究者关注和借鉴；复杂性范式强调土地系统的非线性、自组织、连通性等特征,为LUCC研究提供了一种新的科学世界观、认识论和方法论,利用复杂性理论研究具有非线性特征的复杂土地系统,体现了当前LUCC研究的范式转变.