Çevre politikasında bilimin otoritesi

Bu çalışmada, çevre politikası alanında bilimin rolü, bilimin otoritesi açısındantartışılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada çevre yönetişiminde bilimin rolünün lehinde ve aleyhindekiargümanlara işaret etmek için bilim ve politikanın arayüzlerini (kesişme alanlarını) bilimin ürünleri,süreçleri, aktörleri ve bağlamı olarak çerçeveleyen van den Hove tarafından geliştirilen kavramsalmodel kullanılmaktadır. Çalışmada idealleştirilmiş bilim imajına (akademik bilim veya mode 1)dayanan bilimin bilişsel ve ahlaki otoritesinin post akademik bilimin veya mode 2nin ortaya çıkışıylabirlikte diğer kamu politikası alanlarının yanı sıra çevre politikasında da tartışmalı hale geldiği ileri sürülmektedir.

Authority of science in environmental policy

This study argues the role of science in the field of environmental policy in terms of theauthority of science. The study utilizes the conceptual model developed by van den Hove, whichframes science - policy interfaces as outputs of science, its processes, actors and its context, to pointout arguments for and against the authority of science in environmental governance. The studysuggests that cognitive and moral authority of science which is based on an idealized image of science(academic science or mode 1) has become controversial in environmental policy as well as other fields of public policy because of the emergence of post academic science or mode 2.

