Abstract
The complex field of forest conservation, like many other areas of environmental policy and management, is considered to be in urgent need of sound scientific expertise. At the same time, the practice of linking scientific knowledge production to political and societal decision-making is a persistent challenge. Rather than attempting to illuminate the (problematic) interaction between science and policy-making in an empirical way, this study adopts a meta-perspective to investigate how the role of science in policy-making is discursively framed. To this end, seven established theoretical conceptualizations of science-policy interactions are presented. For each conceptualization, the underlying rationales are presented first. Then, the ensuing discursive and institutional effects—in the sense of proposed procedural and organizational measures—are discussed. Finally, the study reflects on the question of how practices of scientific policy advice could be shaped in a more productive way if—instead of taking single narrow framings for granted—the role of science in policy-making were perceived, discussed and enacted in a more frame-reflective way.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Åkerman M (2003) What does ‘natural capital’ do? the role of metaphor in economic understanding of the environment. Environ Values 12(4):431–448
Antonelli C (2005) Models of knowledge and systems of governance. J Inst Econ 1(1):51–73
Arrow K (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: Nelson RR (ed) The rate and direction of inventive activity: economic and social factors. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 609–626
Bäckstrand K (2003) Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environ Politics 3(4):24–41
Bäckstrand K (2004) Scientisation vs. civic expertise in environmental governance: eco–feminist, Eco–modern and post–modern responses. Environ Politics 13(4):695–714
Bäckstrand K, Khan J, Kronsell A, Lövbrand E (2010) The promise of new modes of environmental governance. In: Bäckstrand K, Khan J, Kronsell A, Lövbrand E (eds) Environmental politics and deliberative democracy: examining the promise of new modes of governance. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 3–27
Beck U (1986) Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg in eine andere moderne. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main
Beck S (2012) Between tribalism and trust: the IPCC under the ‘public microscope’. Nat Cult 7(2):151–173
Beck U, Bonß W (1984) Soziologie und modernisierung Zur Ortsbestimmung der Verwendungsforschung. Soziale Welt 35(4):381–406
Beck S, Borie M, Chilvers J, Esguerra A, 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
Benford RD, Snow DA (2000) Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Ann Rev Soc 26:611–639
Berglund E (2001) Facts, beliefs and biases: perspectives on forest conservation in Finland. J Environ Plan Manag 44(6):833–849
Berkes F (2012) Sacred ecology: traditional ecological knowledge and resource management, 3rd edn. Routledge, New York
Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2000) Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl 10(5):1251–1262
Biermann F (2006) Whose experts? The role of geographic representation in global environmental assessments. In: Mitchell RB, Clark WC, Cash DW, Dickson N (eds) Global environmental assessments: information and influence. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 87–112
Boehmer-Christiansen S (1995) Reflections on scientific advice and EC transboundary pollution policy. Sci Public Policy 22(3):195–203
Brown MB (2008) Review of Roger S. Pielke, Jr., the honest broker : making sense of science in policy and politics. Minerva 46(4):485–489
Buijs AE, Arts BJM, Elands BHM, Lengkeek J (2011) Beyond environmental frames: the social representation and cultural resonance of nature in conflicts over a Dutch woodland. Geoforum 42(3):329–341
Bush V (1945) Science, the endless frontier—a report to the president. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
Callon M (1994) Is science a public good? Sci Technol Human Values 19(4):395–424
Caplan N (1979) The two-communities theory and knowledge utilization. Am Behav Sci 22(3):459–470
Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson N, Eckley N, Guston DH (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(14):8086–8091
Charnley G (2000) Democratic science: enhancing the role of science in stakeholder-based risk management decision-making. HealthRisk Strategies, Washington, DC
Clark WC, Dickson N (2001) Civic Science: America’s Encounter with Global Environmental Risks. In: Social Learning Group (ed) Learning to manage global environmental risks – volume 1: a comparative history of social responses to climate change, ozone depletion and acid rain, vol 1. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 259–294
Collaborative Partnership on Forests (2007) Joint initiative on science and technology: concept note. Manuscript, s.l
Collingridge D, Reeve C (1986) Science speaks to power: the role of experts in policy making. Pinter, London
Cooke B, Kothari U (2001) Participation: the new tyranny?. Zed Books, London
Council InterAcademy (2010) Climate change assessments: review of the processes and procedures of the ipcc. IAC Secretariat, Amsterdam
Cumming GS, Olsson P, Chapin FS, Holling CS (2013) Resilience, experimentation, and scale mismatches in social-ecological landscapes. Landscape Ecol 28(6):1139–1150
Danielsen F, Jensen PM, Burgess ND, Coronado I, Holt S, Poulsen MK, Rueda RM, Skielboe T, Enghoff M, Hemmingsen LH, Sørensen M, Pirhofer-Walzl K (2014) Testing focus groups as a tool for connecting indigenous and local knowledge on abundance of natural resources with science-based land management systems. Conservation letters online first
Demeritt D (2001) The construction of global warming and the politics of science. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 91(2):307–337
Dunn WN (1980) The Two–Communities Metaphor and Models of Knowledge Use: An Exploratory Case Survey. Knowledge 1(4):515–536
Elzinga A (1993) Science as the continuation of politics by other means. In: Brante T, Fuller S, Lynch W (eds) Controversial science: from content to contention. SUNY Press, Albany, pp 127–151
Entman RM (1993) Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J Commun 43(4):51–58
Ezrahi Y (1980) Utopian and pragmatic rationalism: the political context of scientific advice. Minerva 18(1):111–131
Fazey I, Evely AC, Reed MS, Stringer LC, Kruijsen J, White PCL, Newsham A, Jin L, Cortazzi M, Phillipson J (2013) Knowledge exchange: a review and research agenda for environmental management. Environ Conserv 40(1):19–36
Fischer F (1990) Technocracy and the politics of expertise. Sage Publ, Newbury Park
Fischer F (2001) Beyond technocratic environmentalism: citizen inquiry in sustainable development. In: Hisschemöller M, Hoppe R, Dunn WN, Ravetz JR (eds) Knowledge, power, and participation in environmental policy analysis. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, pp 29–45
Fischer F (2003) Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Fischhoff B (2013) The sciences of science communication. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(Supplement 3):14033–14039
Fletcher AL (2009) Clearing the air: the contribution of frame analysis to understanding climate policy in the United States. Environ Politics 18(5):800–816
Foltz F (1999) Five arguments for increasing public participation in making science policy. Bull Sci Technol Soc 19(2):117–127
Ford JD, Vanderbilt W, Berrang-Ford L (2012) Authorship in IPCC AR5 and its implications for content: climate change and Indigenous populations in WGII. Clim Change 113(2):201–213
Foucault M (1980) Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977. Pantheon, New York
Friedman SM, Dunwoody S, Rogers CL (1999) Communicating uncertainty: media coverage of new and controversial science. Routledge, New York
Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25(7):739–756
Gamborg CH, Parrotta JA, Thorsen BJ (2004) The forest science/policy interface: building bridges to a sustainable future. Scand J For Res 19(S4):1–176
Game ET, Meijaard E, Sheil D, McDonald‐Madden E (2013) Conservation in a wicked complex world; challenges and solutions. Conservation letters online first
German Advisory Council on Global Change (2011) World in transition: a social contract for sustainability. WBGU, Berlin
