Lessons from post-normal science for climate science-sceptic debates

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change

Volumn 3, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 397-407

  Turnpenny, John R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

QUALITY CONTROL;

DECISION PROCESS; POLICY ANALYSIS; POLITICAL SCIENCE; POST-NORMAL SCIENCE; SCIENCE STUDIES; SCIENTIFIC EXPERTISE; SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE; SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHES;

CLIMATE CHANGE;

EID: 84865160130     PISSN: 17577780     EISSN: 17577799     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wcc.184     Document Type: Review

References (100)

1. Watts Up With That? Available at: http://wattsupwiththat.com/ (Accessed January 27, 2012).
2. The No Carbon Tax climate sceptics blog. Available at: http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/ (Accessed January 27, 2012).
3. Climate Skeptic. Available at: http://www.climate-skeptic.com/ (Accessed January 27, 2012).
4. Skeptical Science. For rebuttals, see http://www.skepticalscience.com/ (Accessed January 27, 2012).
5. Grist. Available at: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/ (Accessed January 27, 2012).
6. International Conference on Climate Change. Available at: http://climateconference.heartland.org/past-conferences/iccc-6/ (Accessed January 27, 2012).
7. Turnpenny JR, Jones M, Lorenzoni I. Editorial: where now for post-normal science? A critical review of its development, definitions and uses. Sci Technol Hum Values 2011, 36:287-306.
8. Mann ME, Bradley RS, Hughes, MK. Northern hemisphere temperatures during the past millennium: inferences, uncertainties, and limitations. Geophys Res Lett 1999, 26:759-762.
9. Demeritt D. Science studies, climate change and the prospects for constructivist critique, Econ Soc 2006, 35:453-479.
10. Kuhn T. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1962.
11. Ravetz JR. Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1971.
12. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR. A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues. In: Costanza R, ed. Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press; 1991, 137-152.
13. Rosa EA. Metatheoretical foundations for post-normal risk. J Risk Res 1998, 1:15-44.
14. Ravetz JR. What is post-normal science? Futures 1999, 31:647-653.
15. Healy S. Extended peer communities and the ascendance of postnormal politics. Futures 1999, 31: 655-669.
16. Luks F. Post-normal science and the rhetoric of inquiry: deconstructing normal science? Futures 1999, 31:705-719.
17. O'Connor M. Dialogue and debate in a post-normal practice of science: a reflexion. Futures 1999, 31:671-687.
18. de Marchi B, Ravetz JR. Risk management and governance: a post-normal science approach Futures 1999, 31:743-757.
19. Giampietro M. Sustainability, the new challenge of governance, and postnormal science. Polit Life Sci 1999, 18:218-221.
20. Waltner-Toews D, Wall E. Emergent perplexity: in search of post-normal questions for community and agroecosystem health. Soc Sci Med 1997, 45:1741-1749.
21. Francis RA, Goodman MK. Post-normal science and the art of nature conservation. J Nat Conserv 2010, 18:89-105.
22. Pereira AG, Raes F, Pedrosa TD, Rosa P, Brodersen S, Jorgensen MS, Ferreira F, Querol X, Rea J. Atmospheric composition change research: time to go post-normal? Atmos Environ 2009, 43:5423-5432.
23. Bray D, von Storch H. Climate science: an empirical example of postnormal science. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 1999, 80:439-455.
24. Mentzel M. 'Climate' for social assessment: experts, uncertainty and policy development. Innovation 1999, 12:221-234.
25. Saloranta TM. Post-normal science and the global climate change issue. Clim Change 2001, 50:395-404.
26. Etkin D, Ho E. Climate change: perceptions and discourses of risk. J Risk Res 2007, 10:623-641.
27. Hulme M. Claiming and adjudicating on Mt Kilimanjaro's shrinking glaciers: Guy Callendar, Al Gore and extended peer communities. Sci Cult 2010, 19:303-326.
28. Upham P, Riesch H, Tomei J, Thornley P. The sustainability of forestry biomass supply for EU bioenergy: a post-normal approach to environmental risk and uncertainty. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 14:510-518.
29. Friedrichs J. Peak energy and climate change: the double bind of post-normal science. Futures 2011, 43:469-477.
30. Waltner-Toews D, Bunch M, Neudoerffer C, Parkes M, Venema H. Championing ecosystem sustainability and health: profile and tribute to the life and work of James Kay (1954-2004). EcoHealth 2004, 1:334-339.
31. Lorenzoni I, Jones M, Turnpenny JR. Climate change, human genetics and post-normality in the UK. Futures 2007, 39:65-82.
