The science-policy interface: What is an appropriate role for professional societies?

BioScience

Volumn 58, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 865-869

  Scott, J Michael ^a,b   Rachlow, Janet L ^b   Lackey, Robert T ^c,d  

^a U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO   (United States)

^c OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d US Environmental Protection Agency ^*

Author keywords

Advocacy; Policy; Professional societies; Science; Scientists

Indexed keywords

EID: 53149090592     PISSN: 00063568     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1641/B580914     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Beirbaum RM, Raven PH. 2007. A two-pronged climate strategy. Science 316: 17.
2. Blockstein DE. 2002. How to lose your political virginity while keeping your scientific credibility. BioScience 52: 91-96.
3. Brown KS. 2000. A new breed of scientist-advocate emerges. Science 287: 1192-1195.
4. Czech B. 2007. The foundation of a new conservation movement: Professional society positions on economic growth. BioScience 57: 6-7.
5. Faigman DL. 2002. Is science different for lawyers? Science 297: 339-340.
6. [IPCC] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Geneva (Switzerland): IPCC. (13 August 2008; www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg2.htm)
7. Kaiser J. 2000. Ecologists on a mission to save the world. Science 287: 1188-1192.
8. Lach D, List P, Steel B, Shindler B. 2003. Advocacy and credibility of ecological scientists in resource decisionmaking: A regional study. BioScience 53: 170-178.
9. Lackey RT. 2001. Values, policy, and ecosystem health. BioScience 51: 437-443.
10. _. 2004. Societal values and the proper role of restoration ecologists. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 45-46.
11. _. 2007. Science, scientists, and policy advocacy. Conservation Biology 21: 12-17.
12. Noss R. 1994. Cows and conservation. Conservation Biology 8: 613-616.
13. _. 1996. Conservation biology, values and advocacy. Conservation Biology 10: 904.
14. Pielke RA Jr. 2002 Policy, politics and perspective. Nature 416: 367-368.
15. _. 2007. The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge (United Kingdom): Cambridge University Press.
16. Revkin A. 2007. Melding science and diplomacy to run a global climate review. New York Times, 6 February.
17. Roseau D. 1992. Case studies in pathological science. American Scientist 80: 54-63.
18. Rykiel EJ Jr. 2001. Scientific objectivity, value systems, and policymaking. BioScience 51: 433-436.
19. Safina C. 1999. Honor thy science: Advocate. Fisheries 24: 28.
20. Scott JM, Tear TH, Mills LS. 1995. Socioeconomics and the recovery of endangered species: Biological assessment in a political world. Conservation Biology 9: 214-216.
21. Scott JM, Rachlow JL, Lackey RT, Pidgnorna AB, Aycrigg JL, Feldman GR, Svancara LK, Rupp DA, Stanish DI, Steinhorst RK. 2007. Policy, advocacy and science: Prevalence in the research literature and perspectives of conservation biologists. Conservation Biology 21: 29-35.
22. Svancara LK, Brannon R, Scott JM, Groves CR, Noss RF, Pressy RL. 2005. Policy-driven versus evidence-based conservation: A review of political targets and biological needs. BioScience 55: 989-995.
23. Tear TH, et al. 2005. How much is enough? The recurrent problem of setting measurable objectives in conservation. BioScience 55: 835-849.
24. Tomasso J. 2007. Deliberate influence is advocacy (letter to editor). Bio-Science 57: 213.
25. [USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Removing the bald eagle in the lower 48 states from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife. Federal Register 72: 37345-37372.
26. _. 2008. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Final rule designating the northern Rocky Mountain population of gray wolf as a distinct population segment and removing this distinct population segment from the federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife. Federal Register 73: 10513-10560.
27. Vuceitch JA, Nelson MP, Phillips MK. 2006. The normative dimension of the legal meaning of endangered and recovery in the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Conservation Biology 20: 1383-1390.
28. Wagner FH. 2006. Yellowstone's Destabilized Ecosystem: Elk Effects, Science, and Policy. Oxford (United Kingdom): Oxford University Press.
29. Wells WG Jr. 1996. Working with Congress: A Practical Guide for Scientists and Engineers. 2nd ed. Washington (DC): American Association for Advancement of Sciences.
30. Wiens JA. 1997. Scientific responsibility and responsible ecology. Conservation Ecology 1: 16.
31. Wilhere GF. 2008. The how-much-is-enough myth. Conservation Biology, online early edition. (8 August 2008; www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10. 1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00926.x)