Geuna A (1999) The economics of knowledge production: funding and the structure of university research. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Gieryn TF (1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non–science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. Am Sociol Rev 48(6):781–795
Godin B (2006) The linear model of innovation: the historical construction of an analytical framework. Sci Technol Human Values 31(6):639–667
Grundmann R (2009) The role of expertise in governance processes. Forest Policy Econ 11(5–6):398–403
Grundmann R (2012) The legacy of climategate: revitalizing or undermining climate science and policy? Wiley Interdiscip Rev 3(3):281–288
Guldin RW, Parrotta JA, Hellström E (2005) Working effectively at the interface of forest science and forest policy: guidance for scientists and research organizations. IUFRO Occasional Paper No. 17. IUFRO, Vienna
Guston DH (2000) Retiring the social contract for science. Issues Sci Technol 16(4):32–36
Guston DH (2001) Toward a “best practice” of constructing “serviceable truths”. In: Hisschemöller M, Hoppe R, Dunn WN, Ravetz JR (eds) Knowledge, power, and participation in environmental policy analysis. Transaction Publishers, London, pp 97–118
Haas P (1992) Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination. Int Org 46(1):1–35
Habermas J (1968) Technik und wissenschaft als ‘ideologie’. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main
Hagendijk R, Irwin A (2006) Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary europe. Minerva 44(2):167–184
Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2014) The ecosystem approach as a framework for understanding knowledge utilisation. Environ Plan C 32(2):301–319
Hajer MA, Laws D (2006) Ordering through discourse. In: Moran M, Rein M, Goodin RE (eds) The Oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 251–268
Hamann A, Zea-Schmidt C, Leinfelder R (eds) (2013) Die große Transformation. Klima - Kriegen wir die Kurve? Verlagshaus Jacoby & Stuart, Berlin
Harding S (1993) Rethinking standpoint epistemology: what is ‘strong objectivity’? In: Alcoff L, Potter E (eds) Feminist epistemology. Routledge, New York, pp 49–82
Hertin J, Jacob K, Pesch U, Pacchi C (2009) The production and use of knowledge in regulatory impact assessment: an empirical analysis. Forest Policy Econ 11(5–6):413–421
Hisschemöller M, Hoppe R (2001) Coping with Intractable Controversies: The Case for Problem Structuring in Policy Design and Analysis. In: Hisschemöller M, Hoppe R, Dunn WN, Ravetz JR (eds) Knowledge, power, and participation in environmental policy analysis., Policy studies review annual no. 12Transaction Publishers, London, pp 47–72
Hisschemöller M, Hoppe R, Dunn WN, Ravetz JR (2001) Knowledge, power, and participation in environmental policy analysis: an introduction. In: Hisschemöller M, Hoppe R, Dunn WN, Ravetz JR (eds) Knowledge, power, and participation in environmental policy analysis., Policy studies review annual no. 12Transaction Publishers, London, pp 1–26
Hulme M (2010) Problems with making and governing global kinds of knowledge. Glob Environ Change 20(4):558–564
International Council for Science (2010) Earth system science for global sustainability: the grand challenges. ICSU, Paris
Irwin A (1995) Citizen science: a study of people, expertise, and sustainable development. Routledge, London
Irwin A (2001) Constructing the scientific citizen: science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Underst Sci 10(1):1–18
Jäger J (1998) Current thinking on using scientific findings in environmental policy making. Environ Model Assess 3(3):143–153
Janse G (2008) Communication between forest scientists and forest policy-makers in Europe: a survey on both sides of the science/policy interface. Forest Policy Econ 10(3):183–194
Jasanoff S (1987) Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science. Soc Stud Sci 17(2):195–230
Jasanoff S (1990) The fifth branch: science advisers as policymakers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Jasanoff S (2003) Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva 41(3):223–244
Jasanoff S (2004) The idiom of co–production. In: Jasanoff S (ed) States of knowledge: the co–production of science and social order. Routledge, London, pp 1–12
