Collaborative Research: Assessing Assessments: A Historical and Philosophical Study of Scientific Assessments for Environmental Policy in the Late 20th Century

合作研究：评估评估：20世纪末环境政策科学评估的历史和哲学研究

• 批准号: 0957270
• 负责人: Naomi Oreskes
• 金额: $ 34.24万
• 依托单位: University of California-San Diego
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2010
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2010-08-01 至 2013-10-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0957270&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Collaborative; Research; Assessing; Assessments; Historical

Assessing Assessments: A Historical and Philosophical Study of Scientific Assessments for Environmental Policy in the late 20th CenturyIntellectual meritThis project investigates the process by which scientists attempt to assess and summarize--accurately, fairly, objectively--the scientific knowledge that society needs to make informed judgments about complex issues. How do scientists evaluate the reliability of their colleagues? research, understand its limits and degrees of uncertainty, and come to consensus (or not)? How do scientists respond to the subtle or overt pressures that arise when they know the world is watching the outcome of the process? What factors internal to the process may lead to systematic bias, error, or distortion? Periodically, scientists come together to present scientific information at the request of policy-makers and for the benefit of the general public, particularly in the area of environmental science relevant to policy. Recent examples include the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, the Ozone Trends Panel, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, organized to summarize and assess the state of the art with respect to acid rain, global ozone depletion, and anthropogenic climate change, respectively. Such assessments consume large amounts of time, money, and manpower, and they can play a major role in policy debates. Therefore, it is important to understand how they work (or fail to work). Yet, few scholars have studied them. Broader ImpactUnderstanding the internal dynamics of the assessment process puts us in a better position to judge the quality of any particular assessment, as well as to suggest potential means of improvement, and, ultimately, to provide an improved foundation for science-based policy. The presumption that assessments should influence policy assumes that the quality of these assessments is high, but that assumption has rarely been closely examined.

评估评估：对20世纪后期的环境政策的科学评估的历史和哲学研究，该项目调查了科学家试图评估和总结社会所需的科学知识的科学家试图进行评估和总结的过程，即社会需要做出有关复杂问题的知情判断的科学知识。科学家如何评估同事的可靠性？研究，了解其不确定性的限制和程度，并达成共识（或未达成）？ 当科学家知道世界正在观察过程的结果时，他们如何应对微妙或明显的压力？该过程内部的哪些因素可能导致系统的偏见，错误或失真？定期，科学家应政策制定者的要求和公众的利益，特别是在与政策相关的环境科学领域的益处，共同提出科学信息。 最近的例子包括国家酸降水评估计划，臭氧趋势面板和气候变化的政府间小组，分别组织以总结和评估有关酸雨，全球臭氧耗竭和人为气候变化的艺术状态。 这种评估会消耗大量时间，金钱和人力，并且可以在政策辩论中发挥重要作用。因此，重要的是要了解它们的工作方式（或无法工作）。然而，很少有学者研究它们。 对评估过程的内部动态的更广泛的影响使我们有了更好的位置来判断任何特定评估的质量，并提出潜在的改进手段，并最终为基于科学的政策提供改进的基础。评估应影响政策的推定假定这些评估的质量很高，但是该假设很少受到仔细检查。