Path dependence has become a multi-disciplinary concept,
employed across various literatures to e... more Path dependence has become a multi-disciplinary concept, employed across various literatures to explain why the past matters for decision-making. Debate within ‘new institutionalist’ scholarship has provided a detailed critique of the term over several decades. Some scholars argue that it is hampered by poor conceptual clarity and highlight its limitations in explaining institutional reform. Yet, this paper demonstrates how neglecting antecedent conditions and associated decision pathways is particularly inappropriate for politico-spatial issues like disaster risk and natural resource governance. Doing so risks omitting key material and perceptual contingencies influencing contemporary institutions. Examining southeast Queensland’s flooding disaster of 2011, the paper proposes that path contingency provides a useful theoretical bridge between institutionalist theories of stability and reform, and the geographic contexts within which disaster risk governance proceeds. The analysis then addresses the potential generalisability of path contingency beyond its application to disaster management, for consideration across a broader range of institutionalist research.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2023
This paper examines the roles for emergency and disaster risk management plans as policy artefact... more This paper examines the roles for emergency and disaster risk management plans as policy artefacts that guide centralised governance networks. Past scholarship has been sceptical of the instrumental worth of these artefacts for informing and elaborating governance arrangements. Some suspect that such plans are purely symbolic devices, mere 'fantasy documents'. This paper examines the role of South Australia's state emergency management plan during the Black Summer bushfires of 2019-2020. The study provides confirmation of the symbolic utility of these plans for central government, while also providing evidence for some suggested difficulties with centralised emergency management networks, about which there is still limited empirical demonstration. Drawing on focus group and interview testimony from senior actors at strategic, tactical and operational levels of South Australia's emergency network, however, we also demonstrate instrumental-heuristic worth of these plans for network actors seeking to make sense of a continually changing bureaucratic landscape, and when reflecting on the value of the network in the aftermath of extreme events.
Evidence-based decision-making has been a focus of academic scholarship and debate for many decad... more Evidence-based decision-making has been a focus of academic scholarship and debate for many decades. The advent of global, complex problems like climate change, however, has focused the efforts of a broader pool of scholarship on this endeavor than ever before. The "linear model" of expertise, despite obvious problems, continues to be a touchstone for many policy practitioners as well as for academic understandings of evidence development and use. Knowledge co-production, by contrast, is increasingly proposed as both the antithesis and the solution to the linear model's difficulties. In this paper I argue that, appropriately considered, both models have their uses for understanding evidence for policy, yet neither adequately accounts for the political contexts in which expert knowledge has often been asserted to address climate change. The paper proposes that the difficulty with both models lies in lingering assumptions about the information value of evidence for decision-making, the sensitivity of decision-making to scientific expertise, and the assumed mendacity or irrationality of decision-makers when they seem to fail to heed expert advice. This paper presents a model of evidence use that incorporates the aspirations of linear and co-production frameworks, while providing appropriate guidance for evaluating the role of expert knowledge in climate change policy-making.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015
This paper provides a report of climate risk management for the city of Brisbane between 1976 and... more This paper provides a report of climate risk management for the city of Brisbane between 1976 and 2011. Using the evidence presented by the Commission of Inquiry established to investigate extreme flooding events across Queensland in 2010-2011, this paper describes Brisbane City Council's ongoing attempts to derive a 'Q100' flood risk management metric as a means to determine urban planning policy. The evidence presented by the Commission demonstrates how the normative decisions that underpinned the Council's derivation of Q100 and which sought to maximise urban development in the Brisbane River floodplain were in direct conflict with State government's concurrent priorities relating to water resources supply and flood risk management. This account of conflicting climate risk management strategies by local and state government demonstrates how the derivation of technical expert evidence can become politicised to align with conflicting priorities, and are then used in a 'scientised' environmental planning process.