Jasanoff S (2005) Judgement under Siege: The Three–Body Problem of Expert Legitimacy. In: Maasen S, Weingart P (eds) Democratization of expertise? exploring novel forms of scientific advice in political decision–making, vol 24., sociology of the science yearbookSpringer, Dordrecht, pp 209–224
Jasanoff S (2008) Speaking honestly to power. Am Sci 96(3):240
Jasanoff S, Wynne B (1998) Science and decisionmaking. In: Rayner S, Malone EL (eds) Human choice and climate change, vol 1., The societal frameworkBattelle Press, Columbus, pp 1–87
Johnson KN, Herring M (1999) Understanding bioregional assessments. In: Johnson KN, Swanson F, Herring M, Greene S (eds) Bioregional assessments: science at the crossroads of management and policy. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 341–376
Jones MD, Song G (2013) Making sense of climate change: how story frames shape cognition. Political psychology online first
Juntti M, Russel D, Turnpenny J (2009) Evidence, politics and power in public policy for the environment. Environ Sci Policy 12(3):207–215
Keller R (2011) The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse (SKAD). Hum Stud 34(1):43–65
Kleine M (2009) Capacity building for effective work at the interface of forest science and forest policy. Mt Res Dev 29(2):114–120
Kleinschmit D, Krott M (eds) (2005) Public Relations for Forest Science. IUFRO Task Force Public Relations; IUFRO-SPDC, Vienna
Kohler-Koch B (2000) Framing: the bottleneck of constructing legitimate institutions. J Eur Public Policy 7(4):513–531
Kosoy N, Corbera E (2010) Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecol Econ 69(6):1228–1236
Krott M (2012) Value and risks of the use of analytical theory in science for forest policy. Forest Policy Econ 16(1):35–42
Kueffer C, Underwood E, Hirsch Hadorn G, Holderegger R, Lehning M, Pohl C, Schirmer M, Schwarzenbach R, Stauffacher M, Wuelser G, Edwards P (2012) Enabling effective problem-oriented research for sustainable development. Ecol Soc 17 (4): Art. 8 (online)
Larigauderie A, Mooney HA (2010) The Intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services: moving a step closer to an IPCC-like mechanism for biodiversity. Curr Opinion Environ Sustain 2(1–2):9–14
Lawton RN, Rudd MA (2014) A narrative policy approach to environmental conservation. AMBIO online first
Leach M, Sumner A, Waldman L (2008) Discourses, dynamics and disquiet: multiple knowledges in science, society and development. J Int Dev 20(6):727–738
Lee S, Roth WM (2001) How ditch and drain become a healthy creek: re–presentations, translations and agency during the re/design of a watershed. Soc Stud Sci 31(3):315–356
Lee DK, Koch NE, Innes J, Mayer P (2011) Emerging issues in forest science. Folia Forestalia Polonica, Series A 53(1):52–63
Lewicki RJ, Gray B, Elliott M (eds) (2003) Making sense of intractable environmental conflicts: concepts and cases. Island Press, Washington, D.C
Lindquist EA (1990) The third community, policy inquiry, and social scientists. In: Brooks S, Gagnon AG (eds) Social scientists, policy, and the state. Praeger, New York, pp 21–51
Litfin KT (1995) Framing science: precautionary discourse and the ozone treaties. Millennium 24(2):251–277
Long Martello M, Iles A (2006) Making climate change impacts meaningful: framing, methods, and process in coastal zone and agricultural assessments. In: Farrell AE, Jäger J (eds) Assessments of regional and global environmental risks: designing processes for the effective use of science in decisionmaking. RFF Press, Washington, DC, pp 101–118
Loreau M, Oteng-Yeboah A (2006) Diversity without representation. Nature 442(7100):245–246
Lövbrand E, Stripple J, Wiman B (2009) Earth System governmentality: reflections on science in the Anthropocene. Glob Environ Change 19(1):7–13
Lund DH (2012) Scientific and local knowledge in the Danish national park process. In: Hogl K, Kvarda E, Nordbeck R, Pregernig M (eds) Environmental governance: the challenge of legitimacy and effectiveness. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 242–259
Martin B, Richards E (1995) Scientific knowledge, controversy, and public decision making. In: Jasanoff S, Markle GE, Peterson JC, Pinch T (eds) Handbook of science and technology studies. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 506–526
Mayer P, Rametsteiner E (2004) Forest science–policy interface in the context of the ministerial conference on the protection of forests in europe: a policy perspective. Scand J Forest Res 19(Suppl. 4):150–156
