The politics in environmental science: The Endangered Species Act and the Preble's mouse controversy

Environmental Politics

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 449-465

  Carolan, Michael S ^a  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT; ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS; SPECIES CONSERVATION; SUBSPECIES;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 40849095753     PISSN: 09644016     EISSN: 17438934     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09644010802055683     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Brown, P. and Mikkelsen, E. (1997) No safe place, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA
2. Choi, C. (2002) And then there were five: A hidden force could be changing the face of the universe. New Scientist, 2:2332, p. 7.
3. Collins, H. M. and Evans, R. (2002) The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32:2, pp. 235-296.
4. Crandall, K., Bininda-Emonds, O., Mace, G. and Wayne, R. (2000) Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 15:7, pp. 290-295.
5. Dobzhansky, T. (1937) Genetics and the origin of species, Columbia University Press, New York
6. Doremus, H. (2004) The purposes, effects, and the future of the Endangered Species Act's best available science mandate. Environmental Law, 34:11, pp. 397-450.
7. Epstein, S. (1996) Impure science, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA
8. Erickson, J. (2006) Biologists backs delisting Preble's mouse. Rocky Mountain News, 25, p. A2.
9. Evans, R. (2005) ICtroduction: Demarcation socialized: constructing boundaries and recognizing difference. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 30:1, pp. 3-16.
10. Fischer, F. (2000) Citizens, experts, and the environment, Duke University Press, Durham, NC
11. Gieryn, T. (1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48:6, pp. 781-795.
12. Hendry, A., Vamosi, S., Latham, S., Heibuth, J. and Day, T. (2000) Questioning species realities. Conservation Genetics, 1:1, pp. 67-76.
13. Hey, J. (2001) Genes, categories, and species, Oxford University Press, New York
14. Isaac, N. and Purvist, A. (2004) The 'species problem' and testing macroevolutionary hypotheses. Diversity and Distributions, 10:4, pp. 275-281.
15. Jasanoff, S. (1987) Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science. Social Studies of Science, 17:2, pp. 195-230.
16. Jasanoff, S. (2005) Designs on nature, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
17. Jasanoff, S. and Wynne, B. (1998) Science knowledge and decision making. Human choice and climate change, pp. 1-112. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH
18. Kleinman, D. (2005) Science and technology in society, Blackwell, Malden, MA
19. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999) Epistemic cultures, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
20. Krutzsch, P. (1954) North American jumping mice (genus Zapus). University of Kansas Museum of Natural History, 4:7, pp. 349-472.
21. Kuhn, T. S. (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago
22. Lahsen, M. (2005) Technocracy, democracy, and US climate politics: The need for demarcation. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 30:1, pp. 137-169.
23. Latour, B. (1987) Science in action, Open University Press, Milton Keynes
24. Latour, B. (2004) Politics of nature, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
25. McCright, A. and Dunlap, R. (2003) Defeating Kyoto: The conservative movement's impact on US climate change policy. Social Problems, 50:3, pp. 348-373.
26. Mansfield, B. and Haas, J. (2006) Scale framing of scientific uncertainty in controversy over the endangered Steller sea lion. Environmental Politics, 15:1, pp. 78-94.
27. Mayden, R. (1997) A hierarchy of species concepts: The denouement in the sage of the species problem. Species, pp. 381-424. Chapman and Hall, New York
28. Mayr, E. (1942) Systematics and the origin of species, Columbia University Press, New York
29. Mayr, E. (1970) Populations, species, and evolution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
30. Michaels, D. (2005) Scientific evidence and public policy. Public Health Matters, 95:1, pp. S5-S57.
31. Myers, R., Levin, S., Lande, R., James, F., Murdoch, W. and Paine, R. (2004) Hatcheries and endangered salmon. Science, 403:5666, p. 1980.
32. Oreskes, N. (2004) Science and public policy: What's proof got to do with it?. Environmental Science and Policy, 7:1, pp. 369-383.
33. Pielke, R. (2004) When scientists politicize science: Making sense of controversy over The Skeptical Environmentalist. Environmental Science and Policy, 7:1, pp. 405-417.
34. Queiroz, K. (2005) Ernst Mayr and the modern concept of species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of American (PNAS), 102:1, pp. 6600-6607.
35. Ramey, R. J., Liu, H., Epps, C., Carpenter, L. and Wehausen, J. (2005) Genetic relatedness of the Preble's meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei) to nearby species of Z. hudsonius as inferred from variation in cranial morphology, mitochondrial DNA, and microsatellite DNA: Implications for taxonomy and conservation. Animal Conservation, 8:3, pp. 329-346.
36. Ramey, R., Wehausen, J., Liu, H., Epps, C. and Carpenter, L. (2006) Response to Vignieri et al. (2006): Should hypothesis testing or selective post hoc interpretation of result guide the allocation of conservation effort?. Animal Conservation, 9:3, pp. 244-247.
37. Ridley, M. (1989) The cladistic solution to the species problem. Biology and Philosophy, 4:1, pp. 1-16.
38. Ruhl, J. (2004) The battle over endangered species act methodology. Environmental Law, 34:3, pp. 555-604.
39. Sarewitz, D. (2004) How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environmental Science and Policy, 7:3, pp. 385-403.
40. Sarewitz, D. and Pielke, R. (1999) Prediction in science and policy. Technology in Society, 21:1, pp. 121-133.
41. Sarewitz, D., Pielke, R. and Byerly, R. (2000) Prediction, Island Press, Washington, DC
42. Scarce, R. (2000) Fishy business, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA
43. Schulter, D. (2001) Ecology and the origin of species. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 16:7, pp. 372-380.
44. Sites, J. and Marshall, J. (2004) Operational criteria for delimiting species. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 35:3, pp. 199-227.
45. Trombulak, S., Wilcove, D. and Male, T. (2006) Science as smoke screen. Science, 312:5776, p. 973.
46. Vignieri, S., Hallerman, E., Bergstrom, B., Hafner, D., Martin, A., Devers, P., Grobler, P. and Hitt, N. (2006) Mistaken view of taxonomic validity undermines conservation of an evolutionary distinct mouse: A response to Ramey et al. (2005). Animal Conservation, 9:3, pp. 237-243.
47. Waples, R. (1999) Dispelling some myths about hatcheries. Fisheries, 24:2, pp. 12-21.
48. Wynne, B. (2002) Risk and environment as legitimatory discourses of technology: Reflexivity inside out?. Current Sociology, 50:3, pp. 459-477.