32. Turnpenny J, Lorenzoni I, Jones M. Noisy and definitely not normal: responding to wicked issues in the environment, energy and health. Environ Sci Policy 2009, 12:347-358.
33. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR. Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1990.
34. van der Sluijs JP, Craye M, Funtowicz SO, Kloprogge P, Ravetz JR, Risbey J. Combining quantitative and qualitative measures of uncertainty in model-based environmental assessment: the NUSAP system. Risk Anal 2005, 25:481-492.
35. Kasemir B, Jäger J, Jaeger CC, Gardner MT. Public Participation in Sustainability Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003.
36. Backstrand K. Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance Glob Environ Polit 2003, 3:24-41.
37. Bidwell D. Is community-based participatory research postnormal science? Sci Technol Hum Values 2009, 34:741-761.
38. Frame B. 'Wicked', 'messy' and 'clumsy': long-term frameworks for sustainability. Environ Plan C 2008, 26:1113-1128.
39. Frame B, Brown J. Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:225-241.
40. Frame B, O'Connor M. Integrating valuation and deliberation: the purposes of sustainability assessment. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 14:1-10.
41. Spangenberg JH. Sustainability science: a review, an analysis and some empirical lessons. Environ Conserv 2011, 38:275-287.
42. Ravetz JR. Post-normal science and the complexity of transitions towards sustainability. Ecol Complex 2006, 3:275-284.
43. Ravetz JR. Latest thoughts on post-normal science. In: Bogner A, Kastenhofer K, Torgersen H, eds. Inter- und Transdisziplinarität im Wandel? Neue Perspektiven auf problemorientierte Forschung und Politikberatung. Germany: Nomos, Baden Baden; 2010, 231-246.
44. Ravetz JR. 'Climategate' and the maturing of post-normal science. Futures 2011, 43:149-157.
45. Shaw C. The dangerous limits of dangerous limits: climate change and the precautionary principle. Sociol Rev 2009, 57(suppl 2):103-123.
46. Doern GB, Reed TJ. Canada's changing science-based policy and regulatory regime: issues and framework. In: Doern GB, Reed TJ, eds. Risky Business: Canada's Changing Science-Based Policy and Regulatory Regime. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2000, 3-30.
47. Petts J, Brooks C. Expert conceptualisations of the role of lay knowledge in environmental decision making: challenges for deliberative democracy. Environ Plan A 2006, 38:1045-1059.
48. Petersen AC, Cath A, Hage M, Kunseler E, van der Sluijs JP. Post-normal science in practice at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Sci Technol Hum Values 2011, 36:362-388.
49. Farrell KN. Snow White and the wicked problems of the west: a look at the lines between empirical description and normative prescription. Sci Technol Hum Values 2011, 36:334-361.
50. Yearley S. Making systematic sense of public discontents with expert knowledge: two analytical approaches and a case study. Public Underst Sci 2000, 9:105-122.
51. Tacconi L. Scientific methodology for ecological economics. Ecol Econ 1998, 27:91-105.
52. Logar N. Scholarly science policy models and real policy, RSD for SciSIP in US mission agencies. Policy Sci 2011, 44:249-266.
53. Lidskog R. Scientised citizens and democratised science: re-assessing the expert-lay divide. J Risk Res 2008, 11:69-86.
54. Weingart P. From "Finalization" to "Mode 2": old wine in new bottles? Soc Sci Inf 1997, 36:591-613.
55. Wesselink A, Hoppe R. If post-normal science is the solution, what is the problem? The politics of activist environmental science. Sci Technol Hum Values 2011, 36:389-412.
56. Kastenhofer K. Risk assessment of emerging technologies and post-normal science. Sci Technol Hum Values 2011, 36:307-333.
57. Goeminne G. Has science ever been normal? On the need and impossibility of a sustainability science. Futures 2011, 43:627-636.
58. Weiss CH. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Adm Rev 1979, 39:426-431.
59. Heclo H. Modern Social Politics in Britain and Sweden: From Relief to Income Maintenance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1974.
60. Lindblom CE. Still muddling, not yet through. Public Adm Rev 1979, 39:517-526.
61. Sabatier P. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sci 1988, 21:129-168.
62. Majone G. Evidence, Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1989.
63. Jenkins-Smith H. Democratic Politics and Policy Analysis. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole; 1990.
64. Radaelli CM. The role of knowledge in the policy process. J Eur Public Policy 1995, 2:159-183.
65. Kingdon JW. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. Updated 2nd ed. New York: Longman, 2010.
