Adding 'iterativity' to the credibility, relevance, legitimacy: A novel scheme to highlight dynamic aspects of science-policy interfaces

Environmental Science and Policy

Volumn 54, Issue , 2015, Pages 505-512

  Sarkki, Simo ^a   Tinch, Rob ^b   Niemelä, Jari ^c   Heink, Ulrich ^d   Waylen, Kerry ^e   Timaeus, Johannes ^d   Young, Juliette ^f   Watt, Allan ^f   Neßhöver, Carsten ^d   van den Hove, Sybille ^b,g  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^b Median SCP   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^d HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^e SCOTTISH CROP RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^f CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY   (United Kingdom)

^g INSTITUT DE CIÈNCIA I TECNOLOGIA AMBIENTALS   (Spain)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Credibility; Design features; Iterativity; Legitimacy; Relevance; Science policy interface

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ECOSYSTEM HEALTH; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; INTERVIEW; KNOWLEDGE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; SCIENTIST; SOCIETY; WORKSHOP;

EID: 84939449424     PISSN: 14629011     EISSN: 18736416     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.02.016     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Armitage D., Marschke M., Plummer R. Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning. Global Environ. Change 2008, 18:86-98.
2. Beck S. Between tribalism and trust: The IPCC under the "Public Microscope". Nat. Cult. 2012, 7:151-173.
3. Blackmore C. What kinds of knowledge, knowing and learning are required for addressing resource dilemmas?. A theoretical overview. Environ. Sci. Policy 2007, 10:512-525.
4. Brundtland G.H. The scientific underpinning of policy. Science 1997, 277:457.
5. Cash D., Clark W., Alcock F., Dickson N., Eckley N., Jäger J. Credibility, Legitimacy and Boundaries: Linking Research, Assessment and Decision Making David. Harvard University Faculty Research Working Papers 2002, RWP02-046.
6. Cash D.W., Clark W.C., Alcock F., Dickson N.M., Eckley N., Guston D.H., Jäger J., Mitchell R. Knowledge systems for sustainable development. PNAS 2003, 100:8086-8091.
7. Clark W.C., Mitchell R.B., Cash D.W. Evaluating the influence of global environmental assessments. Global Environmental Assessments: Information and Influence 2006, 1-28. The MIT Press, Cambridge. R.B. Mitchell, W.C. Clark, D.W. Cash, N.M. Dickson (Eds.).
8. Dabelko G. Speaking their language: how to communicate better with policymakers and opinion shapers-and why academics should bother in the first place. Int. Environ. Agreem.: Polit. Law Econ. 2005, 15(4):381-386.
9. Dilling L., Lemos M.C. Creating usable science: opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Global Environ. Change 2011, 21:680-689.
10. Eckley N. Dependable dynamism: lessons for designing scientific assessment processes in consensus negotiations. Global Environ. Change 2002, 12:15-23.
11. Engels A. The science-policy interface. Integr. Assess. J. 2005, 5:7-26.
12. Farrell A.E., VanDeveer S., Jäger J. Environmental assessments: Four under-appreciated elements of design. Global Environ. Change 2001, 11:311-333.
13. Farrell A.E., Jäger J., VanDeveer S.D. Overview. Understanding design choices. Assessments of Regional and Global Environmental Risks: Designing Processes for the Effective Use of Science in Decision making 2006, 1-24. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC. A.E. Farrell, J. Jäger (Eds.).
14. Girod B., Wiek A., Mieg H., Hulme M. The evolution of the IPCC's emissions scenarios. Environ. Sci. Policy 2009, 12:103-118.
15. GBO 3 Global Biodiversity Outlook 2010, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, http://www.cbd.int/gbo3/?pub=6667§ion=6669, (accessed 11.03.13).
16. Haas P.M. When does power listen to truth?. A constructivist approach to the policy process. J. Eur. Public Policy 2004, 11:569-592.
17. Hilligoss B., Rieh S.Y. Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Inform. Process. Manag. 2008, 44:1467-1484.
18. Hsieh H.-F., Shannon S.E. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 2005, 15:1277-1288.
19. Koetz T., Farrell K.N., Bridgewater P. Building better science-policy interfaces for international environmental governance: assessing potential within the Intergovernmental Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Int. Environ. Agreem.: Polit. Law Econ. 2012, 12:1-21.
20. Kunseler E.-M., Tuinstra W., Vasileiadou E., Petersen A.C. The reflective futures practitioner: balancing salience, credibility and legitimacy in generating foresight knowledge with stakeholders. Futures 2015, 66:1-12.
21. Labonte R., Feather J., Hills M. A story/dialogue method for health promotion knowledge development and evaluation. Health Educ. Res. 1999, 14:39-50.
22. Lemos M.C., Morehouse B.J. The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments. Global Environ. Change 2005, 15:57-68.
23. The Politics of Scientific Advice: Institutional Design for Quality Assurance 2011, Cambridge University Press, New York. J. Lentsch, P. Weingart (Eds.).