PDF

___

Ann, C. and P. L . (2008) ''The Handbook of Environmental Policy Evaluation'', London: Earthscan.
Ascher, W. (2004) ''Scientific Information and Uncertainty: Challenges for the Use of Science in Policymaking'', Science and Engineering Ethics, 10(3): 437 -455.
Barke, R. P. (2003) ''Politics and Interests in the Republic of Science'', Minerva, 41(4): 305- 325.
Raffensperger, C. and Tickner J. (Eds.), ''Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle'', Washington: Island Press: 106 -122.
Bocking, S. (2004) ''Nature's Experts Science, Politics and the Environment'', New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Brint, S. (1990) ''Rethinking the Policy Influence of Experts: From General Characterizations to Analysis of Variation'', Sociological Forum, 5(3): 361 - 385.
Carolan, M. S. (2006) ''Scientific Knowledge and Environmental Policy: Why Science Needs Values'', Environmental Sciences, 3(4): 229- 237.
Carolan, M. S. (2008) ''The Bright - and Blind - Spots of Science: Why Objective Knowledge is not enough to Resolve Environmental Controversies'', Critical Sociology, 34(5): 725 -740.
Christophorou, L. G. (2001) ''Place of Science in a World of Values and Facts'', Hingham: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Cohen, L., J. McAuley, and Dumberley J. (2001) ''Continuity in Discontinuity: Changing Discourses of Science in a Market Economy'', Technology and Human Values, 26(2): 145 - 166.
Collins, H. M. and Evans R. (2002) ''The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience'', Social Studies of Science, 32(2): 235 - 296.
Feynman, R. P. (1974) ''Cargo Cult Science'', Engineering and Science, 37(7): 10 -13.
Funtowicz, S., ve Ravetz, J. (2003) ''Post- Normal Science'' http://leopold.asu.edu/sustainability/sites /default/files/Norton,%20Post%20Normal%20Science,%20Funtowicz_1.pdf (19.02.2013).
Gieryn, T. F. (1983) ''Boundary -Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non- Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists'', American Sociological Review, 48(6): 781 - 795.
Gregory, R., Failing L., Ohlson D. and McDaniels T. L. (2006) ''Some Pitfalls of an Overemphasis on Science in Environmental Risk Management Decisions'', Journal of Risk Research, 9(7): 717 - 735.
Grove- White, R. (2005) ''Uncertainty, Environmental Policy and Social Learning'', Environmental Education Research, 11(1): 21 -24.
Hass, B. and Kleine, M. (2003) ''The Rhetoric of Junk Science'', Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(3): 267- 284.
Hoppe, R. (2005) ''Rethinking the Science- Policy Nexus: From Knowledge Utilization and Science Technology Studies to Types of Boundary Arrangements'', Poiesis and Praxis, 3(3): 199- 215.
Hunt, J. and Shackley S. (1999) ''Reconceiving Science and Policy: Academic, Fiducial and Bureaucratic Knowledge'', Minerva, 37(2): 141 - 164.
Irwin, A., H. Rothstein, S. Yearley, and E. McCarthy (1997) ''Regulatory Science Towards a S ociological Framework'', Futures, 29(1): 17- 31.
Jarvie, I.C. (2001) ''Science in a Democratic Republic'', Philosophy of Science, 68(4): 545 -564.
Jasanoff, S. (1987) ''Contested Boundaries in Policy- Relevant Science'', Social Studies of Science, 17(2): 195- 230.
Jasanoff, S. (1998) ''The Political Science of Risk Perception'', Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 59(1): 91 -99.
Jasanoff, S. (2003) ''Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science'' Minerva, 41(3): 223- 244.
Keller, A. C. (2009) Science in Environmental Policy: The Politics of Objective Advise, Cambridge Massachusetts, London: The MIT Press.
Keranen, L., Lesko J., Vogelaar A., and Irvin L. (2008) ''Myth, Mask, Shield, and Sword: Dr. John H.
Marburger IIIs Rhetoric of Neutral Sci ence for the Nation'', Cultural Studies Critical Methodologies, 8(2): 159- 186.
Kleinman, D. L. (1998) ''Untangling Context: Understanding a University Labatory in the Commercial World'', Science, Technology and Human Values, 23(3): 285 -314.
Kriebel, D., Tickner J., Epstein P., Lemons J., Levins R., Loechler E. L., Quinn M., Rudel R., Schettler T. and Stoto M. (2001) ''The Precautionary Principle in Environmental Science'', Environmental Health Perspectives, 109(9): 871 -876.
Lafferty, W. M. and Hovden E. (2003) ''Environmental Policy Integration: Towards an Analytical Framework'', Environmental Politics, 12(3): 1 - 22.
Lidskog, R. and Sundqvist G. (2002) ''The Role of Science in Environmental Regimes: The Case of LRTAP'', European Journal of International Relations, 8(1): 77 -101.
Lövbrand, E. and Öberg G. (2005) ''Comment on ''How Science Makes Environmental Controversies Worse'' by Daniel Sarewitz, Enironmental Science and Policy, 7, 385 - 403 and ''When Scientists Politicise Science: Making Sense of the Controversy over The Skeptical Environmentalist'' by Roger A. Pielke Jr., Environmental Science and Policy, 7, 405 - 417'', Environmental Science and Policy, 8(2): 195- 197.
Ludwig, D., Mangel M. and Haddad B. (2001) ''Ecology, Conservation, and Public Policy'', Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 32: 481 - 517.
