Science informing Policy – a health warning for the environment
Science informing Policy – a health warning for the environment
复制标题
科学告知政策——环境健康警告
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
T. Knight
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Pullin;T. Knight
环保科学家经常鼓励与他们的政策同行和更广泛的社会互动，以提高他们传达科学的有效性，并证明其对更广泛的社会的有益影响[1-3]。现在，在环境科学家可能与非科学家互动并被理解的方式上存在着重要的文献[4]，而代表性的科学社会和科学的资助者则提供了有关科学家如何增加其影响的建议（例如，美国的生态学会，英国的英国生态学会英国自然环境研究委员会生态学会），在某些情况下，为此类活动提供资金和培训。良好的科学需要为环境政策决策提供信息，这比以往任何时候都更加紧迫，这可以遵循政策社区和更广泛的社会的科学翻译，需要鼓励，但它也需要一些方法论基础。科学家与政策制定者之间相互理解的发展对科学证据在告知政策中的作用对于有效的环境管理至关重要。这种参与可能会提供的更高知名度和更大的媒体覆盖范围对于环境科学和科学家来说可能是好事。原始研究的价值需要可能为此付费的人（纳税人，捐助者）提供更大的赞赏。真正的新颖和开创性的研究应使用熟练的新闻业进行广泛，准确的报告，以向外行读者或观看受众群体解释复杂的问题。但是，与这些积极因素相比，当科学家或既得利益集团竞争关注以提倡一项研究比另一个更重要或有趣的研究时，存在潜在的负面影响。向更广泛的受众传达科学已经是一个行业。现在，许多发行商试图获得单个论文的媒体报道，并总结了专门的关键论文发现
Environmental scientists regularly receive encouragement to engage with both their policy counterparts and wider society, to increase the effectiveness with which they communicate their science and to demonstrate its beneficial impact on wider society [1-3]. A significant body of literature now exists on ways in which environmental scientists might engage with non-scientists and be understood [4] and representative scientific societies and funders of science provide advice on how scientists can increase their impact (e.g. Ecological Society of America, British Ecological Society, UK Natural Environment Research Council) and, in some cases, provide funds and training for such activities. The need for good science to inform environmental policy decisions is arguably more urgent than ever before and it follows that good translation of science both for policy communities and wider society, needs encouragement, but it does also need some methodological basis. The development of mutual understanding between scientist and policy maker of the role of scientific evidence in informing policy is critical to effective environmental management. A higher profile and greater media coverage such engagement might provide are potentially good things for environmental science and scientists. The value of original research needs greater appreciation by those who might pay for it (tax payers, donors). Truly novel and groundbreaking research should be widely and accurately reported using skilled journalism to explain often complex issues to a lay readership or viewing audience. But, along with these positives there are potential negatives when scientists or vested interest groups compete for attention to promote one piece of research as more important or interesting than another. Communicating science to a wider audience is already something of an industry. Many publishers now seek to gain media coverage for individual papers and summarize the findings of key papers in dedicated