Civic Science

Schmandt, Jürgen

doi:10.1177/1075547098020001008

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These same scholar‐scientists and policymakers have gravitated to the concept of civic science/scientists—“efforts on the part of scientists to articulate and illuminate science content in the context of social issues”—as a new and improved model (Clark & Illman, 2001, p. 18; Feldman, Khademian, Ingram, & Schneider, 2006; Lane, 1999; Pielke, 2007; Pielke & Sarewitz, 2005). As such, civic science necessarily emphasizes a multidirectional and iterative flow of information among scientists, policymakers, citizens, and other societal stakeholders for the purpose of reconciling and better managing the supply, demand, and use of scientific information in the policy process (Dietz & Stern, 2009; McNie, 2007; Schmandt, 1998; Scott, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…17–20). Schmandt's (1998) version of civic science “is the process of linking experts and stakeholders in planning social, economic, and environmental improvements” (p. 63), while Pielke and Sarewitz (2005) seek to improve the usability of science through communication, due consideration of institutional context, and the matching of science supply with societal demands (see also McNie, 2007). Welp, Proudman, and Morris (2005), much like Schmandt (1998), and Jasanoff (1990) make the case for a civic science that is more fully and effectively integrated into collaborative participatory decision processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Civic Science and Salmon Recovery Planning in Puget Sound

Weber

Leschine

Brock

2010

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today, science and scientists as experts no longer hold sway as unquestioned authoritative sources of objective information in many policy debates. This has led to growing frustration on the part of government officials and scientists over their inability to have science exert as meaningful a role as they think appropriate in the consideration and selection of policy alternatives. Given this development, what can be done to restore or otherwise ensure that the appropriate science and scientists are integrated into the policy process so that they matter to policy outcomes? There is general agreement that traditional top-down, one-way (from scientists to others), linear models for conceptualizing the role of science and scientists in the policy process are not capable of capturing the changed political, social, and "scientific" realities of the contemporary policymaking context. Many have gravitated to the concept of civic science/scientists as a new and improved model. Yet, despite clear progress in reconceptualizing the role of science in the policy process, there are gaps in the literature when it comes to actual applications of civic science. As McNie correctly notes: "it is essential that we develop a more robust understanding of experience and practical experiments regarding how relationships [and institutions] are constructed and managed across the science-society boundary" (p. 29). This research develops lessons for civic science in the policy process by exploring an innovative collaborative governance effort by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries and the Shared Strategy for Salmon Recovery in Puget Sound (Washington). The integration of science into the salmon recovery process in this case relied on a series of actions that the Technical Recovery Team (TRT) took to bridge the traditionally separate science and policy spheres in order to increase the certainty of science impact, specific steps taken to establish and maintain the TRTs role as an authoritative, credible source of science, and the embrace of a results-oriented, adaptive learning approach.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Civic Science and Salmon Recovery Planning in Puget Sound

Weber

Leschine

Brock

2010

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, civic science can involve citizen volunteers collecting data according to scientists' questions and methods or, more generally, public participation in scientific research (Shirk et al 2012). However, civic science can also include other form of participation such as involving multidirectional and iterative flows of information among scientists, policymakers, citizens, and others for the purpose of designing, reconciling, and better managing the supply, demand, and use of scientific information in the policy process (Dietz and Stern 2009;McNie 2007;Schmandt 1998).…”

Section: The Emergence Of Civic Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

The Value of Practice-Based Knowledge

Weber

Belsky

Lach

et al. 2014

Society & Natural Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These same scholar-scientists, along with many policymakers, have gravitated to the concept of civic science/scientists-"efforts on the part of scientists to articulate and illuminate science content in the context of social issues"--as a new and improved model for integrating science effectively into the policy process (Clark and Illman 2001, 18;Lane 1999;Pielke 2007;Pielke and Sarewitz 2005;Schmandt 1998;Stokes 1997). …”

Section: Rethinking the Role Of Science In The Policy Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A second section develops why the traditional instrumental, linear approach to science is unlikely to work in this case and why an alternative approach to science-civic science-offers promise as a way forward given the overarching adversarial setting, the logic of the problem set, and the ultimate goal of sustainability. Civic science emphasizes a multidirectional and iterative flow of information among scientists, policymakers, citizens, and other societal stakeholders for the purpose of reconciling and better managing the supply, demand, and use of scientific information in the policy process (Dietz & Stern, 2009; McNie, 2007;Schmandt, 1998). Yet, given the adversarial reality of the "societal impasse" in the Selwyn case, additional steps need to be taken in order to create a decision-making context conducive to the civic science enterprise.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science, Society, and Water Resources in New Zealand: Recognizing and Overcoming a Societal Impasse

Weber

Memon

Painter

2011

Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Canterbury Regional Council, which manages 70 percent of New Zealand's irrigated land, has struggled to control the burgeoning demand for water resources as more land is converted to highly profitable, water intensive dairy farms relying on groundwater. At the center of Canterbury's struggle over water resources and its effective management are two competing groundwater science models. The different approaches and their implications for water management have led to a situation commonly described as a "science impasse" with scientists, policymakers, and stakeholders increasingly focused on "how to break the gridlock over science," particularly in one of the region's major watersheds, the Selwyn. In keeping with the traditional logical positivist, linear approach to science the expectation is that if the scientists can get the science right, then the ultimate goal of water sustainability will be made more likely since the "facts" will guide policymakers toward proper decisions. Yet our research found that while stakeholders do focus tightly on the dominant role of science and scientists when discussing solutions to the impasse, the underlying reality is a societal impasse grounded in the overarching adversarial setting, the logic of the wicked problem set, and the ultimate goal of sustainability. Seeing the "impasse problem" from this new perspective means that getting only the physical science right addresses the symptoms, not the underlying causes of the impasse. The article develops why the traditional instrumental, linear approach to science is unlikely to work in this case and why an alternative approach to science-civic science-offers promise as a way forward. A final section turns to the kind of steps most likely required to transition the Selwyn watershed's "societal impasse" dynamic from an adversarial setting to an effective collaborative governance arrangement conducive to the civic science enterprise. Regional Council-Environment Canterbury (ECan)-which manages 70 percent of NZ's irrigated land using 60% of all water allocated for consumptive use in NZ, is no exception. In the Selwyn watershed of Central Canterbury, ECan has struggled to control the burgeoning demand for water as more dryland farms (mainly sheep) and plantation forests are converted to more profitable water intensive dairy farms relying on irrigation from groundwater. These trends coincide with a period of lower than average rainfall. The result is that lowland streams now experience low or no flows for significant portions of the year.At the center of Canterbury's struggle over water resource management is the science that maps the hydrogeological characteristics of the region. Most dairy farmers, irrigators, and developers prefer a physical processes computer modeling approach--the "Aqualinc" groundwater model. The idea of an impasse runs contrary to the traditional logical positivist, linear approach to science in the policy process that is based on a rational planning model. Implicit to this line of reasoning is the bel...

show abstract

Civic Science

Cited by 16 publications

References 2 publications

Civic Science and Salmon Recovery Planning in Puget Sound

Civic Science and Salmon Recovery Planning in Puget Sound

The Value of Practice-Based Knowledge

Science, Society, and Water Resources in New Zealand: Recognizing and Overcoming a Societal Impasse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About