Policy-makers perspectives on credibility,relevance and legitimacy (CRELE) |
| |
| Institution: | 1. School of Social Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3800, Australia;2. Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive Cities, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3800, Australia;3. Department of Political Science, School of Social Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia;1. Department of Geography, King’s College London, London, UK;2. Environmental Sociology Section, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden;3. Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK;4. Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands;5. Institute for Applied Ecology and Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia;6. Centre for Museums and Heritage, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia;1. Biometris, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, P.O. Box 16, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands;2. LEI Wageningen UR, P.O. Box 29703, 2502 LS, The Hague, The Netherlands;3. Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht, 3584 CS, Utrecht, The Netherlands;4. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands;5. Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;1. Laboratory of Geo-Information Science and Remote Sensing, Wageningen University, The Netherlands;2. School of Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies, Södertörn University, SE-141 89 Huddinge, Sweden;1. Univ. Grenoble Alpes, PACTE, INRAE, LESSEM, 38000 Grenoble, France;2. Univ. Grenoble Alpes, INRAE, LESSEM, 38000 Grenoble, France;3. Univ. Grenoble Alpes, PACTE, 38000 Grenoble, France;1. Environmental Policy Centre, Finnish Environment Institute, Mechelininkatu 34a, 00250 Helsinki, Finland;2. Environment Centre, P.O. Box 44, FI-02070 City of Espoo, Finland;1. Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC), EUREF-Campus 19, 10829 Berlin, Germany;2. UN Environment (UNEP), North America Office, 900 17th Street NW, Washington DC 20006, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | For more than a decade, a popular theory amongst scholars of science-policy interactions has been that research is most effective at informing policy and decision-making processes when it is credible, relevant and legitimate (CRELE) with multiple audiences simultaneously. In this paper, we argue that this triad reflects a primarily intra-scientific perspective, rather than the needs and considerations of policy-makers themselves. Using over seventy semi-structured interviews with policy-makers, we present alternative criteria for effective science-policy interactions based on experiences in the urban water sector. We find that applicability, comprehensiveness, timing and accessibility (ACTA) better summarises the most important aspects of scientific research when it comes to influencing decision-making, while finding that CRELE was a poor predictor of policy-maker concerns. Whilst the ACTA quartet effectively gives double-billing to the ‘relevance’ component of CRELE, credibility and legitimacy were much lower priorities for policy-makers interviewed. This article questions whether CRELE is a useful mindset for researchers interested in policy influence. These findings will be of interest to those engaged in debates related to effective science-policy interactions more broadly, and researchers that want to marshal policy influence more specifically. |
| |
| Keywords: | Science-policy interface Policy process Credibility Legitimacy Relevance |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
