Science in environmental policy : the politics of objective advice
著者
書誌事項
Science in environmental policy : the politics of objective advice
(Politics, science, and the environment)
MIT Press, c2009
- : hardcover
- : pbk
大学図書館所蔵 全12件
  青森
  岩手
  宮城
  秋田
  山形
  福島
  茨城
  栃木
  群馬
  埼玉
  千葉
  東京
  神奈川
  新潟
  富山
  石川
  福井
  山梨
  長野
  岐阜
  静岡
  愛知
  三重
  滋賀
  京都
  大阪
  兵庫
  奈良
  和歌山
  鳥取
  島根
  岡山
  広島
  山口
  徳島
  香川
  愛媛
  高知
  福岡
  佐賀
  長崎
  熊本
  大分
  宮崎
  鹿児島
  沖縄
  韓国
  中国
  タイ
  イギリス
  ドイツ
  スイス
  フランス
  ベルギー
  オランダ
  スウェーデン
  ノルウェー
  アメリカ
注記
Includes bibliographical references (p. [247]-274) and index
内容説明・目次
内容説明
An analysis of the role and influence of scientists at the agenda-setting, legislative, and implementation stages of environmental policy making.
Scientists often bring issues to the policy agenda, translating scientific questions into everyday language and political terms. When Roger Revelle characterized Earth as a spaceship in testimony to Congress in 1957, his evocative language framed the issue of our planet's climate vulnerability in a way that technical discourse could not. In this book, Ann Campbell Keller examines the influence of scientists on environmental policymaking and makes the novel argument that scientists' adherence to the role of neutral advisor varies over the course of the policymaking process. Keller divides the policy process into three stages-agenda setting, legislation, and implementation-and compares scientists' influence on acid rain and climate change policy at these different stages over the course of several decades. She finds that scientists face more pressure to uphold the ideal of objectivity as policy-making processes advance and become more formalized, and thus are more likely to engage in advocacy and persuasion in the earlier, less formal, agenda-setting stage of the process. In the later, more structured legislative and implementation phases, scientists-working hard to give the appearance of neutral expertise-cede the role of persuader to others.
Keller draws on theoretical work in political science and science studies and on empirical evidence from scientific reports, news coverage, congressional hearings, and interviews. Focusing on comparable cases and considering scientists' participation in them over time, she offers unique insights into how the context of decision making affects scientists' policy influence and emphasizes the multiple pathways by which scientific meaning is constructed in public settings.
「Nielsen BookData」 より