66. Haas PM. When does power listen to truth? A constructivist approach to the policy process. J Eur Public Policy 2004, 11:569-592.
67. Owens S, Rayner T, Bina O. New agendas for appraisal: reflections on theory, practice, and research. Environ Plan A 2004, 36:1943-1959.
68. Ryghaug M, Skjølsvold TM. The global warming of climate science: Climategate and the construction of scientific facts. Int Stud Philos Sci 2010, 24:287-307.
69. Climate Etc. Available at: http://judithcurry.com/ (Accessed May 7, 2012).
70. Die Klimazwiebel: Available at: http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.it/ (Accessed May 7, 2012).
71. Topf R. Conclusion: science, public policy and the authoritativeness of the governmental process. In: Barker A, Peters BG, eds. The Politics of Expert Advice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1993, 103-117.
72. Keller AC. Science in Environmental Policy: The Politics of Objective Advice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2009.
73. YouGov/Channel 4 News Survey of 32 268 British adults, 29 May-4 June 2009. Available at: http://www.yougov.co.uk/archives/pdf/Megapoll_EuroElections.pdf. (Accessed January 30, 2012).
74. Barker A, Peters BG. Introduction: science policy and government. In: Barker A, Peters BG, eds. The Politics of Expert Advice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1993, 1-16.
75. Jasanoff S. Judgment under siege: the three-body problem of expert legitimacy. In: Maasen S, Weingart P, eds. Democratization of Expertise? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-Making. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer; 2005, 209-223.
76. Trenberth K. Communicating Climate Science and Thoughts on Climategate AMS, 23-27 January 2011. Seattle Joint Presidential Session on Communicating Climate Change.
77. Editorial 'Value Judgements'. Nature 2011, 473:123-124.
78. Hulme M. Why We Disagree About Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
79. Whitmarsh L. Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: dimensions, determinants and change over time. Glob Environ Change 2011, 21:690-700.
80. Owens S. Learning across levels of governance: expert advice and the adoption of carbon dioxide emissions reduction targets in the UK. Glob Environ Change 2010, 20:394-401.
81. Shackley S, Wynne B. Representing uncertainty in global climate change science and policy: boundary-ordering devices and authority. Sci Technol Hum Values 1996, 21:275-302.
82. Hoppe R. The Governance of Problems: Puzzling, Powering and Participation. Bristol: Policy Press; 2011.
83. Healy S. Post-normal science in postnormal times. Futures 2011, 43:202-208.
84. Radaelli CM. The public policy of the European Union: whither politics of expertise? J Eur Public Policy 1999, 6:757-774.
85. Rossi PH, Lipsey MW, Freeman HE. Evaluation-A Systematic Approach. 7th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004.
86. Wollmann H. Policy evaluation and evaluation research. In: Fischer F, Miller GJ, Sidney MS, eds. Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2007, 393-402.
87. Sanderson I. Complexity, 'practical rationality' and evidence-based policy making. Policy Polit 2006, 34:115-132.
88. Nutley SM, Walter I, Davies HTO. Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Bristol: Policy Press; 2007.
89. Sanderson I. Intelligent policy making for a complex world: pragmatism, evidence and learning. Polit Stud 2009, 57:699-719.
90. Newman J. Boundary troubles: working the academic-policy interface. Policy Polit 2011, 39:473-484.
91. Sullivan H. 'Truth' junkies: using evaluation in UK public policy. Policy Polit 2011, 39:499-512.
92. Fischer F. Evaluating Public Policy. Stamford, CT: Wadsworth; 1995.
93. Newell P. Climate for Change: Non-State Actors and the Global Politics of the Greenhouse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
94. Miller CA. Climate science and the making of a global political order. In: Jasanoff S, ed. States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order. New York: Routledge; 2004, 46-66.
95. O'Neill SJ, Hulme M, Turnpenny J, Screen M. Disciplines, geography and gender in the framing of climate change. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 2010, 91:997-1002.
96. Hulme M. Meet the humanities. Nat Clim Chang 2011, 1:177-179.
97. Hulme M. Geographical work at the boundaries of climate change. Trans Inst Br Geogr 2008, NS33:5-11.
98. Mahony M, Hulme M. The colour of risk: an exploration of the IPCC's 'burning embers' diagram. Spontaneous Generations: J Hist Philos Sci. In press.
99. Pielke R. The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
100. Collins H, Evans R. The third wave of science studies - studies of expertise and experience. Soc Stud Sci 2002, 32:235-296.