The differences between the purpose of science and the purpose of policy and the relationshi the two go back centuries. As science and technology became more ingrained and cen of society this inter-relationship has grown but so have the stresses, blossoming in the p Anthropogenic effects on the environment have sharpened the discord between the ‘use o the ‘preservation of nature’. The stress is acute in short-term extractive use which leaves little has collateral damage. The shifting baselines syndrome ensures that present generations know what the environment was like in the past, in both diversity and abundance. This is seen in marine capture fisheries and the depauperation of the ocean.
p between tral to the activities
ost-WW II years. f nature’ and behind and little of sharp relief in erational e Two are ctural gap that on the marine marine living the ocean about the cumented and ic imperative. decision. commitments. t them, but ): . That total vour to the the point of ientists have ure in their bones, then the traditional culture responds by wishing the future did not exist. It is the
hed by the emergence of the scientific one, which
policy gap. r short term s, the gap will continue to exist.
ing into
The science-policy gap is no figment but puts forward a challenge for sustainability, intergen equity and biodiversity preservation. The gap exists for multiple reasons. Some relate to ‘Th Cultures’, problems of dialogue, understanding, integration, and independence. These problems recurring and discussed repeatedly in the literature but they can be overcome, however, as stru elements in the gap they will not ‘close the gap’. It is the deeper, architectural elements of the must be addressed if there is to be any chance of reducing, or mitigating, the human impact environment.
The architectural causes of the science-policy gap and its appearance in the extractive use of resources are political and economic in nature and result in the continuing overexploitation of for short term benefit with little regard for long term loss. Increasingly, scientific knowledge dynamics, interactions, interrelations between species and ecosystems, as well as the do continuing depletion of marine life put efforts to rein in this use in conflict with the econom The functioning of the gap is most succinctly put in two quotes:
… I will remind the authors of my insistence on a distinction between a conclusion and a While this gap may be only inches wide, it is, in my opinion, a thousand feet deep. (Alderson, in Churchman et al., 1965)
The biggest gap exists between commitments and implementation, not between research and (Chairman – the Stockholm ‘Bridging the Gap’ conference, 2001)
There are many commitments for sustainability and conservation, with the science to suppor implementing them is the problem. In Chapter One, I preferred this quote from Snow (1959
But I believe the pole of total incomprehension of science radiates its influence on all the rest incomprehension gives, much more pervasively than we realise, living in it, an unscientific fla whole 'traditional' culture, and that unscientific flavour is often, much more than we admit, on turning anti-scientific. The feelings of one pole become the anti-feelings of the other. If the sc the fut
traditional culture, to an extent remarkably little diminis manages the western world.
It is the ‘traditional culture’ with a use ethic towards the environment that drives the science- Unless, and until, the science behind marine capture fisheries is prioritized, or privileged, ove political and economic interest
This is the heart of the gap: The age-old attitude that the natural world is there for use is com conflict with knowledge, derived from science, that such use must be reduced or halted. Until that conflict is resolved the gap will remain.
The implications and application of this thesis and further directions for research
The implications of this thesis are clear; that most of the works done to try and m
failing for the single reason that they do not address the main source of the gap. As I mentioned earlier, itigate overfishing are f which are worthy,
ce and economic odel, in which it is thought that if
ers will sustainability d out, the rry greater weight4
licy makers’
economics because dations) of the gap. pts to integrate science and policy (another structural element) by using simulations will fail
s had been , (2012) showed
es greater out:
but they’re now couching it lly sustainable
s don’t t who sees the need to really make some
make those tough cisions on.
he political la and Huang oint out failures in the delivery of policy under the influence of these architectural elements as has
d for science he policy ly ‘honest brokers’. But it is an approach that needs definite and
n known for
re doubtful elli, c. 1505). there are numerous and varied instruments that try to address structural factors, all o
but they fail because they do not address the fundamental elements of political interferen interests.
For example, Lawton (2007) discussed the ‘information deficit’ m
policymakers are educated and informed about the science and what it means, then policymak make the correct decision in the spirit of the many agreements and conventions that speak to and conservation of marine systems. As Lawton and others (e.g. Sturman, 1971) have pointe science is not the most important item; political and economic interests nearly always ca and no amount of ‘clearly communicating evidence-based information to the public and to po (Likens, 2010) will alter that situation.
