权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Misaligned or mismanaged? Exploring the role of expectations and tacit negotiations in expert advice - the case of environmental science-policy in the

错位或管理不善？

基本信息

批准号：
2112765
负责人：
金额：
--
依托单位：
University of Cambridge
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Studentship
财政年份：
2018
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2018 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2112765
关键词：
Misaligned mismanaged Exploring role expectations

项目摘要

For my PhD project I intend to study the institutions of advice-giving in UK environmental science-policy. I argue that,over the past few years, the implicit contract between science and society has markedly changed, and yet certain datedexpectations and behaviours about how science relates to policy persist. This is particularly severe in the case of climateand environmental science-policy, which has typically been qualified as post-normal and where many scientists continueto uphold the belief that better science and evidence will lead to better policy outcomes. Existing scholarly work hasexamined the various roles and configurations of scientific and expert advice. However, no one has systematically lookedinto how internally-held expectations shape the ways in which scientists and experts engage with policy advice, and howthese expectations are (tacitly) negotiated. I suggest that such a research project must examine both the politics ofknowledge and the role of communication and knowledge-brokering within boundary organisations involved in policyadvice. I have identified potential sites of study - including formal science advisory bodies (UK CCC and Defra SAC) andinformal science-policy networks (CSaP and NERC Policy Placement Fellowship Scheme). Finally, in order to study thecivic and institutional epistemologies of these organisations, I propose to triangulate three qualitative methods: expertinterviews, qualitative content analysis, and ethnography.

对于我的博士项目，我打算研究英国环境科学政策中的建议机构。我认为，在过去的几年里，科学与社会之间的隐性契约已经发生了显着变化，但有关科学如何与政策相关的某些dateexpectations和行为仍然存在。这在气候和环境科学政策方面尤为严重，这通常被认为是后常态，许多科学家继续坚持更好的科学和证据将导致更好的政策结果的信念。现有的学术工作已经审查了科学和专家意见的各种作用和配置。然而，没有人系统地研究过内部预期如何塑造科学家和专家参与政策建议的方式，以及这些预期是如何（默许）谈判的。我建议，这样的研究项目必须同时研究知识的政治和沟通的作用，并在政策咨询参与边界组织内的知识经纪人。我已经确定了潜在的研究地点-包括正式的科学咨询机构（英国CCC和Defra SAC）和非正式的科学政策网络（CSaP和NERC政策安置奖学金计划）。最后，为了研究这些组织的公民和制度的认识论，我提出了三个三角定性方法：专家访谈，定性内容分析，民族志。