 Partners : |
GreenFacts2003 ConferenceAnnoncement - Schedule - Workshop Themes - Press - Proceedings - Photos Conveying Science into PolicyScience Communication and Environmental Decision-makingat the Atomium, in Brussels, 16 October 2003. Conference Workshop QuestionsLast update: 14 October 2003 Workshop 1: How should Science be Communicated (and by whom) ? Moderator: Mia Nybrant (The Scientific Alliance) Who communicates scientific information, and how?
How well have scientists communicated their information to non-specialists? What measures should be taken to alleviate the general public’s fears when scientists openly disagree? What are some mechanisms to communicate science to a wider public (success stories, bad experiences, lessons learnt)? What new communication solutions do we need to develop to ensure it? In a multi-stakeholder environmental governance structure, how balanced is the communication of scientific information? Has the funding of research interfered with its communication?
(Has the patent replaced the peer review?) Moderator: Alexandre de Lichtervelde (Belgian Federal Ministry of the Environment) Introduction by Clare Coffey (Institute of European Environmental
Policy) General environmental governance issues 1. What is the role of governments vis-à-vis the environment
2. What are the policy instruments that governments have used or could use for effecting environmental policy? Taxes, trade barriers, penalties, incentives … 3. What is the role of the stakeholders? Where, When and How should policymakers consult stakeholders (and which stakeholders)? REACH and Kyoto are too recent examples to be evaluated. Science and policymaking 4. How should a governmental, intergovernmental or EU body select its scientific advice? 5. When there is scientific disagreement, what should policymakers do? 6. What can be done when clear scientific advice is not followed
by policymakers? How much value should scientific evidence be given
in relation to other political factors (cultural, historical, economic …)? 7. At the EU level, how can compliance be better enforced? Should the role of the EEA be expanded, or another EPA-style body created with the sole responsibility of compliance enforcement? 8. How will enlargement affect EU environmental governance? 9. What are the inroads and means of influence of scientists willing
to give input to EU policy? Workshop 3: How can the image of Science in Society be improved? Moderator: Mary K Weed Each question will be on a ppt slide to help the moderator guide the dialogue. No subject slide should run for more than 15 minutes and it is most likely that the last slides won’t have enough time to be covered (so most important questions in the top 8). Has the public image of science and scientists deteriorated in the past decade? Where? Why? Should the general public previously have put so much trust in the sciences? Many countries in Western Europe have reported significant declines in university enrolments in the traditional sciences (physics, chemistry). What are the reasons for this? What could be the consequences? Could the decline be a reflection of the claim that Western Europe lacks, at the grassroots level, an innovation culture? Do Americans face the same problem? Is a little knowledge a dangerous thing? If the more people learn about research or scientific developments, the less comfortable they are, then should we communicate less? What can scientists do or avoid doing to improve their image? What can organizations, universities, companies or individuals do to promote the image of science? What can governments do? The recent science and society programme in the UK has attempted to restore the image of science in the UK. Has it been successful? The EU – DG Research has earmarked a significant budget
for the Science and Society in Europe programme. Is this a European-wide
issue? Do accession countries face the same problems?
|