Climate security is a burgeoning focus of the multidisciplinary literatures investigating the imp... more Climate security is a burgeoning focus of the multidisciplinary literatures investigating the impacts from climate change. This research theme has gained prominence due to the realisation that climatic changes will likely compromise human welfare and community stability, with significant implications for governments' security agendas. The Indo-Pacific region is an important case study for understanding climate security given its ongoing environmental and developmental challenges and the cultural, political and economic tensions existing within and between neighbouring countries. This paper presents a systematic review and synthesis of academic and "grey" literatures that address climate adaptation, disaster management or regional security in the Indo-Pacific. From this review, we identify four key themes that arise prominently in discussion and analysis prepared by academic scholars, governments and non-government organisations alike. The ubiquity of these themes speaks to the interdependent nature of the adaptation, disaster management and security challenges. The literature is in agreement that maintaining and enhancing climate security in the Indo-Pacific will depend on the region's capacity to strategically coordinate between the activities of governments, industry and communities; the willingness of governments to meaningfully cooperate with communities and each other despite existing tensions; governments' ability to manage limited resources efficiently; and their capacity to identify and address climate-maladaptive path dependencies. We highlight the most popular prescriptions for addressing these concurrent challenges at the current time. We argue that these prescriptions warrant further research and will likely have broader applicability for addressing climate security challenges in other regions of the world.
In recent decades, the label of Climate Denier has become an increasingly popular ad hominem devi... more In recent decades, the label of Climate Denier has become an increasingly popular ad hominem device for climate change communications. Yet, what constitutes climate denial has evolved considerably from its original ascription for those who deny the physical science of anthropogenic global warming. This paper unpacks the multiple contemporary meanings of climate denial to examine whether this moniker can correlate with rational action (i.e. principled action logically derived from reliable knowledge), and how rationality can be deployed for the purposes of pursuing political priorities that conflict with the orthodox normative positions of climate change experts. By better understanding the rationalities pertaining to the climate change debate, this paper proposes, experts and advocates can tailor their communication to more effectively influence the design of effective policies. Valid modes of rationality, the paper concludes, are diverse and not the sole preserve of those proponents of systemic, transformative and/or unified climate change action. Modes of rationality are also intimately linked to problem framing. Experts' scientifically derived problem-frames may actually facilitate Climate Deniers' avoidance of the sorts of rationalisations that experts wish them to make. A better understanding of the ways in which Climate Deniers can be rational and how rationalisation relates to problem framing will be necessary to address the most polarised politics of the climate crisis.
This paper presents a comparative analysis of catchment management dams in Cork, Ireland and Bris... more This paper presents a comparative analysis of catchment management dams in Cork, Ireland and Brisbane, Australia to demonstrate how interactions between municipal government and expert advisors for public infrastructure administration can constrain community climate adaptation. The analysis highlights how neoliberal economic rationalism can appropriate public value choice under the guise of technocratic expertise. Experts are often considered responsible agents for the effective administration of public infrastructure, even when ostensibly technical decisions concerning infrastructure management seem to demand normative, political input. Technocratic administration arising from economic rationalist priorities can thereby exacerbate the hazards presented by climate variability and advancing climate change. Climate risk managers in both cases over‐relied on operating protocols and the expertise of engineers to administer public infrastructure in pursuit of economic priorities. When operating protocols proved insufficient in the face of climate extremes, however, blame was assigned to experts despite their making all available attempts to avert disaster. Through analysis of these cases, the paper discusses the need for normative transparency in expert‐led public administration and better integration of multi‐level governance for climate resilience when pursuing economic rationalist imperatives.
Risk-based decision-making is widely considered to be the best means of presenting the science of... more Risk-based decision-making is widely considered to be the best means of presenting the science of climate change and for developing and presenting climate change evidence for policymaking. This paper examines some of the justifications provided by climate and decision scientists for their preferred approach, and argues that, although risk-based approaches are indeed analytically and instrumentally helpful, they may not always provide the most politically appropriate framework for resolving the politics of evidence-based policymaking. Decision scientists still promote risk-based decision-making under erroneous ideals of linear-instrumental-rationality, even if they have become more circumspect concerning the worst excesses of past technocratic linear-rationality. Moreover, decision scientists have provided very shallow justification to date for 'risk' as default decision framework. A reasonable analysis of the general suitability of risk would include comparative analysis with alternative conceptual frames, not simply in terms of their analytical power, but also their political acceptability in constituencies where particular evidence-frames may be challenged on the basis of their premises, rather than their conclusions. Key words risk • climate change • evidence-based policymaking • IPCC Key messages • Risk-based decision guidance does not fully account for the politics of evidence-based policy. • Decision scientists should avoid conflating the heuristic and prescriptive worth of policy models. • Risk-based approaches should be justified from political analysis with alternate conceptual frames. • Context-appropriate decisions demand context-sensitive conceptual frames for policy-evidence.
