It seems to me that we need more comparative study of whether ENGOs are indeed sources of scientific advice and whether their expertise has any meaningful influence in policy-making. I would argue that policy-makers would be interested in crafting policy recommendations that were based on sound science (However, I don't want to get into the debate of science-policy interactions since I am not a social studies of science person and there are people out there who know this topic much better than me).
Warmest regards, Raul
----- Original Message ----- From: "Wil Burns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Leonard Hirsch'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu>
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 5:51 AM
Subject: RE: NGOs and climate change science and policy making
Leonard,
I guess I wouldn't even concede that generally NGOs are more harmful than
conducive to the development of sound science. I agree that in many (most)
cases, they approach these issues from a perspective of advocacy, but that
doesn't mean that they distort their research methodologies or results to
conform to this agenda. Even organizations that I may have agreed did so at
one time, e.g. Greenpeace, have developed very sophisticated scientific arms
that provide critical scientific information in contexts far beyond marine
or cetacean regimes, e.g. in the development of the POPS Convention. wil
Wil Burns, Editor-in-Chief Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy 1702 Arlington Blvd. El Cerrito, CA 94530 USA Ph: 650.281.9126 Fax: 510.217.7060 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.jiwlp.com
We who revel in nature's diversity and feel instructed by every animal tend
to brand Homo sapiens as the greatest catastrophe since the Cretaceous
extinction. Stephen Jay Gould
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leonard Hirsch Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 3:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Subject: RE: NGOs and climate change science and policy making
Will and others,
I was trying (clearly not successful) at not being broad-brush--to quote myself:
" The former is nuanced, but generally negative (NGOs are more
harmful/problematic to science then helpful, supportive only when it
supports them, and then generally using simplistic and simplified versions
which alienates the scientists) and very influential on policy--sometimes."
Generally, more harmful (not always)...
However, your examples bring up what would probably be a very interested
research project which is examining whether there are patterns to real and
perceived impact on science and policy. Are some areas, such as cetaceans
and marine pollution more open to science? But the WDCS, whose work I
admire greatly, is as much, if not more, of an advocacy group than a
scientific organization. The questions they ask, and therefore the results
they get are based not on understanding cetaceans, sensu strictu, but on
making the case for conservation (a concept I advocate). Even their
scientific reports have language such as: "Whilst no quantification can be
made of these threats at this time, they may still be significant for the
conservation of populations." (CETACEANS IN THE INDIAN OCEAN SANCTUARY: A
REVIEW A WDCS SCIENCE REPORT
[http://www.wdcs.org/dan/publishing.nsf/c525f7df6cbf01ef802569d600573108/9c7
6567b8cc72ff080256d2d00301341/$FILE/IOSreview.pdf]
These threats may also not be significant for the conservation of
populations. (Again, I, like the authors, would hypothesize that when
examined, we will find impact--the scientific question is what is the impact
of the impact, not that it is there and should therefore be stopped (an
advocacy position).
It is this difficulty of separating out science from advocacy that I was
trying to (and perhaps now evening confusing more) point out as an issue for
discourse--much more pointalism, not a broad brush indictment.
========================================================== The future is an act of the imagination. (from Ziegler 1987) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Leonard P. Hirsch Smithsonian Institution
New mailing address: 1100 Jefferson Drive SW #3123 PO Box 37012 Q-3123 MRC 705 Washington, DC 20013-7012
1.202.633.4788 1.202.312.2888 fax [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Wil Burns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/06/05 05:10AM >>>Leonard,
I have to say that I find this broad-brush indictment of NGOs' role in scientific research to be rather unfair. For example, I work closely with ACCOBAMS, one of the regional whaling regimes under the Convention on Migratory Species. Several NGOs, including the Whale & Dolphin Conservation Society and the Tethys Institute are the bulwark of scientific research for the treaty instrument, and I must say that not only do I find their work of the highest caliber scientifically, but also not driven by pre-ordained conclusions or particular agendas. Ditto for the work of NGOs in the context of ASCOBANS, the other regional whaling treaty under the CMS. In both regimes, the NGOs work very closely with the members of the parties' scientific committees. I would generally say ditto for the NGOs that have worked with LRTAP. Wil
Wil Burns, Co-Chair American Society of International Law - International Environmental Law Group 1702 Arlington Blvd. El Cerrito, CA 94530 USA Ph: 650.281.9126 Fax: 510.217.7060
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_____
From: Leonard Hirsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 1:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: NGOs and climate change science and policy making
Neil:
From working within the science and policy beast, I think there is a real
difference between NGO influence on SCIENCE and on POLICY. The former is nuanced, but generally negative (NGOs are more harmful/problematic to science then helpful, supportive only when it supports them, and then generally using simplistic and simplified versions which alienates the scientists) and very influential on policy--sometimes. The information they
bring forward, the lobbying they do, the construction of media events that
influence decision makers, the grunt work of crafting legislation, regulation, programs and initiatives is done by many NGOs to great effect.
Clearly, they aren't going to make purses out of sow's ears--ie they are
more successful with administrations and legislators who are prone to agree
with them, but they also work (frequently effectively) in getting those folks to their side.
It is a long term process where empirical studies of specific events generally cannot get the larger picture of the lobbying water torture that
happens.
==========================================================
The future is an act of the imagination. (from Ziegler 1987)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------- Leonard P. Hirsch
Smithsonian Institution
New mailing address: 1100 Jefferson Drive SW #3123 PO Box 37012 Q-3123 MRC 705 Washington, DC 20013-7012
1.202.633.4788 1.202.312.2888 fax [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Neil E Harrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/04/05 09:26AM >>>Henrik:
As the title suggests, the book I co-edited with Gary Bryner last year ("Science and Politics in the International Environment," Rowman and Littlefield, 2004) looked specifically at the relationship between science and policy making in international environmental issues. One of our conclusions in the final chapter is that NGOs have little influence on science or policy beyond getting the issue on the international agenda. In only one issue (the formation and management of a US-Mexican biosphere reserve) were NGOs evidently active and influential beyond issue recognition.
It may be that scholars who look for the influence of NGOs see more of it (and rate it a more significant influence on policy outcomes) than those who look generally at the issue. The authors of the case studies (many of whom are not political scientists) did not specifically seek out the influence of NGOs but looked holistically at the history of the issue. The 10 cases (on issues as varied as mad cow disease in Europe, climate change, dioxins in the Arctic, acid rain, global forest policy, and watershed management) are specifically written for use in class and are rich in detailed data on events and actors. To encourage student participation and discussion they do not draw specific conclusions on each case. The final chapter considers the usefulness of current theories on science-policy interactions and find them all wanting. Gary and I suggest some routes for new theoretical development.
Cheers:
Neil Harrison SDI/UW
-----Original Message----- From: Henrik Selin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:39 PM
To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: NGOs and climate change science and policy making
Hello all,
Can anyone recommend shorter texts (articles, book chapters etc) that examine the roles of NGOs specifically with respect to climate change science and policy making, to be used in class?
Thanks, Henrik S.
Henrik Selin Assistant Professor Department of International Relations Boston University 154 Bay State Road Boston, MA 02215
Phone: (1)- 617-353-5400 Fax: (1)-617-353-9290 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/selin.html
