The case for policy-relevant conservation science

Conservation Biology

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 748-754

  Rose, David C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Boundary work; Evidence based conservation; Evidence informed policy; Framing; Science policy interface

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION PLANNING; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; POLICY MAKING;

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MANAGEMENT; POLITICS;

CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; POLICY MAKING; POLITICS;

EID: 84929231067     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: 15231739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12444     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Adams WM, Sandbrook C. 2013. Conservation, evidence and policy. Oryx 47(3):329-335.
2. Agrawal A, Ostrom E. 2006. Political science and conservation biology: a dialog of the deaf. Conservation Biology 20:681-682.
3. Avery M. 2012. Fighting for birds: 25 years in nature conservation. Pelagic Publishing, Exeter, United Kingdom.
4. Balmford A. 2012. Wild hope: on the front lines of conservation success. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
5. Bijker WE, Bal R, Hendriks R. 2009. The paradox of scientific authority: the role of scientific advice in democracies. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Breining G. 2012. Too much advocacy? Scientists and public policy. Star Tribune 9 September 2012. Available from http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/168971316.html (accessed September 2014).
7. Cash D, Clark W, Alcock F, Dickson N, Eckley N, Jager J. 2002. Salience, credibility, legitimacy and boundaries: linking research, assessment, and decision-making, Faculty research working paper series. John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
8. Cook CN, Mascia MB, Schwartz MW, Possingham HP, Fuller RA. 2013. Achieving conservation science that bridges the knowledge-action boundary. Conservation Biology 27(4):669-678.
9. Davies P. 2004. Is evidence-based government possible? Jerry Lee Lecture. Available from http://www.sfi.dk/graphics/Campbell/Dokumenter/Artikler/Is_Evidence-Based_Government_Possible.pdf (accessed September 2014).
10. De wit B. 2011. RMNO and quality control of scientific advice to policy. Pages 139-156 in Lentsch L, Weingart P, editors. The politics of scientific advice: institutional design for quality assurance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
11. European Commission. 2013. Public opinion in the European Union: first results. Standard Eurobarometer 80 Autumn 2013.
12. Gieryn T. 1983. Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review 48:781-795.
13. Hajer M. 1995. The politics of environmental discourse. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
14. Jasanoff S. 1990. The fifth branch: science advisers as policymakers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
15. Jasanoff S. 2013. The science of science advice. Pages 62-68 in Doubleday R, Wilsdon J, editors. Future directions for scientific advice in Whitehall. Available from http://www.csap.cam.ac.uk/media/uploads/files/1/fdsaw.pdf (accessed September 2014).
16. Jørgensen D, Nilsson C, Hof AR, Hasselquist EM, Baker S, Chapin FS, Eckerberg K, Hjältén J, Polvi L, Meyerson LA. 2014. Policy language in restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 22(1):1-4.
17. Kingdon J. 2003. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. 2nd edition. Longman, New York.
18. Lawton RN, Rudd MA. 2014. A narrative policy approach to environmental conservation. Ambio 43(7):849-857.
19. Lentsch L, Weingart P. 2011. Introduction: The quest for quality as a challenge to scientific policy advice: an overdue debate? Pages 3-18 in Lentsch L, Weingart P, editors. 2011. The politics of scientific advice: institutional design for quality assurance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
20. Leslie HM, et al. 2013. How good science and stories can go hand-in-hand. Conservation Biology 27:1126-1129.
21. McCauley DJ. 2006. Selling out on nature. Nature 443:27-28.
22. Morecroft M, et al. 2014. Enhancing the impact of climate science. Nature Climate Change 4:842-843.
23. Owens S. 2011. Knowledge, advice and influence: the role of the UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 1970-2009. Pages 73-101 in Lentsch L, Weingart P, editors. 2011. The politics of scientific advice: institutional design for quality assurance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
24. Owens S. 2012. Experts and the environment: the UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution 1970-2011. Journal of Environmental Law 24:1-22.
25. Owens S, Petts J, Bulkeley H. 2006. Boundary work: knowledge, policy and the urban environment. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 24(5):633-643.
26. Palmer J. 2012. Risk governance in an age of wicked problem: lessons from the European approach to indirect land-use change. Journal of Risk Research 15(5):495-513.
27. Pullin AS, Knight TM. 2012. Science informing policy-a health warning for the environment. Environmental Evidence 1:15.
28. Rein M, Schön D. 1991. Frame reflective policy discourse. Pages 262-289 in Wagner P, Weiss C, Wittrock B, Wollman H, editors. Social sciences, modern states, national experiences and theoretical crossroads. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
29. Riker WH. 1986. The art of political manipulation. Yale University Press, Newhaven, Connecticut.
30. Rose DC. 2014a. Five ways to enhance the impact of climate science. Nature Climate Change 4:522-524.
31. Rose DC. 2014b. Boundary work. Nature Climate Change 4:1038.
32. Sandercock L. 2003. Out of the closet: the importance of stories and storytelling in planning practice. Planning Theory & Practice 4:11-28.
33. Sarewitz D. 2004. How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environment Science and Policy 7:385-403.
34. Star S, Griesmer J. 1989. Institutional ecology, 'translations' and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-1939. Social Studies of Science 19(3):387-420.
35. Sutherland WJ, Spiegelhalter D, Burgman MA. 2013. Twenty tips for interpreting scientific claims. Nature 504:335-337.
36. Swart JAA, van Andel J. 2008. Rethinking the interface between ecology and society. The case of the cockle controversy in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Journal of Applied Ecology 45:82-90.
37. Takacs D. 1996. The idea of biodiversity: philosophies of paradise. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London.
38. Thompson M, Warburton M. 1985. Decision making under contradictory certainties: how to save the Himalayas when you can't find what's wrong with them. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis 12:3-33.
39. Toulmin ES. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
40. Turnhout E, Hisschemöller M, Eijsackers H. 2008. Ecological indicators: Between the two fires of science and policy. Ecological Indicators 7:215-228.
41. Tyler C. 2013. Top 20 things scientists need to know about policy-making. The Guardian, available at http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/02/scientists-policy-governments-science (accessed September 2014).
42. van Bommel S, van der Zouwen M. 2013. Creating scientific narratives: experiences in constructing and interweaving empirical and theoretical plots. Pages 217-239 in Arts B, Behagel J, van Bommel S, de Koning J, Turnhout E, editors. Forest and nature governance: a practice based approach. Springer Science + Business Media, Dordrecht.
43. Vira B, Adams WM. 2009. Ecosystem services and conservation strategy: beware the silver bullet. Conservation Letters 2(4):158-162.
44. Young JC, et al. 2014. Improving the science-policy dialogue to meet the challenges of biodiversity conservation: having conversations rather than talking at one-another. Biodiversity Conservation 23:387-404.