Ethical challenges at the science-policy interface: an ethical risk assessment and proposition of an ethical infrastructure

Biodiversity and Conservation

Volumn 25, Issue 7, 2016, Pages 1253-1267

  Tremblay, Maryse ^a   Vandewalle, Marie ^b   Wittmer, Heidi ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^b HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

Credibility; Ethical infrastructure; Ethical risk assessment; Legitimacy; Science policy interface

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; DECISION MAKING; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE; KNOWLEDGE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84973092352     PISSN: 09603115     EISSN: 15729710     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10531-016-1123-9     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Beck S (2012) Between Tribalism and Trust: The IPCC Under the public microscope. Nat Cult 7(2):151–173
2. Beck S, Borie M, Esguerra A, Chilvers J, Heubach K, Hulme M, Lidskog R, Lövbrand E, Marquard E, Miller C, Nadim T, Nesshöver C, Settele J, Turnhout E, Vasileiadou E, Görg C (2014) Towards a reflexive turn in the governance of global environmental expertise. The cases of the IPCC and the IPBES. GAIA 23(2):80–87. doi:10.14512/gaia.23.2.4
3. Bertok J, Beth E (2005) Public sector integrity a framework for assessment. OECD, France
4. Foucart S (2014) Expert: le contrat de défiance. Le Monde, 11 Novembre 2014
5. Görg C et al (2016) The Governance of Science-Policy Interfaces—Network vs. Platform approach. Biodivers Conserv. doi:10.1007/s10531-016-1132-8
6. Hajer M (2012) A media storm in the world risk society: enacting scientific authority in the IPCC controversy (2009–10). Crit Policy Stud 6(4):452–464
7. Heink U, Marquard E, Heubach K, Jax K, Kugel C, Nesshöver C, Neumann CK, Paulsch A, Tilch S, Timaeus J, Vandewalle M (2015) Conceptualizing credibility, relevance and legitimacy for evaluating the effectiveness of science–policy interfaces: challenges and opportunities. Sci Public Policy 42(5):676–689
8. Huberts L (2014) The integrity of Governance. Houndmills, Basingstoke
9. KNEU Team (2014) A recommended design for “BiodiversityKnowledge”, a Network of Knowledge to support decision making on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe. Leipzig
10. Kolthoff EW (2007) Ethics and new public management: Empirical Research into the Effects of Businesslike Government on Ethics and Integrity. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
11. Larigauderie A (2015) Pollinator assessment: IPBES responds on conflicts of interest. Nature 517(7534):271. doi:10.1038/517271e
12. Livoreil B, Geijzendorffer IR, Pullin AS, Schindler S, Vandewalle M, Nesshöver C (2016) Biodiversity knowledge synthesis at the European scale: actors and steps. Biodivers Conserv. doi:10.1007/s10531-016-1143-5
13. Loosdregt H-B (2004) Prévenir les risques éthiques de votre entreprise: guide pratique à l’usage des dirigeants. INSEP consulting, Paris
14. Maesschalck J (2004) Approaches to ethics management in the public sector: a proposed extension of the compliance-integrity. Public Integrity 7(1):20–41
15. Nesshöver C et al (2016) The Network of Knowledge approach—improving the science and society dialogue on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe. Biodivers Conserv. doi: 10.1007/s10531-016-1127-5
16. OECD (2000) Getting the public ethics right. Observer 220. Online: Accessed 14 Feb 2016
17. Paine LS (1994) Managing for organizational integrity. Harvard Bus Rev 72(2):106–117
18. Treviño L, Weaver GR (2003) Managing ethics in business organizations: social scientific perspective. Stanford University Press, Stanford
19. Van den Hove S (2007) A rationale for science policy interfaces. Futures 39:807–826
20. Weible CM (2007) Stakeholder perceptions of scientists: Lake Tahoe environmental policy from 1984 to 2001. Environ Manage 40:853–865