This paper examines the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) recommendation for ris... more This paper examines the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) recommendation for risk-based approaches to knowing and communicating policy problems, and its suitability as a general directive for public policy decision-makers and their advisors. Although explicitly ambiguous about what a risk-based approach is or should be, this paper shows how the IPCC's 5 th Assessment Report nonetheless perpetuates ideals of objective risk calculation for rational policymaking. Policy evidence can benefit from context-appropriate problem-framings, as the IPCC concedes. Risk is one of a number of useful conceptual frames for understanding climate policy problems. This paper contributes to climate-related policymaking by describing how IPCC decision-scientists can enhance their guidance to account for the politics of policymaking. It cautions against continuing assumptions or prescriptions for the rational application of objective risk assessment to policymaking, and discusses some of the challenges faced to date by the risk-based approach when it has been applied to policymaking. The paper then briefly examines how we might better situate understandings of risk within alternative conceptual frames to advance climate change policy.
Scientific warnings about impending climate disaster and experts' advocacy for more and better cl... more Scientific warnings about impending climate disaster and experts' advocacy for more and better climate science have been largely unsuccessful for advancing evidence-based policy in Australia. Continuing expectations to the contrary stem from a reliance on the supposed ability of science to prime political understandings of climate change. This paper shows how scientists undermine this 'deficit model' ideal by conflating types and uses of evidence and expertise in policymaking. These tactics are unconvincing for conservative opponents, for whom climate science is far from the last word on what climate change means. This paper examines experts' rhetorical tactics through the eyes of conservative policymakers and, thereby, proposes a strategy more likely to effect resilient climate adaptation and mitigation policies in Australia.
This paper responds to an original research article by Gemma Dunn and Matthew Laing in volume 76 ... more This paper responds to an original research article by Gemma Dunn and Matthew Laing in volume 76 of this journal. Their article describes an empirical study on the demand-side of the science-policy interface, and proposes a new framework by which to evaluate and/or design effective knowledge systems for influencing policymaking. In doing so, they also critique the commonly used CRELE framework, and propose that their alternative ACTA framework better summarises the most important aspects of scientific research for influencing decision-making. In response, this paper highlights some ambiguities commonly arising from the use of CRELE, to which Dunn and Laing have also succumbed, alongside ambiguities within CRELE itself, which they have failed to address. These difficulties highlight how empirical evidence of the sort collected by Dunn and Laing should not alone determine the worth of any knowledge-systems framework. This paper then discusses the dangers arising from a framework such as ACTA, were it to be used instead, and concludes that although CRELE is flawed, it does at least point to appropriate priorities for the use of evidence in public decision-making.
This paper describes the views of participants in the UK’s 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment, t... more This paper describes the views of participants in the UK’s 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment, to provide insights into the development and use of scientific evidence for complex social-ecological policy problems like climate adaptation. Interviews confirm that ‘linear-rationalist’ prescriptions commonly used for the ex-ante policy appraisal of science facilitate processes of politicisation, providing a façade of legitimacy behind which the inevitable normative decisions required during evidence development can be safely made for political ends. The UK’s risk assessment was used tactically rather than instrumentally at all levels of government to garner political legitimacy for various policy portfolios. The tactical or political use of evidence occurred overtly, as an aid during policy advocacy, and covertly through the politicisation of expert knowledge. However, the linear-rationalist assessment method was largely inadequate for characterising climate change problems, for making instrumental use of climate science and suppressed broader institutional learning about climate-related policy-making.
