Above the din but in the fray: Environmental scientists as effective advocates

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment

Volumn 8, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 299-305

  Meyer, Judy L ^a   Frumhoff, Peter C ^b   Hamburg, Steven P ^c   De La Rosa, Carlos ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS   (United States)

^c ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND   (United States)

^d Santa Catalina Island Conservancy   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVOCACY; BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS; POLICY MAKING;

EID: 77955573720     PISSN: 15409295     EISSN: 15409309     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/090143     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Blockstein DE. 2002. How to lose your political virginity while keeping your scientific credibility. BioScience 52: 91-96.
2. Chan KMA. 2008. Value and advocacy in conservation biology: crisis discipline or discipline in crisis? Conserv Biol 22: 1-3.
3. de la Rosa C. 2008. Ecologists, environmentalists, and the problem with labels. Front Ecol Environ 6: 467-68.
4. Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, et al. 2008. Clearing land and the biofuels carbon debt. Science 319: 1235-38.
5. Fischhoff B. 2007. Nonpersuasive communication about matters of greatest urgency: climate change. Env Sci Technol 41: 7204-08.
6. Groffman PM, Stylinski C, Nisbet MC, et al. 2010. Restarting the conversation: challenges at the interface between ecology and society. Front Ecol Environ 8: 284-91.
7. Growth Energy. 2009. Growth energy policy brief: California's dangerous gamble with indirect land-use change, http://growf.rienergy.org/images/reports/ GE-Policy-Briefing-on-California-1.pdf. Viewed 16 Jun 2010.
8. Kaiser J. 2000. Ecologists on a mission to save the world. Science 287: 1118-19.
9. Lackey RT. 2007. Science, scientists, and policy advocacy. Conserv Biol 21: 12-17.
10. Lovejoy T. 1989. The obligations of a biologist. Conserv Biol 3: 329-30.
11. Nelson M and Vucetich JA. 2009. On advocacy by environmental scientists: what, whether, why, and how. Conserv Biol 23: 1090-1101.
12. Noss RF. 2007. Values are a good thing in conservation biology. Conserv Biol 21: 18-20.
13. Pace ML, Hampton SE, Limburg KE, et al. 2010. Communicating with the public: opportunities and rewards for individual ecologists. Front Ecol Environ 8: 292-98.
14. Pielke Jr R. 2007. The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15. Rowland FS and Molina MJ. 2001. The CFC-ozone puzzle: environmental science in the global arena. Washington, DC: National Council for Science and the Environment.
16. Strong DR. 2008. Ecologists and environmentalism. Front Ecol Environ 6: 347.
17. UCS (Union of Concerned Scientists). 2009a. Science and the Endangered Species Act. www.ucsusa.org/scientific-integrity/solutions/agency-specific- solutions/changes-to-esa.html. Viewed 14 Aug 2009.
18. UCS (Union of Concerned Scientists). 2009b. Scientists and economists call to action on biofuels and land-use change. www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/ clean-vehicles/call-to-action-biofuels-and-land-use-change.pdf. Viewed 14 Aug 2009.
19. Whitmer A, Ogden L, Lawton J, et al. 2010. The engaged university: providing a platform for research that transforms society. Front Ecol Environ 8: 314-21.