Meyer M (2010) The rise of the knowledge broker. Sci Commun 32(1):118–127
Michaels S (2009) Matching knowledge brokering strategies to environmental policy problems and settings. Environ Sci Policy 12(7):994–1011
Miller CA (2000) The dynamics of framing environmental values and policy: four models of societal processes. Environ Values 9(2):211–233
Miller CA (2004) Resisting empire: globalism, relocalization, and the politics of knowledge. In: Jasanoff S, Long Martello M (eds) Earthly politics: local and global in environmental governance. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 81–102
Millstone E (2005) Science-based policy–making: an analysis of processes of institutional reform. In: Bogner A, Torgersen H (eds) Wozu Experten? Ambivalenzen der Beziehung von Wissenschaft und Politik. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, pp 314–341
Mitchell RB, Clark WC, Cash DW (2006) Information and influence. In: Mitchell RB, Clark WC, Cash DW, Dickson N (eds) Global environmental assessments: information and influence. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 307–338
Neilson S (2001) Knowledge utilization and public policy processes: a literature review. Evaluation Unit IDRC, Ottawa
Nisbet MC, Mooney C (2007) Framing science. Science 316(5821):56
Norgaard RB (2010) Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecol Econ 69(6):1219–1227
Nowotny H (1994) wissen entsteht im kontext der anwendung’—theoretische und praktische anmerkungen zum wissenschaftstransfer. In: Apeltauer M (ed) Wissen an der börse—bürgernahe wissenschaft in österreich. Bundesministerium für Wissenschaft und Forschung, Wien, pp 31–37
Oh CH (1996) Linking social science information to policy–making. Jai Press, Greenwich
O’Riordan T (1996) Exploring the role of civic science in risk management. In: Hood C, Jones DKC (eds) Accident and design: contemporary debates in risk management. UCL Press, London, pp 182–192
Parrotta JA, Campos Arce JJ (2003) Communication across the forest science/forest policy interface. Forest Policy Econ 5(4):329–446
Perrings C, Duraiappah A, Larigauderie A, Mooney H (2011) The biodiversity and ecosystem services science-policy interface. Science 331(6021):1139–1140
Pidgeon N, Fischhoff B (2011) The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nat Clim Change 1(1):35–41
Pielke RA (2004) When scientists politicize science: making sense of controversy over the skeptical environmentalist. Environ Sci Policy 7(5):405–417
Pielke RA (2007) The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Pohl C (2008) From science to policy through transdisciplinary research. Environ Sci Policy 11(1):46–53
Pregernig M (2000) Putting science into practice: the diffusion of scientific knowledge exemplified by the Austrian ‘research initiative against forest decline’. Forest Policy Econ 1(2):165–176
Pregernig M (2006) Transdisciplinarity viewed from afar: science–policy assessments as forums for the creation of transdisciplinary knowledge. Sci Public Policy 33(6):445–455
Pregernig M, Böcher M (2012) Normative and analytical perspectives on the role of science and expertise in environmental governance. In: Hogl K, Kvarda E, Nordbeck R, Pregernig M (eds) Environmental governance: the challenge of legitimacy and effectiveness. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Pregernig M, Böcher M (2013) The role of expertise in environmental governance: theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence. In: Siebenhüner B, Arnold M, Eisenack K, Jacob K (eds) Long-term governance for social-ecological change. Routledge, London, pp 29–46
Price DK (1981) The spectrum from truth to power. In: Kuehn TJ, Porter AL (eds) Science, technology, and national policy. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 95–131
Pullin AS, Knight TM (2009) Doing more good than harm: building an evidence-base for conservation and environmental management. Biol Conserv 142(5):931–934
Pullin AS, Knight TM, Watkinson AR (2009) Linking reductionist science and holistic policy using systematic reviews: unpacking environmental policy questions to construct an evidence-based framework. J Appl Ecol 46(5):970–975