This paper presents a comparative analysis of the use of climate science for adaptation policy in... more This paper presents a comparative analysis of the use of climate science for adaptation policy in Queensland, Australia and the UK. We examine policy players’ perceptions of climate science alongside prevailing political influences on evidence-based policy making. In Queensland, the evidence-based mandate has been weakened by partisan politics so that the political acceptability of evidence is a foremost concern for policy makers. In the UK, the evidence-based mandate is enshrined in the Climate Change Act (2008), yet here too political forces have sought to limit the acceptable use of climate science for policy making. Both cases reveal normative and political tensions in the interpretation and use of climate science, suggesting that important political challenges must be overcome by the scientific community to ensure the ongoing utility of climate science for policy making.
Major disasters, such as bushfires or floods, place significant stress on scarce public resources... more Major disasters, such as bushfires or floods, place significant stress on scarce public resources. Climate change is likely to exacerbate this stress. An integrated approach to disaster risk management (DRM) and climate change adaptation (CCA) could reduce the stress by encouraging the more efficient use of pooled resources and expertise. A comparative analysis of three extreme climate-related events that occurred in Australia between 2009 and 2011 indicated that a strategy to improve interagency communication and collaboration would be a key factor in this type of policy/planning integration. These findings are in accord with the concepts of Joined-up Government and Network Governance. Five key reforms are proposed: developing a shared policy vision; adopting multi-level planning; integrating legislation; networking organisations; and establishing cooperative funding. These reforms are examined with reference to the related research literature in order to identify potential problems associated with their implementation. The findings are relevant for public policy generally but are particularly useful for CCA and DRM.
Exposure to micropollutants can pose a serious risk to both the environment and human health. Alt... more Exposure to micropollutants can pose a serious risk to both the environment and human health. Although sewage treatment works (STWs) aim to reduce levels of pollutants in municipal wastewater discharges, they have become a significant point source of dangerous substances to the aquatic environment. With increasing regulation on pollution prevention, it has become essential to assess STW source inputs in order to control pollutant discharge into the environment. This paper has therefore focussed on developing calculations to estimate micropollutant levels in STW influents. The analysis was carried out using information from published literature, the Water Industry, and monitored influent data. Results demonstrated that, where monitoring data were available for metals and organic pollutants, STW influent could be adequately estimated and validated, with accuracy between 77% and 100%. In addition, based on these calculations and using data for over 600 STWs in England, our analysis showed that compounds such as di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, lead and linear alkylbenzenesulfonate could reach influent levels that could be challenging for conventional wastewater treatment removal.
Path dependence has become a multi-disciplinary concept,
employed across various literatures to e... more Path dependence has become a multi-disciplinary concept, employed across various literatures to explain why the past matters for decision-making. Debate within ‘new institutionalist’ scholarship has provided a detailed critique of the term over several decades. Some scholars argue that it is hampered by poor conceptual clarity and highlight its limitations in explaining institutional reform. Yet, this paper demonstrates how neglecting antecedent conditions and associated decision pathways is particularly inappropriate for politico-spatial issues like disaster risk and natural resource governance. Doing so risks omitting key material and perceptual contingencies influencing contemporary institutions. Examining southeast Queensland’s flooding disaster of 2011, the paper proposes that path contingency provides a useful theoretical bridge between institutionalist theories of stability and reform, and the geographic contexts within which disaster risk governance proceeds. The analysis then addresses the potential generalisability of path contingency beyond its application to disaster management, for consideration across a broader range of institutionalist research.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2023
This paper examines the roles for emergency and disaster risk management plans as policy artefact... more This paper examines the roles for emergency and disaster risk management plans as policy artefacts that guide centralised governance networks. Past scholarship has been sceptical of the instrumental worth of these artefacts for informing and elaborating governance arrangements. Some suspect that such plans are purely symbolic devices, mere 'fantasy documents'. This paper examines the role of South Australia's state emergency management plan during the Black Summer bushfires of 2019-2020. The study provides confirmation of the symbolic utility of these plans for central government, while also providing evidence for some suggested difficulties with centralised emergency management networks, about which there is still limited empirical demonstration. Drawing on focus group and interview testimony from senior actors at strategic, tactical and operational levels of South Australia's emergency network, however, we also demonstrate instrumental-heuristic worth of these plans for network actors seeking to make sense of a continually changing bureaucratic landscape, and when reflecting on the value of the network in the aftermath of extreme events.
