Science in Policy-Making: Neutral Experts or Strategic Policy-Makers?
Science in Policy-Making: Neutral Experts or Strategic Policy-Makers?
复制标题
决策中的科学：中立的专家还是战略决策者？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Muriel Luzia Gschwend
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Ingold;Muriel Luzia Gschwend
尽管许多政策过程和扩散理论遵循科学和技术知识在各种政策领域发挥关键作用的前提，但很少有经验地评估制度和过程相关因素可能对科学在过程中的地位产生的影响。本研究解决了科学在政策过程中扮演什么角色的问题。为了回答这个问题，我们应用了倡导联盟框架（ACF），并通过对四个案例的定性比较来研究三个互补的假设：ACF声称，在政策过程中，科学专家可以采取非常不同的立场，这取决于所谓的政策子系统中行动者和联盟之间的关系是多么冲突或以共识为导向。换句话说，子系统的类型影响着科学在过程中的地位。结果表明，子系统特定因素影响科学代表是在过程的外围行动，还是作为寻求可行政策解决方案的政策经纪人。
Although many policy process and diffusion theories follow the premise that scientific and technological knowledge plays a crucial role in a wide variety of policy fields, very few empirically assess the impact that institutional and process-relevant factors may have on the position of science within a process. The present study addresses the question of what role science plays in policy processes. To answer this, we apply the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and investigate three complementary assumptions using a qualitative comparison of four cases: the ACF claims that scientific experts can take very different positions in the policy process, depending on how conflictive or consensus-oriented the relations among actors and coalitions are within a so-called policy subsystem. Put differently, the type of subsystem impacts on the position of science within the process. The results show that subsystem-specific factors impact upon whether scientific representatives act at the periphery of a process or as policy brokers seeking feasible policy solutions.
为什么整合政策评估如此困难？
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Turnpenny J
通讯作者：
Turnpenny J