Yes, that's policy-biased science!
Friend and colleague Dr. Robert T. 'Bob' Lackey, one of the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to science, policy, and a whole host of other things, gave this presentation to my hydrology class yesterday:
Download Lackey-GEOG-424-524-Lecture-January-24-2017
He also provided the following short article, 'Keep Science and Scientists Credible: Avoid Stealth Policy Advocacy':
Download 2016a-Keep-Science-and-Scientists-Credible-Reprint-Lackey
He always make me think when I hear him speak or read his work - more so than
most others I encounter,
Good stuff!
Enjoy!
"Scientists has much to offer the public and decision-makers, but also have much to lose when they practice stealth policy advocacy." - Robert T. Lackey
Good points and I appreciate the feedback.
Certainly, recognition of the danger of the slippage of regular (traditional) science into normative science has been around at least since Francis Bacon popularized the notion of the scientific method several centuries ago. Terminology tends to be variable, but the challenge to scientists of keeping policy preferences out of their science has long been recognized.
These days, many policy advocacy organizations and their staffs and members often attempt to wrap their advocacy pitch in science. This creates the well-known “advocate masquerading as scientist” phenomenon, similar to the parallel “advocacy masquerading as science” advocacy tactic. Many advocacy organizations even incorporate “science” and “scientist” in their names. They do this because science can, and often is, an effective weapon in policy and political debates. Most non-scientists never detect such a misuse of science. Here is a plenary talk addressing this problem:
https://media.oregonstate.edu/media/t/0_ttqin3fl/2528402
Posted by: Robert Lackey | Sunday, 29 January 2017 at 07:20 PM
The science is possible for politics of decisions making also. Unfortunately, it is still out attention or affords of mainstream researchers in the country. The mainstream researchers may be defined as researchers who are successful in stream of the government funding.
The basic publication on the topic is: Boulding, K. E. 1956 “General Systems Theory — The Skeleton Of Science”. Management Science, 2(3): 197-208.
Posted by: Boris | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 01:24 PM
So I assume that Dr. Lackey does not support the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Posted by: Jesse Richardson | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:33 PM
…The author of this presentation notes … “information gathered in a rational, systematic, testable, and reproducible manner”… which as written is all well and good … but … sorry to rain on anyone’s parade… but...in all my 30 plus years of involvement in ARIZONA with water and sewage issues I continue to find in this INFORMATION gathering stage a primary player is almost always never invited to the table…. “WE”- the people …. And I recognize from my own experience that when “WE” are part of the mix … “WE” make the process messy, time consuming which is an anathema to all bureaucracy…
...I am still waiting for anyone to inform me how any plan can be authentically implemented and adhered to when that sector upon which all rules and regulations fall are NOT part of the process…???
Posted by: PAUL MILLER | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 08:24 AM