Michigan scientist, ethicist urge scientists to speak out on environmental policy

[Guest guest]

thought we needed to read something positive!

Michigan scientist, ethicist urge scientists to speak out on environmental

policy

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-05/mtu-mse051909.php

Should environmental scientists be advocates for environmental policy? To a

wildlife ecologist from Michigan Technological University and an environmental

ethicist from Michigan State University, the answer is a resounding yes.

" Scientists, by virtue of being citizens first and scientists second, have a

responsibility to advocate to the best of their abilities and in a justified and

transparent manner, " say A. Vucetich and P. in an advance

online publication of a paper in the journal Conservation Biology.

The paper is titled " On Advocacy by Environmental Scientists: What, Whether,

Why, and How. "

Vucetich is a wildlife ecologist in Michigan Tech's School of Forest Resources

and Environmental Science. is an environmental ethicist jointly appointed

in Lyman Briggs College, the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, and the

Department of Philosophy at Michigan State.

" Much of what has been written about advocacy assesses its appropriateness

without adequately assessing its nature, " they observe. In a systematic catalog

and critique of advocacy arguments—pro and con—Vucetich and examine the

nature of several key arguments, including

Scientific credibility.

The ability to conduct objective scientific research.

The nature of science itself.

The personal and professional costs associated with advocacy.

The belief that science and advocacy are alike.

Social harm that could come from a failure to advocate.

All citizens, including scientists, have a moral obligation to advocate.

" Most of the arguments, whether for or against advocacy, are characterized by

some significant deficiency, " they say.

Take scientific credibility, for example. Those who oppose scientists acting as

advocates often say that advocacy undermines a scientist's credibility. Vucetich

and disagree.

" As long as a scientist's work is transparently honest, the scientific

community is obligated to, and almost always does, confer credibility, " they

write. " Scientific credibility is not the same as effectiveness. One may have

scientific credibility and be effective or ineffective at advocacy. "

Vucetich and also analyze and reject most of the usual arguments

favoring scientists acting as policy advocates

" Only one argument seems robustly sound and valid, " Vucetich and say.

That is, as citizens first and scientists second, scientists have a

responsibility to use their scientific data and insights to guide policy

decisions. The ethicist and the scientist call it an ideal marriage of

philosophical ethics and scientific commitment to data collection and analysis.

" Our assessment calls for more active participation by scientists in matters of

policy, " they conclude. " Broad participation will undoubtedly result in

disagreement among good scientists and will substantially complicate the

policy-making process. However, our goal here should not be simplicity, but

rather the betterment of society. "

Mark Hixon, a leading coral reef ecologist at Oregon State University, endorses

the pair's conclusion. " and Vucetich's excellent paper is the first

rigorous analysis of the logic underlying arguments for and against scientists

participating in environmental policy debates, " he said. " The extent to which a

scientist engages in advocacy is a personal decision that should be respected by

peers, given that there are real benefits and costs, as well as

responsibilities, involved. I personally decided that I did not abdicate my

citizenship when I became scientist, so I attempt to live a personal

precautionary principle: The risk of not participating in policy debates--severe

environmental degradation--is far greater than the risk of participating. "

###

Vucetich's research is supported in part by the National Science Foundation

(NSF). The NSF does not necessarily endorse the ideas expressed in this paper.

Michigan Technological University is a leading public research university,

conducting research, developing new technologies and preparing students to

create the future for a prosperous and sustainable world. Michigan Tech offers

nearly 130 undergraduate and graduate degree programs in engineering, forestry

and environmental sciences, computing, technology, business and economics,

natural and physical sciences, arts, humanities and social sciences.

Michigan State University has been advancing knowledge and transforming lives

through innovative teaching, research and outreach for more than 150 years. MSU

is known internationally as a major public university with global reach and

extraordinary impact. Its 17 degree-granting colleges attract scholars worldwide

who are interested in combining education with practical problem solving.

---------------------------------

One at a time or all at once? Get updates from your friends in one place.