			Home About us Contact

Scientific Advice (scientific + advice)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Humanities and Social Sciences	40%
Earth and Environmental Science	40%

Selected Abstracts

European governance of natural resources and participation in a multi-level context: An editorial

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GOVERNANCE, Issue 3 2009
Felix Rauschmayer
Abstract Policy markers are looking at two different directions for guidance when addressing the challenges of multi-level environmental governance in the face of global environmental change. First, they are seeking scientific advice to find solutions to policy problems. Second, they are emphasizing participation of the public and/or stakeholders to enhance the legitimacy of governance. In this editorial we explore the challenges of participation in a multi-level governance context, outline a practically relevant strategy for research on multi-level governance of natural resources and briefly outline the key contributions of the five articles that comprise this special issue. The special issue maps issues of key importance for research on multi-level governance of natural resources rather than offering conclusions from systematic comparative studies , the latter is the ultimate goal of the GoverNat project from which the contributions stem. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment. [source]

On scientists' discomfort in fisheries advisory science: the example of simulation-based fisheries management-strategy evaluations

FISH AND FISHERIES, Issue 2 2010
Sarah B M Kraak
Abstract Scientists feel discomfort when they are asked to create certainty, where none exists, for use as an alibi in policy-making. Recently, the scientific literature has drawn attention to some pitfalls of simulation-based fisheries management-strategy evaluation (MSE). For example, while estimates concerning central tendencies of distributions of simulation outcomes are usually fairly robust because they are conditioned on ample data, estimates concerning the tails of distributions (such as the probability of falling below a critical biomass) are usually conditional on few data and thus often rely on assumptions that have no strong knowledge base. The clients of scientific advice, such as the European Commission, are embracing the mechanization of the evaluation of proposed Harvest Control Rules against the precautionary principle and management objectives. Where the fisheries management institutions aim for simple answers from the scientists, giving ,green/red light' to a proposed management strategy, the scientists are forced into a split position between satisfying the demands of their advisory role and living up to the standards of scientific rigour. We argue against the mechanization of scientific advice that aims to incorporate all relevant processes into one big model algorithm that, after construction, can be run without circumspection. We rather encourage that fisheries advice should be a dynamic process of expert judgement, incorporating separate parallel concurrent, lines of scientific evidence, from quantitative and qualitative modelling exercises and factual knowledge of the biology and the fishery dynamics. This process can be formalized to a certain degree and can easily accommodate stakeholder viewpoints. [source]

Understanding fish habitat ecology to achieve conservation,

JOURNAL OF FISH BIOLOGY, Issue 2005
J. C. Rice
Habitat science can provide the unifying concepts to bring together ecological studies of physiological tolerances, predator avoidance, foraging and feeding, reproduction and life histories. Its unifying role is built on two assumptions, imported from terrestrial habitat science and not always stated explicitly: that competition is present interspecifically and intraspecifically under at least some conditions, and that habitat features have some persistence and predictability in space and time. Consistent with its central conceptual position in ecology, habitat science has contributed importantly to scientific advice on pollution, coastal zone management and many other areas of environmental quality, although it has been largely divorced from developments in fish populations dynamics done in support of fisheries management. Commitments by most management agencies to apply an integrated, ecosystem approach to management of human activities in marine systems, poses new challenges to marine science advisors to management. Integrated management and ecosystem approaches both inherently require spatial thinking and spatial tools, making habitat science a particularly relevant advisory framework, particularly because of the unifying role of habitat in ecology. The basic mechanisms behind ocean biological dynamics, productivity, concentration and retention, however, present much weaker opportunities for competition and less persistence and predictability, weakening the foundations of theory and concepts behind current habitat science. The paper highlights the new types of thinking about ,habitat' that will be required, if habitat science is to meet the advisory needs of the new approaches to management. [source]

Eine Lanze für den Sachverständigenrat?

PERSPEKTIVEN DER WIRTSCHAFTSPOLITIK, Issue 4 2007
Plädoyer für eine differenziertere Analyse wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Beratungsinstitutionen
On a closer look, these conclusions are disputable. Therefore, in this contribution we analyse both institutions with respect to different functions of scientific advice such as: (1) operative advice, (2) conception, (3) information of the public, (4) legitimization, and (5) filter. Our approach shows that the simultaneous treatment of all functions by one institution is impossible. Finally, the institutionalization of the German Council is quite appropriate with respect to some functions of scientific advice. [source]

Science,policy guidelines as a benchmark: making the European Water Framework Directive

AREA, Issue 4 2008
Emilie Lagacé
In recent years, a number of governments have made moves towards evidenced-based policymaking justified by the assertions that scientific understanding makes for better-informed and more effective legislative and regulatory decisions. Some of these governments have produced generic, almost step-by-step recipes, for the use of evidence in policymaking in the form of ,science,policy guidelines'. The usefulness of these somewhat linear procedures has not been assessed in the actual process of policymaking. Using as a benchmark the guidelines developed by the European Commission, this paper examines the collection and use of scientific advice in the development of the European Water Framework Directive. [source]