Abstract
We empirically reveal how environmental experts interpret the objectivity norm while navigating the authority paradox. The paradox here is that while there is a need for objective scientific advice, such advice is only to be acquired from experts and expert agencies whose objectivity and, hence, authority are contested. Viewed through the lens of practice, we identify what practitioners at the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency understand by objectivity. Using this paradigmatic case, we show how practitioners renegotiate the meaning of objectivity while seeking to engage with new policy actors and extended peers in an independent, rigorous and legitimate manner. Successfully navigating the authority paradox is related to skilfully representing and adapting to various meanings of objectivity. Experts and experts agencies accordingly need reflexive skills to recognise which meanings of objectivity they ascribe to and which ones are invoked in public debates. Environmental experts who are able to loosely connect diverse objectivity conceptions are more likely considered as trustworthy and authoritative partners in environmental science-policy interfaces.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-7 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Environmental Science & Policy |
| Volume | 67 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jan 2017 |
Funding
This research was made possible by the Open Assessment Methodology programme of PBL the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. We wish to thank workshop participants and interviewees for the useful discussions and input, and Albert Cath for sharing his interview reports. The paper benefited from the valuable suggestions made by Femke Merkx, Eleftheria Vasileiadou and Arthur Petersen. We would also like to thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency |
Keywords
- Authority paradox
- Credibility crisis
- Objectivity
- Practice theory
- Science-policy interfaces