Tackling the dilemma of the science-policy interface in environmental policy analysis

Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 46-52

  Cimorelli, Alan J ^a,b,c   Stahl, Cynthia H ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c DREXEL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Environmental policy; Indicators; Policy analysis

Indexed keywords

DECISION THEORY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; OZONE; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; INDICATORS; POLICY ANALYSIS;

TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 27844478884     PISSN: 02704676     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0270467604271221     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Brunk, C. G., Haworth, L., & Lee, B. (1991). Value assumptions in risk assessment: A case study of the Alachlor controversy. Waterloo, Canada: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
2. Diem, J. E., & Comrie, A. C. (2002). Predictive mapping of air pollution involving sparse spatial observations. Environmental Pollution, 119, 99-117.
3. Endter-Wada, J., Blahna, D., Krannich, R., & Brunson, M. (1998). A framework for understanding social science contributions to ecosystem management. Ecological Applications, 8, 891-904.
4. Faucheux, S., & Hue, C. (2001). From irreversibility to participation: Towards a participatory foresight for the governance of collective environmental risks. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 86, 223-243.
5. Fischbeck, P. S., Farrow, R. S., & Morgan, M. G. (2001). Introduction: The challenge of improving regulation. In P. S. Fischbeck & R. S. Farro (Eds.), Improving regulation: Cases in environment, health, and safety (pp. 1-13). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
6. Fischhoff, B. (2001). Defining stigma. In J. Flynn, H. Kunreuther, & P. Slovic (Eds.), Risk, media, and stigma: Understanding public challenges to modern science and technology (pp. 361-368). London: Earthscan.
7. Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). The emergence of post-normal science. In R. von Schomberg (Ed.), Science, politics and morality: Scientific uncertainty and decision making (pp. 85-123). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
8. Greenland, D., & Yorty, R. A. (1985). The spatial distribution of particulate concentrations in the Denver metropolitan area. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 75, 69-82.
9. Haag, D., & Kaupenjohann, M. (2001). Parameters, prediction, post-normal science and the precautionary principle - A roadmap for modelling for decision-making. Ecological Modelling, 144, 45-60.
10. Hannigan, J. A. (1995). Environmental sociology: A social constructionist perspective. London: Routledge.
11. Harwell, M. A., & Harwell, C. A. (1988). Environmental decision making in the presence of uncertainty. In S. A. Levin, M. A. Harwell, J. R. Kelly, & K. D. Kimball (Eds.), Ecotoxicology: Problems and approaches (pp. 517-540). New York: Springer-Verlag.
12. Hicks, N., & Streeten, P. (1979). Indicators of development: The search for a basic needs yardstick. World Development, 7, 567-580.
13. Hisschemoller, M., & Hoppe, R. (2001). Coping with intractable controversies: The case for problem structuring in policy design and analysis. In M. Hisschemoller, R. Hoppe, W. N. Dunn, & J. R. Ravetz (Eds.), Knowledge, power, and participation in environmental policy analysis (pp. 47-72). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishing.
14. Ionescu, A., Candau, Y., Mayer, E., & Colda, I, (2000). Analytical determination and classification of pollutant concentration fields using air pollution monitoring network data-Methodology and application in the Paris area, during episodes with peak nitrogen dioxide levels. Environmental Modelling & Software, 15, 565-573.
15. Jamieson, D. (1996). Scientific uncertainty and the political process. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 545, 35-43.
16. Jasanoff, S. (1986). Risk management and political culture. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
17. Kelly, J. R., & Harwell, M. A. (1988). Indicators of ecosystem response and recovery. In S. A. Levin, M. A. Harwell, J. R. Kelly, & K. D. Kimball (Eds.), Ecotoxicology: Problems and approaches (pp. 9-35). New York: Springer-Verlag.
18. Knudsen, H. P., & Lefohn, A. S. (1989). The use of geostatistics to characterize regional ozone exposure. In W. W. Heck, O. C. Taylor & D. T. Tingey (Eds.), Assessment of crop loss from air pollution (pp. 91-105). New York: Elsevier Applied Science.
19. Kovarick, W., & Hermes, M. E. (2001). Status of MTBE (Methyl t-Butyl Ether) and MMT (methylcyclopenadienyl manganese tricarbonyl). Retrieved from http://chemcases.com/converter/converter-27.htm
20. Krimsky, S., & Plough, A. (1988). Plant closure: The ASARCO Tacoma copper smelter. In S. Krimsky & A. Plough (Eds.), n - vironmental hazards: Communicating risks as a social process (pp. 180-238). Dover, MA: Auburn House.
21. Lefohn, A. S., Knudsen, H. P., Logan, J. A., Simpson, J., & Bhumralkar, C. M. (1987). An evaluation of the Kriging Method to predict 7-h seasonal mean ozone concentrations for estimating crop loss. Journal of Air Pollution Control Association, 37, 595-602.
22. Liu, L. -J. S., & Rossini, A. J. (1996). Use of Kriging models to predict 12-hour mean ozone concentrations in metropolitan Toronto - A pilot study. Environment International, 22, 677-692.
23. Longino, H. E. (1990a). Values and objectivity. In Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry (pp. 62-82). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24. Longino, H. E. (1990b). Values and science. In Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry (pp. 83-102). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25. Niemeijer, D. (2002). Developing indicators for environmental policy: Data-driven and theory-driven approaches examined by example. Environmental Science & Policy, 5, 91-103.
26. Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration., 1998, Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 50, Appendix H: Interpretation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone.
27. Ott, W. R. (1978). Environmental indices: Theory and practice. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Science.
28. Phillips, D. L., Lee, E. H., Herstrom, A. A., Hogesett, W. E., & Tingey, D. (1997). Use of auxiliary data for spatial interpolation of ozone exposure in sourtheastern forests. Environmetrics, 8, 43-61.
29. Pielke, R. A., Jr. (1997). Asking the right questions: Atmospheric sciences research and societal needs. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 78, 255-264.
30. Prelec, D. (1991). Values and principles: Some limitations on traditional economic analysis. In A. Etzioni & P. R. Lawrence (Eds.), Socio-economics: Toward a new synthesis (pp. 131-145). New York: M.E. Sharpe.
31. Rultenbeek, H. J. (1991). The role of indicators in the decision process. In Canadian Environmental Advisory Council (Ed.), Economic, ecological, and decision theories: Indicators of ecologically sustainable development (pp. 59-90). Ottawa, Canada: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
32. Stahl, C. H. (2003). Multi-criteria integrated resource assessment (MIRA): A new decision analytic approach to inform environmental policy analysis. Doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware.
33. Stahl, C. H., Cimorelli, A. J., & Chow, A. H. (2002). A new approach to environmental decision analysis: Multi-criteria integrated resource assessment (MIRA). Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society, 22, 443-459.
34. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2002, July 1). 40 CFR Part 50, national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards, Subchapter C-Air programs. Washington, DC: Author.
35. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. (1998, December). Guideline on data handling conventions for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (EPA-454/ R-98-017). Research Triangle Park, NC: Author.
36. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources. (1999). List of reformulated gasoline program areas. Retrieved November 26, 1999, from www.epa.gov/oms/rfgarea.htm