Merton, R. K. (1973) ''The Normative Structure of Science 1942'', Robert K. Merton and Norman W. Storer (Ed.), The Sociology of Science, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press: 267 -278.
Miller, C. (2001) ''Hybrid Management: Boundary Organizations, Science Policy and Environmental Governance in the Climate Regime'', Science, Technology and Human Values, 26(4): 478- 500.
Nowotny, H. (2005) ''The Changing Nature of Public Science'', Helga Nowotny, Dominique Pestre, Eberhard Schmidt- ABmann, Helmuth Schulze- Fielitz, Hans - Heinrich Trute (Eds.), The Public
Nature of Science under Assault Politics, Markets, Science and the Law, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer: 1 - 27.
Nowotny, H. (2007) ''Putting ''The Limits of Science'' into Context, ''Knowledge Production and its Constraints: Epistemic and Societal Considerations'', Gulbenkian Fondation, Lisbon: 25 - 26
October 2007, http://www.helga- nowotny.eu/downloads/helga_nowotny_b58. pdf (19.02.2013).
Nowotny, H. (2008) ''Lessons Learned and Lessons to Learn'', Seminar ''Scientific Advice and Policy Making: Where are We Heading?'', Lisbon, 22- 23 January 2008, http://hel ganowotny.eu/downloads/helga_nowotny_b57.pdf (27.06.2010).
Nowotny, H., Scott P., and Gibbons M. (2003) ''Introduction 'Mode 2' Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge'', Minerva, 41(3): 179 -194.
O'Neill, J. F. (2004) ''Ecology, Policy and Politics: Human Well-being and the Natural World'', London: Routledge.
Ozalina, Z., vd. (2009) ''Global Governance of Science'' http://ec.europa.eu/research/science- society/document_library/pdf_06/global - governance- 020609_en.pdf (19.02.2013).
Pielke, R. A. (2007) ''The Honest Broker Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Polanyi, M. (2000) ''Minerva Classics 1962 the Republic of Science: Its Political and Economic Theory'', Minerva, 38(1): 1 - 32.
Proctor, James D. (2005) ''Science, Religion and the Human Experience'', New York: Oxford University Press.
Raffensperger, C. and deFur P. L. (19 99) ''Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Rigorous Science and Solid Ethics'', Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 5(5): 933- 941.
Rodriguez, V. (2007) Merton and Ziman's Modes of Science: The Case of Biological and Similar Material Transfer Agreements'', Science and Public Policy, 34(5): 355 -363.
Schulze- Fielitz, H. (2005) ''Responses of Legal Order to the Loss of Trust in Science'', H. Nowotny, D. Pestre, E. Schmidt -ABmann, H. Schulze- Fielitz and H. Trute (Eds.), The Public Nature of Science under Assault Politics, Markets, Science and the Law, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer: 63 - 86.
Shapin, S. (1990) ''Science and the Public'', R.C. Olby, J.R.R. Christine and J.S. Hodge (Eds.), Companion to the History of Modern Science, London and New York: Routledge: 990 -1007.
Shapin, S. (1995) ''Trust, Honesty, and the Authority of Science'', R. E. Bulger, E. M. Bobby, and H. V. Fineberg (Eds.), Society's Choices Social and Ethical Decision Making in Biomedicine, Washington D.C.: Institute of Medicine National Academy Press: 388- 408.
Shapin, S. (2004) ''The Way We Trust Now: The Authority of Science and the Character of the Scientists'', P. Hodbhoy, D. Glaser and S. Shapin (Eds.), Trust Me, Im a Scientist, London: British Council: 42- 63.
Shapin, S. (2007) ''Science and Modern Wo rld'', E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, and J. Wajcman (Eds.) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd Ed, Cambridge: MIT Press: 433- 448.
Slaughter, S. and Rhoades G. (2005) ''From ''Endless Frontier'' to ''Basic Science for Use'': Social Contracts between Science and Society'', Science, Technology and Human Values, 30(4): 536 - 572.
Steel, B. S., vd. (2006) ''Ideology and Scientific Credibility: Environmental Policy in the American Pacific Northwest'', Public Understanding of Science, 15(4): 481 - 495.
Sztompka, P. (2007) ''Trust in Science Robert K. Merton's Inspirations'', Journal of Classical Sociology, 7(2): 211 -220.
Trute, H. (2005) ''Democratizing Science: Expertise and Participation in Administrative Decision- Making'', H. Nowotny, D. Pestre, E. Schmi dt- ABmann, H. Schulze- Fielitz and H. Trute (Eds.),
The Public Nature of Science under Assault Politics, Markets, Science and the Law, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer: 87- 108.
Van den Hove, S. (2007) ''A Rationale for Science- Policy Interfaces'', Futures, 39(7): 807 -826.
Wynne, B. (1996) ''Misunderstood Misunderstandings: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science'', A. Irwin and B. Wynne (eds.), Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 19- 46.
Yearley, S. (2005) ''Making Sense of Science: Understanding the Social Study of Science'', London: Sage Publications.
Ziman, J. (1996) ''-Post- Academic Science: Constructing Knowledge with Networks and Norms'', Science Studies, 9(1): 67- 80.
Ziman, J. (2001) ''Getting Scientists to Think About What They are Doing?'', Science and Engineering Ethics, 7(2): 165 -176.
Ziman, J. (2003) ''Non- Instrumental Roles of Science'', Science and Engineering Ethics, 9(1): 17 -27. Ziman, J. (2004) Real Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.