Attempts to alter management regimes also founder upon the reef of politics and fundamentally they all address the structure, not the architecture (or even the foun For example, attem
and management strategy evaluations (Butterworth et al., 2010), address only the structure and when facing the architectural elements. Da Rocha et al., (2012) showed that if ‘drastic’ measure taken in the CFP, fisheries would be far more productive today; while Sumaila and Huang that if the bluefin tuna TAC had not been raised in 1983, the tuna population would 3.4 tim today. However, again the architectural elements are the main issue, as interviewee OP points
Now unfortunately, they’re pretty much stuck in this more exploitative mode,
in terms of sustainability. But sustainable resource management is different to ecologica resource use. There’s some who realise what needs to be done, and there’s others who perhap necessarily want to realise what has to be done, and they’re also very much influenced by the political circumstance of the time. But occasionally you’ll get a bureaucra
strong decisions, but I think we need more bureaucrats and others who are prepared to decisions, or recommend those tough decisions, and for governments to take those tough de I think we’re still some- we’re a long way from that yet.
The application of the results of this thesis clearly lies in the direction of actually addressing t and economic influences that lie at the heart of the gap. Da Rocha et al. (2012), and Sumai (2012) p
Daw and Gray (2004). Even international measures can be compromised as Callis-Suzuki and Pauly (2010) have shown. Lawton (2007) and others (from Ray, 1970, to present) have pointed out the nee
to advocate for ecosystems5, to engage in the process and drive science-led policy decisions. This is a difficult course to steer, despite the growing number of calls for science to engage in t process, rather than being simp
considered action in the near term as change can be slow and difficult, something that has bee over 500 years: ‘It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor mo of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things’ (Machiav
4 For example, there is a substantial amount of research showing clear scientific evidence that ‘no-take’
protected areas (MPAs) are very effective as restoration ecology tools. Canada has 161 MPAs and of th commercial fishing (Robb et al., 2011).
5
marine ose, 160 allow See also: Alm and Simon, 2001; Knight et al., 2008; Fritz, 2010; Meyer, et al. 2010; Schenkel, 2010; Bowman, 2011; Hughes, 2011; Reichert, 2011; Safina and Hardt, 2011
The need for science to engage with the policymaking process as more than ‘data banks’ c far back as 1965, and this leads neatly to the possibilities for further research.
The ‘honest broker’ has largely been the preferred model for the engagement of science with p for over a decade and it is a good model, but equally, since Churchman et al. (1965) ther proposals for more direct involvement, growing more frequent in recent
an be found as olicymaking e have been years. It would be worthwhile to
te 5, above) and validity of g, with d be fruitful. At an even deeper level, the foundations of the science-
olicy results the second most ts. As a structural element in the gap, I have not
lity, research observed neficial but is the ore long ethods for a staged drawdown of resource use for sustainability would be
short term ing a ‘future’ not be ork -Suzuki and , 2012) the eries reases favouring t of basically, on the whole,
* * * *
study this dynamic and examine these calls for advocacy and engagement (see footno develop this model, especially in this present time of unprecedented populist attack on the science (e.g. climate change).On a broader scale, research into the tension between ‘science-led’ and traditional policymakin ‘science on tap, but not on top’, woul
policy gap lie in the human-nature duality and teasing out that level and its relationship with p would be interesting.
A far more critical and important avenue of work lies in ‘short decision times’. This was frequent cause of the gap listed by the survey responden
focussed on it greatly as I was more interested in the deeper, root causes. In terms of practica into this cause of the gap is an imperative. The precautionary principle is widely accepted but more in the breach. Da Rocha et al. (2012) found that fishery closures in the EU would be be ‘drastic’ given the socio-economic impact on the fishing industry. Putting the two together, it political need for decisions that do not affect industry in the short term versus the need for m term sustainability is the driver for much of the short decision timeframes. Research into m longer time horizon policy, perhaps with
rewarding. There is no direct reason why scientific research needs to actually be driven by the policy needs of the present, so seeking a way to disconnect the ‘now’ of policy and creat
research platform to influence and direct policy in the long term is critical; especially one that will subverted or compromised by the needs of the ‘now’ when it arrives in the future.
An emerging issue in all fisheries as the need for changes to fishing practice increases will be w addressing corruption in fisheries. As several researchers have noted (e.g. Hardin, 1968; Callis Pauly, 2010; Doremus, 2010; Peterson and Stead, 2011; Robb et al. 2012; Sumaila and Huang success of fisheries policy lies in the observance of the rules and effective enforcement. If fish management authorities are seen to be corrupt, then lack of observance and rule-breaking inc (Sundström, 2012). Institutional corruption, where the function of governance turns towards industry interests over policy or legislation, will be a fruitful field for research and developmen countering policy instruments.
As the senior policy adviser CD said: ‘…at the top level, you know, the policymakers want to they want to look after the fishing industry and ah, and so on…’
APPENDIX 1
ed, the role of the bureaucracy, the role of the weak
problem where those bureaucrats don’t do it. And I see an cy
here ent Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority now. It doesn’t exist; it has to
d t, the cultural and
o o that again, was
a nt. And
eaucrats acks, and then the institutional
at can are no longer able to. hen you’re talking about Jelly-backs or that level, ‘cause one thing that p