Evidence-based decision-making has been a focus of academic scholarship and debate for many decad... more Evidence-based decision-making has been a focus of academic scholarship and debate for many decades. The advent of global, complex problems like climate change, however, has focused the efforts of a broader pool of scholarship on this endeavor than ever before. The "linear model" of expertise, despite obvious problems, continues to be a touchstone for many policy practitioners as well as for academic understandings of evidence development and use. Knowledge co-production, by contrast, is increasingly proposed as both the antithesis and the solution to the linear model's difficulties. In this paper I argue that, appropriately considered, both models have their uses for understanding evidence for policy, yet neither adequately accounts for the political contexts in which expert knowledge has often been asserted to address climate change. The paper proposes that the difficulty with both models lies in lingering assumptions about the information value of evidence for decision-making, the sensitivity of decision-making to scientific expertise, and the assumed mendacity or irrationality of decision-makers when they seem to fail to heed expert advice. This paper presents a model of evidence use that incorporates the aspirations of linear and co-production frameworks, while providing appropriate guidance for evaluating the role of expert knowledge in climate change policy-making.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015
This paper provides a report of climate risk management for the city of Brisbane between 1976 and... more This paper provides a report of climate risk management for the city of Brisbane between 1976 and 2011. Using the evidence presented by the Commission of Inquiry established to investigate extreme flooding events across Queensland in 2010-2011, this paper describes Brisbane City Council's ongoing attempts to derive a 'Q100' flood risk management metric as a means to determine urban planning policy. The evidence presented by the Commission demonstrates how the normative decisions that underpinned the Council's derivation of Q100 and which sought to maximise urban development in the Brisbane River floodplain were in direct conflict with State government's concurrent priorities relating to water resources supply and flood risk management. This account of conflicting climate risk management strategies by local and state government demonstrates how the derivation of technical expert evidence can become politicised to align with conflicting priorities, and are then used in a 'scientised' environmental planning process.
Climate security is a burgeoning focus of the multidisciplinary literatures investigating the imp... more Climate security is a burgeoning focus of the multidisciplinary literatures investigating the impacts from climate change. This research theme has gained prominence due to the realisation that climatic changes will likely compromise human welfare and community stability, with significant implications for governments' security agendas. The Indo-Pacific region is an important case study for understanding climate security given its ongoing environmental and developmental challenges and the cultural, political and economic tensions existing within and between neighbouring countries. This paper presents a systematic review and synthesis of academic and "grey" literatures that address climate adaptation, disaster management or regional security in the Indo-Pacific. From this review, we identify four key themes that arise prominently in discussion and analysis prepared by academic scholars, governments and non-government organisations alike. The ubiquity of these themes speaks to the interdependent nature of the adaptation, disaster management and security challenges. The literature is in agreement that maintaining and enhancing climate security in the Indo-Pacific will depend on the region's capacity to strategically coordinate between the activities of governments, industry and communities; the willingness of governments to meaningfully cooperate with communities and each other despite existing tensions; governments' ability to manage limited resources efficiently; and their capacity to identify and address climate-maladaptive path dependencies. We highlight the most popular prescriptions for addressing these concurrent challenges at the current time. We argue that these prescriptions warrant further research and will likely have broader applicability for addressing climate security challenges in other regions of the world.
In recent decades, the label of Climate Denier has become an increasingly popular ad hominem devi... more In recent decades, the label of Climate Denier has become an increasingly popular ad hominem device for climate change communications. Yet, what constitutes climate denial has evolved considerably from its original ascription for those who deny the physical science of anthropogenic global warming. This paper unpacks the multiple contemporary meanings of climate denial to examine whether this moniker can correlate with rational action (i.e. principled action logically derived from reliable knowledge), and how rationality can be deployed for the purposes of pursuing political priorities that conflict with the orthodox normative positions of climate change experts. By better understanding the rationalities pertaining to the climate change debate, this paper proposes, experts and advocates can tailor their communication to more effectively influence the design of effective policies. Valid modes of rationality, the paper concludes, are diverse and not the sole preserve of those proponents of systemic, transformative and/or unified climate change action. Modes of rationality are also intimately linked to problem framing. Experts' scientifically derived problem-frames may actually facilitate Climate Deniers' avoidance of the sorts of rationalisations that experts wish them to make. A better understanding of the ways in which Climate Deniers can be rational and how rationalisation relates to problem framing will be necessary to address the most polarised politics of the climate crisis.
