Science-Policy Interface: Scientific Input Limited

Sue Briggs, Andrew Knight

    Research output: Contribution to journalLetter

    16 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    THE POLICY FORUM ABOUT THE PROPOSED Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) by C. Perrings et al. (⿿The biodiversity and ecosystem services science-policy interface,� 4 March, p. 1139) refers to the role of the Platform in strengthening the science-policy interface in biodiversity and ecosystem services, but does not address the fact that science policy formation does not depend solely on scientifi c facts. In practice, policy is formed through the intermingling of scientifi c knowledge, political judgment, and practical considerations (1, 2). Establishing an institution to identify information, perform assessments, identify tools, prioritize capacity-building (3), and evaluate policy options will not necessarily provide a ⿿robust ⿦ science/policy interface� (4) because the science-policy interface is turbulent (5), not linear (1, 2, 6), and scientifi c input plays only a small role. The scientifi c information that policy-makers need derives from policy and political processes, not from scientists⿿ perceptions. The sciencepolicy interface can be bridged only when scientists understand this policy process and work with policy-makers to reduce political and policy risk, rather than simply providing scientifi c facts. IPBES has not met yet (the fi rst plenary session is scheduled in October 2011). Undoubtedly, IPBES will contribute to global understanding of biodiversity and ecosystem services, but the effectiveness of the Platform in operating across the sciencepolicy interface will depend on how well thescientists associated with IPBES understand the nature of policy.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)696-697
    Number of pages2
    JournalScience
    Volume333
    Issue number6043
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Fingerprint

    Biodiversity
    Administrative Personnel
    Ecosystem
    Capacity Building

    Cite this

    Briggs, Sue ; Knight, Andrew. / Science-Policy Interface: Scientific Input Limited. In: Science. 2011 ; Vol. 333, No. 6043. pp. 696-697.
    @article{eb9c972e09514d1fb68d320faefe4e02,
    title = "Science-Policy Interface: Scientific Input Limited",
    abstract = "THE POLICY FORUM ABOUT THE PROPOSED Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) by C. Perrings et al. ({\^a}¿¿The biodiversity and ecosystem services science-policy interface,{\^a}¿� 4 March, p. 1139) refers to the role of the Platform in strengthening the science-policy interface in biodiversity and ecosystem services, but does not address the fact that science policy formation does not depend solely on scientifi c facts. In practice, policy is formed through the intermingling of scientifi c knowledge, political judgment, and practical considerations (1, 2). Establishing an institution to identify information, perform assessments, identify tools, prioritize capacity-building (3), and evaluate policy options will not necessarily provide a {\^a}¿¿robust {\^a}¿¦ science/policy interface{\^a}¿� (4) because the science-policy interface is turbulent (5), not linear (1, 2, 6), and scientifi c input plays only a small role. The scientifi c information that policy-makers need derives from policy and political processes, not from scientists{\^a}¿¿ perceptions. The sciencepolicy interface can be bridged only when scientists understand this policy process and work with policy-makers to reduce political and policy risk, rather than simply providing scientifi c facts. IPBES has not met yet (the fi rst plenary session is scheduled in October 2011). Undoubtedly, IPBES will contribute to global understanding of biodiversity and ecosystem services, but the effectiveness of the Platform in operating across the sciencepolicy interface will depend on how well thescientists associated with IPBES understand the nature of policy.",
    author = "Sue Briggs and Andrew Knight",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.1126/science.333.6043.696-b",
    language = "English",
    volume = "333",
    pages = "696--697",
    journal = "The Scientific monthly",
    issn = "0036-8075",
    publisher = "American Association for the Advancement of Science",
    number = "6043",

    }

    Science-Policy Interface: Scientific Input Limited. / Briggs, Sue; Knight, Andrew.

    In: Science, Vol. 333, No. 6043, 2011, p. 696-697.

    Research output: Contribution to journalLetter

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Science-Policy Interface: Scientific Input Limited

    AU - Briggs, Sue

    AU - Knight, Andrew

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - THE POLICY FORUM ABOUT THE PROPOSED Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) by C. Perrings et al. (⿿The biodiversity and ecosystem services science-policy interface,� 4 March, p. 1139) refers to the role of the Platform in strengthening the science-policy interface in biodiversity and ecosystem services, but does not address the fact that science policy formation does not depend solely on scientifi c facts. In practice, policy is formed through the intermingling of scientifi c knowledge, political judgment, and practical considerations (1, 2). Establishing an institution to identify information, perform assessments, identify tools, prioritize capacity-building (3), and evaluate policy options will not necessarily provide a ⿿robust ⿦ science/policy interface� (4) because the science-policy interface is turbulent (5), not linear (1, 2, 6), and scientifi c input plays only a small role. The scientifi c information that policy-makers need derives from policy and political processes, not from scientists⿿ perceptions. The sciencepolicy interface can be bridged only when scientists understand this policy process and work with policy-makers to reduce political and policy risk, rather than simply providing scientifi c facts. IPBES has not met yet (the fi rst plenary session is scheduled in October 2011). Undoubtedly, IPBES will contribute to global understanding of biodiversity and ecosystem services, but the effectiveness of the Platform in operating across the sciencepolicy interface will depend on how well thescientists associated with IPBES understand the nature of policy.

    AB - THE POLICY FORUM ABOUT THE PROPOSED Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) by C. Perrings et al. (⿿The biodiversity and ecosystem services science-policy interface,� 4 March, p. 1139) refers to the role of the Platform in strengthening the science-policy interface in biodiversity and ecosystem services, but does not address the fact that science policy formation does not depend solely on scientifi c facts. In practice, policy is formed through the intermingling of scientifi c knowledge, political judgment, and practical considerations (1, 2). Establishing an institution to identify information, perform assessments, identify tools, prioritize capacity-building (3), and evaluate policy options will not necessarily provide a ⿿robust ⿦ science/policy interface� (4) because the science-policy interface is turbulent (5), not linear (1, 2, 6), and scientifi c input plays only a small role. The scientifi c information that policy-makers need derives from policy and political processes, not from scientists⿿ perceptions. The sciencepolicy interface can be bridged only when scientists understand this policy process and work with policy-makers to reduce political and policy risk, rather than simply providing scientifi c facts. IPBES has not met yet (the fi rst plenary session is scheduled in October 2011). Undoubtedly, IPBES will contribute to global understanding of biodiversity and ecosystem services, but the effectiveness of the Platform in operating across the sciencepolicy interface will depend on how well thescientists associated with IPBES understand the nature of policy.

    U2 - 10.1126/science.333.6043.696-b

    DO - 10.1126/science.333.6043.696-b

    M3 - Letter

    VL - 333

    SP - 696

    EP - 697

    JO - The Scientific monthly

    JF - The Scientific monthly

    SN - 0036-8075

    IS - 6043

    ER -