The use of scientific knowledge in the decision making process of environmental public policies in Brazil

Journal of Science Communication

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2011, Pages

  Carneiro, Maria José ^a   da Silva Rosa, Teresa ^b  

^a FEDERAL RURAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSIDADE VILA VELHA   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79954457079     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18242049     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.22323/2.10010203     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. F. Scarano (2007), Perspectivas das ciências da biodiversidade no Brasil, Sci. Agric. 64: 439-447.
2. Brasil (2008), Ministério do Meio Ambiente e Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia. National consultation meeting for creating a scientific advisory mechanism, regarding policy decisions on the scope of the convention on biological diversity and the Brazilian government, Final Report. Brasília, January 2008.
3. C. Laurent (2006), Agricultura e desenvolvimento sustentável nas problemáticas das 'Políticas baseadas em evidencias', Projeto de Pesquisa, INRA, Paris France.
4. B. Latour (1995), Le métier de chercheur regard d'um anthropologue, Ed. INRA, Paris France.
5. Ph. Descola (2003), Décrire, comprendre, expliquer, in J-P. Changeux, La vérité dans les sciences. Odile Jacob, Paris France, pp 81-92.
6. T. Ingold (2000), The perception of the environment - essays in livehood, dwelling nd skill, Routledge, London U.K.
7. 10
8. 9 and Büscher and Wolmer (2007)32
9. H.R. Leis (2001), Para uma reestruturação interdisciplinar das ciências sociais: a complexa tarefa de enfrentar os desafios da problemática ambiental sem cair no senso comum da sociedade civil, Ambient. Soc. 8: 145-154.
10. J. Hannigan (2009), Sociologia ambiental, Petrópolis, Vozes Brasil.
11. J.A. Drumond (2006), A primazia das Ciências Naturais na construção da agenda ambiental contemporânea, Rev. bras. Ci. Soc. 21(62): 5-25.
12. A. Brandenburg (2005), Ciências Sociais e ambiente rural. Principais temas e perspectivas analíticas, Ambient. & Soc. VIII(1): 51-63.
13. It was called the National Consultation Meeting for creating a scientific advisory mechanism regarding policy decisions on the scope of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Brazilian Government, in Brasília, November 2007, in partnership with the Ministry of Science and Technology.
14. 31
15. H.T.O. Davies and S.M. Nutley (2001), Evidence-based policy and practice: moving from rhetoric to reality, Third International, Inter-disciplinary Evidence-Based Policies and Indicator Systems Conference, July 2001.
16. C. Laurent et al. (2009), Pour quoi s'intéresser à la notion «d'evidence-based policy»?, Revue Tiers Monde 200: 853-873.
17. W. Sutherland et al. (2004), The need for evidence based conservation, Trends Ecol. Evol. 19(6): 305-308.
18. The Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation/CEBC (University of Birmingham) has as its main purpose to be a source of evidence and to coordinate a network of collaborators in developing systematic bibliographic revisions. http://www.cebc.bangor.ac.uk/
19. N. Myers et al. (2000), Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities, Nature 403: 853-858 www.nature.com.
20. Cf. Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica e Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais. Atlas de Florestas Remanescentes da Mata Atlântica (SOS Atlantic Forest Foundation and National Institute for Space Research, Atlas of the Forest Remnants of the Atlantic Forest) - period 2000-2005, 2008.
21. 30 which was set up in the year 2000, recognizes the rights for segments of the dwelling population identified as traditional population to remain in protected areas and to perform activities of self-subsistence as long as they contribute towards the sustainable use of the natural resources and cause no harm to the environment. This regulation spawned reactions from different groups residing in such areas who started to claim their rights, which, in turn, brought about situations of conflict with environmental bodies. Besides, the notion of " traditional or local population" arose a very vivid and controversial debate during the elaboration process of this federal act.
22. J. Young (2005), Research, policy and practice: why developing countries are different, J. Int. Dev. 17: 727-734.
23. The access to these consultancy groups created by NGOs, or even directly by government bodies, deserves another study.
24. P. Bourdieu (2004), Os usos sociais da Ciência. Por uma sociologia clínica do campo científico, Ed. UNESP, São Paulo Brasil.
25. Young (2005) has observed the same difficulties concerning the communication between scientists and policy makers dealing with development policies.
26. This is the case of the Brazilian National Organization for the Development of Professionals in Higher Education/CAPES web site (http://www.capes.gor.br) which provides various open access services that promote scientific and academic knowledge.
27. Also, there is the Scientific Electronic Library Online/Scielo site (http://www.scielo.br) which provides an open access to a large range of journals.
28. http://www.cebc.bangor.ac.uk/
29. http://www.cria.org.br/
30. http://www.mma.gov.br/sitio/index.php?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=72
31. SNUC (2004), Sistema Nacional de Conservação da Natureza - SNUC: lei 9985, 18 julho 2000. 5 ed. Brasília: MMA/SBF.
32. T. Da-Silva-Rosa and M.J. Carneiro, O acesso livre à produção acadêmica como subsídios para políticas públicas: um exercício sobre o Banco de Teses da CAPES, História, Ciências, Saúde 17(4): 955-974.
33. B. Büscher and W. Womer (2007), Introduction The politicas of engagement between biodiversity conservation and the Social Sciences, Conservat. Soc. 5(1): 1-21.