This paper presents a comparative analysis of catchment management dams in Cork, Ireland and Bris... more This paper presents a comparative analysis of catchment management dams in Cork, Ireland and Brisbane, Australia to demonstrate how interactions between municipal government and expert advisors for public infrastructure administration can constrain community climate adaptation. The analysis highlights how neoliberal economic rationalism can appropriate public value choice under the guise of technocratic expertise. Experts are often considered responsible agents for the effective administration of public infrastructure, even when ostensibly technical decisions concerning infrastructure management seem to demand normative, political input. Technocratic administration arising from economic rationalist priorities can thereby exacerbate the hazards presented by climate variability and advancing climate change. Climate risk managers in both cases over‐relied on operating protocols and the expertise of engineers to administer public infrastructure in pursuit of economic priorities. When operating protocols proved insufficient in the face of climate extremes, however, blame was assigned to experts despite their making all available attempts to avert disaster. Through analysis of these cases, the paper discusses the need for normative transparency in expert‐led public administration and better integration of multi‐level governance for climate resilience when pursuing economic rationalist imperatives.
Risk-based decision-making is widely considered to be the best means of presenting the science of... more Risk-based decision-making is widely considered to be the best means of presenting the science of climate change and for developing and presenting climate change evidence for policymaking. This paper examines some of the justifications provided by climate and decision scientists for their preferred approach, and argues that, although risk-based approaches are indeed analytically and instrumentally helpful, they may not always provide the most politically appropriate framework for resolving the politics of evidence-based policymaking. Decision scientists still promote risk-based decision-making under erroneous ideals of linear-instrumental-rationality, even if they have become more circumspect concerning the worst excesses of past technocratic linear-rationality. Moreover, decision scientists have provided very shallow justification to date for 'risk' as default decision framework. A reasonable analysis of the general suitability of risk would include comparative analysis with alternative conceptual frames, not simply in terms of their analytical power, but also their political acceptability in constituencies where particular evidence-frames may be challenged on the basis of their premises, rather than their conclusions. Key words risk • climate change • evidence-based policymaking • IPCC Key messages • Risk-based decision guidance does not fully account for the politics of evidence-based policy. • Decision scientists should avoid conflating the heuristic and prescriptive worth of policy models. • Risk-based approaches should be justified from political analysis with alternate conceptual frames. • Context-appropriate decisions demand context-sensitive conceptual frames for policy-evidence.
This paper examines the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) recommendation for ris... more This paper examines the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) recommendation for risk-based approaches to knowing and communicating policy problems, and its suitability as a general directive for public policy decision-makers and their advisors. Although explicitly ambiguous about what a risk-based approach is or should be, this paper shows how the IPCC's 5 th Assessment Report nonetheless perpetuates ideals of objective risk calculation for rational policymaking. Policy evidence can benefit from context-appropriate problem-framings, as the IPCC concedes. Risk is one of a number of useful conceptual frames for understanding climate policy problems. This paper contributes to climate-related policymaking by describing how IPCC decision-scientists can enhance their guidance to account for the politics of policymaking. It cautions against continuing assumptions or prescriptions for the rational application of objective risk assessment to policymaking, and discusses some of the challenges faced to date by the risk-based approach when it has been applied to policymaking. The paper then briefly examines how we might better situate understandings of risk within alternative conceptual frames to advance climate change policy.