24. Lövbrand E. Co-producing European climate science and policy: a cautionary note on the making of useful knowledge. Sci. Public Policy 2011, 38:225-236.
25. MA, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
26. Michaels D. Doubt is Their Product. How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health 2008, Oxford University Press, New York.
27. Murray M. Narrative psychology and narrative analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology: Expanding Perspectives in Methodology and Design 2003, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. P.M. Camic, J.E. Rhodes, L. Yardley (Eds.).
28. Neßhöver C., Heink U., Timaeus J., Wittmer H., SPIRAL Team Concept Note on Common Framework for Case Study Analysis. SPIRAL Deliverable 1.1 2012, http://www.spiral-project.eu/sites/default/files/SPIRAL_1-1_all.pdf. (accessed 14.02.14).
29. Neßhöver C., Timaeus J., Wittmer H., Krieg A., Geamana N., van den Hove S., Young J., Watt A. Improving the science-policy interface of biodiversity research projects. Gaia 2013, 22:99-103.
30. Oreskes N., Conway E.M. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming 2010, Bloomsbury Press, New York. 1st US. ed.
31. Owens S., Petts J., Bulkeley H. Boundary work: knowledge, policy and the urban environment. Environ. Plann. C: Gov. Policy 2006, 24:633-643.
32. Petersen A.C., Cath A., Hage M., Kunseler E., van der Sluijs J.P. Post-normal science in practice at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Sci. Technol. Human Values 2011, 36:362-388.
33. Pielke R. The Honest Broker. Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics 2007, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
34. Sarkki S., Karjalainen T.P. Science and issue advocacy in a forestry debate in Northern Finland. Polar J. 2012, 2/1:125-138.
35. Sarkki S., Niemelä J., Tinch R., SPIRAL team Attributes of Science-Policy Interfaces and their Linkages to Instruments and Mechanisms for Encouraging Behaviour that Reduces Negative Human Impacts on Biodiversity 2012, Deliverable 3.1 of EU 7th framework programme project SPIRAL, http://www.spiral-project.eu/content/documents (accessed 07.02.13).
36. Sarkki S., Niemelä J., Tinch R., van den Hove S., Watt A., Young J. Balancing credibility, relevance and legitimacy: a critical assessment of trade-offs in science-policy interfaces. Sci. Public Policy 2014, 41:194-206.
37. Tuinstra W., Hordijk L., Kroeze C. Moving boundaries in transboundary air pollution co-production of science and policy under the convention on long range transboundary air pollution. Global Environ. Change 2006, 16:349-363.
38. UNEP, IOC-UNESCO An Assessment of Assessments, Findings of the Group of Experts. Start-up Phase of a Regular Process for Global Reporting and Assessment of the State of the Marine Environment including Socio-economic Aspects. ISBN 978-92-807-2976-4 2009, http://www.unga-regular-process.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=20 (accessed 21.08.13).
39. van den Hove S. A rationale for science-policy interfaces. Futures 2007, 39:807-826.
40. van Kerkhoff L., Lebel L. Linking knowledge and action for sustainable development. Ann. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2006, 31:445-477.
41. Vogel C., Moser S.C., Kasperson R.E., Dabelko G.D. Linking vulnerability, adaptation, and resilience science to practice: pathways, players, and partnerships. Global Environ. Change 2007, 17:349-364.
42. Watson R. Turning science into policy: challenges and experiences from the science-policy interface. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2005, 360:471-477.
43. Weichselgartner J., Kasperson R. Barriers in the science-policy-practice interface: toward a knowledge-action-system in global environmental change research. Global Environ. Change 2010, 20:266-277.
44. Weingart P. Scientific expertise and political accountability: paradoxes of science in politics. Sci. Public Policy 1999, 26:151-161.
45. White D.D., Wutich A., Larson K.L., Gober P., Lant T., Senneville C. Credibility, salience, and legitimacy of boundary objects: water managers' assessment of a simulation model in an immersive decision theater. Sci. Public Policy 2010, 37:219-232.
46. Wynne B., Felt U., Eduarda Goncalves M., Jasanoff S., Jepsen M., Joly P.-B., Konopasek Z., et al. Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously 2007, European Commission, Brussels, http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/european-knowledge-society_en.pdf.
47. Young J., Waylen K., Sarkki S., Albon S., Bainbridge I., Balian E., Davidson J., et al. Improving the science-policy dialogue to meet the challenges of biodiversity conservation: having a conversation rather than talking at one-another. Biodivers. Conserv. 2014, 23:387-404.
48. Young J.C., Watt A.D., van den Hove S., SPIRAL project team Effective Interfaces Between Science, Policy and Society: The SPIRAL Project Handbook 2013, http://www.spiral-project.eu/content/documents (accessed 25.04.13).
49. Young J.C., Watt A.D., van den Hove S., SPIRAL project team The SPIRAL Synthesis Report: A Resource Book on Science-Policy Interfaces 2013, http://www.spiral-project.eu/content/documents (accessed 07.01.15).