Radaelli CM (1995) The role of knowledge in the policy process. J Eur Public Policy 2(2):160–183
Raymond CM, Fazey I, Reed MS, Stringer LC, Robinson GM, Evely AC (2010) Integrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management. J Environ Manag 91(8):1766–1777
Rayner S (2003) Democracy in the age of assessment: reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public–sector decision making. Sci Public Policy 30(3):163–170
Rein M, Schön DA (1991) Frame-reflective policy discourse. In: Wagner P, Weiss CH, Wittrock B, Wollmann H (eds) Social sciences and modern states: national experiences and theoretical crossroads. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 262–289
Rich RF (1977) Uses of social science information by federal bureaucrats: knowledge for action versus knowledge for understanding. In: Weiss CH (ed) Using social research in public policy making. Lexington Books, Lexington, pp 199–212
Rich RF (1991) Knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilization: perspectives of the founding editor of knowledge. Knowledge 12(3):319–337
Ronge V (1989) Verwendung sozialwissenschaftlicher ergebnisse in institutionellen kontexten. In: Beck U, Bonß W (eds) Weder Sozialtechnologie noch Aufklärung? Analysen zur Verwendung sozialwissenschaftlichen Wissens. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, pp 332–354
Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences (1987) Knowledge transfer from scientists to decision makers: the threat of air pollution to forests. Report No. 325. IVA, Stockholm
Salter AJ, Martin BR (2001) The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review. Res Policy 30(3):509–532
Sanderson I (2002) Making sense of ‘what works’: evidence based policy making as instrumental rationality? Public Policy Adm 17(3):61–75
Schelsky H (1965) Auf der Suche nach Wirklichkeit: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Eugen Diederichs Verlag, Düsseldorf; Köln
Schön DA, Rein M (1994) Frame reflection: toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies. Basic Books, New York
Scoones I (2009) The politics of global assessments: the case of the international assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development (IAASTD). J Peasant Stud 36(3):547–571
Seppälä R (2004) The future of forest research in a changing world. J For Res 9(4):313–316
Shirk JL, Ballard HL, Wilderman CC, Phillips T, Wiggins A, Jordan R, McCallie E, Minarchek M, Lewenstein BV, Krasny ME (2012) Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecol Soc 17(2):29
Shmueli DF (2008) Framing in geographical analysis of environmental conflicts: theory, methodology and three case studies. Geoforum 39(6):2048–2061
Shove E, Rip A (2000) Users and unicorns: a discussion of mythical beasts in interactive science. Sci Public Policy 27(3):175–182
Skolnikoff EB (2008) Review of Roger A. Pielke, Jr., The Honest Broker: making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Rev Policy Res 25(1):71–73
Snow CP (1959) The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge University Press, New York
Soberón MJ (2004) Translating life’s diversity. Environment 46(7):10–20
Spierenburg M (2012) Getting the message across biodiversity science and policy interfaces a review. GAIA 21(2):125–134
Steinberg MW (1998) Tilting the frame: considerations on collective action framing from a discursive turn. Theory Soc 27(6):845–872
Stephan PE (1996) The economics of science. J Econ Lit 34(3):1199–1235
Stirling A (2008) ‘Opening up’ and ‘closing down’: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Sci Technol Human Values 33(2):262–294
Stirling A (2014) Transforming power: social science and the politics of energy choices. Energy Res Soc Sci 1:83–95
Stone D (2002) Using knowledge: the dilemmas of ‘bridging research and policy’. Compare 32(3):285–296
Sutherland W (2003) Evidence-based conservation. Conserv Pract 4(3):39–42
Sutherland WJ, Mitchell R, Prior SV (2012) The role of ‘conservation evidence’ in improving conservation management. Conserv Evid 9(1):1–2
Sutherland WJ, Gardner TA, Haider LJ, Dicks LV (2014) How can local and traditional knowledge be effectively incorporated into international assessments? Oryx 48(1):1–2
Sutton R (1999) The policy process: an overview. Overseas Development Institute, London