Scientific warnings about impending climate disaster and experts' advocacy for more and better cl... more Scientific warnings about impending climate disaster and experts' advocacy for more and better climate science have been largely unsuccessful for advancing evidence-based policy in Australia. Continuing expectations to the contrary stem from a reliance on the supposed ability of science to prime political understandings of climate change. This paper shows how scientists undermine this 'deficit model' ideal by conflating types and uses of evidence and expertise in policymaking. These tactics are unconvincing for conservative opponents, for whom climate science is far from the last word on what climate change means. This paper examines experts' rhetorical tactics through the eyes of conservative policymakers and, thereby, proposes a strategy more likely to effect resilient climate adaptation and mitigation policies in Australia.
This paper responds to an original research article by Gemma Dunn and Matthew Laing in volume 76 ... more This paper responds to an original research article by Gemma Dunn and Matthew Laing in volume 76 of this journal. Their article describes an empirical study on the demand-side of the science-policy interface, and proposes a new framework by which to evaluate and/or design effective knowledge systems for influencing policymaking. In doing so, they also critique the commonly used CRELE framework, and propose that their alternative ACTA framework better summarises the most important aspects of scientific research for influencing decision-making. In response, this paper highlights some ambiguities commonly arising from the use of CRELE, to which Dunn and Laing have also succumbed, alongside ambiguities within CRELE itself, which they have failed to address. These difficulties highlight how empirical evidence of the sort collected by Dunn and Laing should not alone determine the worth of any knowledge-systems framework. This paper then discusses the dangers arising from a framework such as ACTA, were it to be used instead, and concludes that although CRELE is flawed, it does at least point to appropriate priorities for the use of evidence in public decision-making.
This paper describes the views of participants in the UK’s 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment, t... more This paper describes the views of participants in the UK’s 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment, to provide insights into the development and use of scientific evidence for complex social-ecological policy problems like climate adaptation. Interviews confirm that ‘linear-rationalist’ prescriptions commonly used for the ex-ante policy appraisal of science facilitate processes of politicisation, providing a façade of legitimacy behind which the inevitable normative decisions required during evidence development can be safely made for political ends. The UK’s risk assessment was used tactically rather than instrumentally at all levels of government to garner political legitimacy for various policy portfolios. The tactical or political use of evidence occurred overtly, as an aid during policy advocacy, and covertly through the politicisation of expert knowledge. However, the linear-rationalist assessment method was largely inadequate for characterising climate change problems, for making instrumental use of climate science and suppressed broader institutional learning about climate-related policy-making.
This paper presents a comparative analysis of the use of climate science for adaptation policy in... more This paper presents a comparative analysis of the use of climate science for adaptation policy in Queensland, Australia and the UK. We examine policy players’ perceptions of climate science alongside prevailing political influences on evidence-based policy making. In Queensland, the evidence-based mandate has been weakened by partisan politics so that the political acceptability of evidence is a foremost concern for policy makers. In the UK, the evidence-based mandate is enshrined in the Climate Change Act (2008), yet here too political forces have sought to limit the acceptable use of climate science for policy making. Both cases reveal normative and political tensions in the interpretation and use of climate science, suggesting that important political challenges must be overcome by the scientific community to ensure the ongoing utility of climate science for policy making.
Major disasters, such as bushfires or floods, place significant stress on scarce public resources... more Major disasters, such as bushfires or floods, place significant stress on scarce public resources. Climate change is likely to exacerbate this stress. An integrated approach to disaster risk management (DRM) and climate change adaptation (CCA) could reduce the stress by encouraging the more efficient use of pooled resources and expertise. A comparative analysis of three extreme climate-related events that occurred in Australia between 2009 and 2011 indicated that a strategy to improve interagency communication and collaboration would be a key factor in this type of policy/planning integration. These findings are in accord with the concepts of Joined-up Government and Network Governance. Five key reforms are proposed: developing a shared policy vision; adopting multi-level planning; integrating legislation; networking organisations; and establishing cooperative funding. These reforms are examined with reference to the related research literature in order to identify potential problems associated with their implementation. The findings are relevant for public policy generally but are particularly useful for CCA and DRM.
