東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Science in environmental policy: Def...

Roland, Helen Elizabeth.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Science in environmental policy: Defining species under the federal Endangered Species Act.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Science in environmental policy: Defining species under the federal Endangered Species Act./
Author:	Roland, Helen Elizabeth.
Description:	364 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-10, Section: A, page: 3794.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International66-10A.
Subject:	Political Science, General. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3191172
ISBN:	0542347202

Science in environmental policy: Defining species under the federal Endangered Species Act.
Roland, Helen Elizabeth.

Science in environmental policy: Defining species under the federal Endangered Species Act. - 364 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-10, Section: A, page: 3794.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Davis, 2005.

Previous work on the role of science in decision making found that science serves as a strategic resource in political battles, a foundation for social movements, or information that becomes so widely accepted by both the science establishment and the public that policy makers are force to incorporate it into their political calculations. I proposed, however, that scientific information can affect policy in a more direct way. I hypothesized that science qua science is likely to impact regulatory policy if, early in the implementation chain, agencies are required to use "the best available science" in defining critical terms and conditions controlling the application of the law.

ISBN: 0542347202Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017391
Political Science, General.

Science in environmental policy: Defining species under the federal Endangered Species Act.
LDR:03375nmm 2200325 4500 001 1816269
005 20060711082606.5
008 130610s2005 eng d
020 $a 0542347202
035 $a (UnM)AAI3191172
035 $a AAI3191172
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Roland, Helen Elizabeth. $3 1905662
245 1 0 $a Science in environmental policy: Defining species under the federal Endangered Species Act.
300 $a 364 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-10, Section: A, page: 3794.
500 $a Adviser: Donald Palmer.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Davis, 2005.
520 $a Previous work on the role of science in decision making found that science serves as a strategic resource in political battles, a foundation for social movements, or information that becomes so widely accepted by both the science establishment and the public that policy makers are force to incorporate it into their political calculations. I proposed, however, that scientific information can affect policy in a more direct way. I hypothesized that science qua science is likely to impact regulatory policy if, early in the implementation chain, agencies are required to use "the best available science" in defining critical terms and conditions controlling the application of the law.
520 $a To investigate my thesis I focused on the development of the National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS) evolutionarily significant unit policy (ESU) and the joint Fish and Wildlife Service and NMFS' distinct population policy (DPS). Both policies explicate a regulatory definition of "species" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). I found evidence that science played a central role in the ESU policy and, to a lesser degree, in the DPS policy. However, the administrations' management of the agencies assured that the scientific approach would result in restrictive policies. The Reagan and Bush administrations' used executive appointments, civil service assignments and agency reorganization to limit the listings. For example, newly hired agency lawyers narrowly construed the agencies' authority, although broader interpretations were possible. This reading framed the questions that the scientists addressed. While other researchers have noted that lawyers can constrain agency science (e.g., Powell 1999), they do not focus on how the agency interpretation of Congressional intent circumscribes potential scientific inputs. My research suggests that future research on the role of science in policy should. Moreover, administrative control over which scientists developed the policy ensured that future listings would require a higher burden of proof. My research implies that a strong Executive Office can substantively alter a regulatory regime without pressuring personnel to guarantee a specific outcome. Future research on the role of science in environmental policy should address the more subtle control of science which results from a presidential administration's management decisions.
590 $a School code: 0029.
650 4 $a Political Science, General. $3 1017391
650 4 $a Political Science, Public Administration. $3 1017438
650 4 $a Environmental Sciences. $3 676987
650 4 $a Agriculture, Forestry and Wildlife. $3 783690
650 4 $a Sociology, Social Structure and Development. $3 1017425
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0617
690 $a 0768
690 $a 0478
690 $a 0700
710 2 0 $a University of California, Davis. $3 1018682
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 66-10A.
790 1 0 $a Palmer, Donald, $e advisor
790 $a 0029
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2005
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3191172