Tengö M, Brondizio ES, Elmqvist T, Malmer P, Spierenburg M (2014) Connecting diverse knowledge systems for enhanced ecosystem governance: the multiple evidence base approach. AMBIO online first
Turner JM (2006) Conservation science and forest service policy for roadless areas. Conserv Biol 20(3):713–722
Turnhout E, Bloomfield B, Hulme M, Vogel J, Wynne B (2012) Conservation policy: listen to the voices of experience. Nature 488(7412):454–455
Turnhout E, Stuiver M, Klostermann J, Harms B, Leeuwis C (2013a) New roles of science in society: different repertoires of knowledge brokering. Sci Public Policy 40(3):354–365
Turnhout E, Waterton C, Neves K, Buizer M (2013b) Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to ‘living with’. Conserv Lett 6(3):154–161
UNESCO (2013) World social science report: changing global environments—summary. UNESCO Publishing, Paris
van Lieshout M, Dewulf A, Aarts N, Termeer CJAM (2011) Do scale frames matter? Scale frame mismatches in the decision making process of a ‘mega farm’in a small Dutch village. Ecology Society 16(1):38
Varner J (2014) Scientific outreach: toward effective public engagement with biological science. Bioscience 64(4):333–340
Ward V, Smith S, House A, Hamer S (2012) Exploring knowledge exchange: a useful framework for practice and policy. Soc Sci Med 74(3):297–304
Waylen KA, Young J (2014) Expectations and experiences of diverse forms of knowledge use: the case of the Uk national ecosystem assessment. Environ Plann C 32(2):229–246
Webber DJ (1992) The distribution and use of policy knowledge in the policy process. In: Dunn WN, Kelly RM (eds) Advances in policy studies since 1950. Transaction Books, London, pp 383–418
Weber SM (2013) Politikberatung - Wer spricht? Dispositive der Relationierung im Feld der Politikberatung. In: Felden Hv, Hof C, Schmidt-Lauff S (eds) Erwachsenenbildung im Spannungsfeld von Wissenschaft, Politik und Praxis. Schneider Verlag Hohengehren, Baltmannsweiler, pp 34–48
Weigold MF (2001) Communicating science: a review of the literature. Sci Commun 23(2):164–193
Weingart P (1999) Scientific expertise and political accountability: paradoxes of science in politics. Sci Public Policy 26(3):151–161
Weiss CH (1977) Research for policy’s sake: the enlightenment function of social research. Policy Anal 3(4):531–545
Weiss CH (1980) Knowledge creep and decision accretion. Knowledge 1(3):381–404
Wildavsky A (1987) Speaking truth to power: the art and craft of policy analysis. Transaction Books, Oxford
Wingens M (1990) Toward a general utilization theory: a systems theory reformulation of the two–communities metaphor. Knowledge 12(1):27–42
Wynne B (1987) Uncertainty—technical and social. In: Brooks H, Cooper C, Cooper CL (eds) Science for public policy. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 95–115
Wynne B (2005) Risk as globalizing ‘democratic’discourse? Framing subjects and citizens. In: Leach M, Scoones I, Wynne B (eds) Science and citizens: globalization and the challenge of engagement, vol Zed Books. London; New York, NY, pp 66–82
Wynne B, Shackley S (1994) Environmental models: truth machines of social heuristics? Globe 21:6–8
Young JC, Jordan A, Searle KR, Butler A, Simmons P, Watt AD (2013) Framing scale in participatory biodiversity management may contribute to more sustainable solutions. Conserv Lett 6(5):333–340
Young JC, Waylen KA, Sarkki S, Albon S, Bainbridge I, Balian E, Davidson J, Edwards D, Fairley R, Margerison C, McCracken D, Owen R, Quine CP, Stewart-Roper C, Thompson D, Tinch R, van den Hove S, Watt A (2014) Improving the science-policy dialogue to meet the challenges of biodiversity conservation: having conversations rather than talking at one-another. Biodivers Conserv 23(2):387–404
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on earlier versions of this paper and Bleta Arifi for her valuable support in the review of the literature.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Georg Winkel.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pregernig, M. Framings of science-policy interactions and their discursive and institutional effects: examples from conservation and environmental policy. Biodivers Conserv 23, 3615–3639 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0806-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0806-3