Exposure to micropollutants can pose a serious risk to both the environment and human health. Alt... more Exposure to micropollutants can pose a serious risk to both the environment and human health. Although sewage treatment works (STWs) aim to reduce levels of pollutants in municipal wastewater discharges, they have become a significant point source of dangerous substances to the aquatic environment. With increasing regulation on pollution prevention, it has become essential to assess STW source inputs in order to control pollutant discharge into the environment. This paper has therefore focussed on developing calculations to estimate micropollutant levels in STW influents. The analysis was carried out using information from published literature, the Water Industry, and monitored influent data. Results demonstrated that, where monitoring data were available for metals and organic pollutants, STW influent could be adequately estimated and validated, with accuracy between 77% and 100%. In addition, based on these calculations and using data for over 600 STWs in England, our analysis showed that compounds such as di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, lead and linear alkylbenzenesulfonate could reach influent levels that could be challenging for conventional wastewater treatment removal.
Evidence-based policymaking is often promoted within liberal democracies as the best means for go... more Evidence-based policymaking is often promoted within liberal democracies as the best means for government to balance political values with technical considerations. Under the evidence-based mandate, both experts and non-experts often assume that policy problems are sufficiently tractable and that experts can provide impartial and usable advice to government so that problems like climate change adaptation can be effectively addressed: at least, where there is political will to do so. This book compares the politics and science informing climate adaptation policy in Australia and the UK to understand how realistic these expectations are in practice. At a time when both academics and practitioners have repeatedly called for more and better science to anticipate climate change impacts and, thereby, to effectively adapt, this book explains why a dearth of useful expert evidence about future climate is not the most pressing problem. Even when it is sufficiently credible and relevant for decision-making, climate science is often ignored or politicised to ensure the evidence-based mandate is coherent with prevailing political, economic and epistemic ideals. There are other types of policy knowledge too that are, arguably, much more important. This comparative analysis reveals what the politics of climate change mean for both the development of useful evidence and for the practice of evidence-based policymaking.
Uploads
Papers by Peter Tangney
employed across various literatures to explain why the past
matters for decision-making. Debate within ‘new institutionalist’
scholarship has provided a detailed critique of the term over
several decades. Some scholars argue that it is hampered by poor
conceptual clarity and highlight its limitations in explaining
institutional reform. Yet, this paper demonstrates how neglecting
antecedent conditions and associated decision pathways is
particularly inappropriate for politico-spatial issues like disaster
risk and natural resource governance. Doing so risks omitting key
material and perceptual contingencies influencing contemporary
institutions. Examining southeast Queensland’s flooding disaster
of 2011, the paper proposes that path contingency provides a
useful theoretical bridge between institutionalist theories of
stability and reform, and the geographic contexts within which
disaster risk governance proceeds. The analysis then addresses
the potential generalisability of path contingency beyond its
application to disaster management, for consideration across a
broader range of institutionalist research.
employed across various literatures to explain why the past
matters for decision-making. Debate within ‘new institutionalist’
scholarship has provided a detailed critique of the term over
several decades. Some scholars argue that it is hampered by poor
conceptual clarity and highlight its limitations in explaining
institutional reform. Yet, this paper demonstrates how neglecting
antecedent conditions and associated decision pathways is
particularly inappropriate for politico-spatial issues like disaster
risk and natural resource governance. Doing so risks omitting key
material and perceptual contingencies influencing contemporary
institutions. Examining southeast Queensland’s flooding disaster
of 2011, the paper proposes that path contingency provides a
useful theoretical bridge between institutionalist theories of
stability and reform, and the geographic contexts within which
disaster risk governance proceeds. The analysis then addresses
the potential generalisability of path contingency beyond its
application to disaster management, for consideration across a
broader range of institutionalist research.
At a time when both academics and practitioners have repeatedly called for more and better science to anticipate climate change impacts and, thereby, to effectively adapt, this book explains why a dearth of useful expert evidence about future climate is not the most pressing problem. Even when it is sufficiently credible and relevant for decision-making, climate science is often ignored or politicised to ensure the evidence-based mandate is coherent with prevailing political, economic and epistemic ideals. There are other types of policy knowledge too that are, arguably, much more important. This comparative analysis reveals what the politics of climate change mean for both the development of useful evidence and for the practice of evidence-based policymaking.