What Scientists Say about the Changing Risk Calculation in the Marine Environment under the Harper Government of Canada (2006-2015)
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5337956 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Allain J Barnett (0000-0002-7248-3107, Florida International University, corresponding author), M G Wiber (0000-0002-6764-0067, University of New Brunswick) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 44 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 29-51 |
| Publication date | 2019-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Science Technology & Human Values (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0162-2439 • E-ISSN: 1552-8251 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0162243918781269 |
| OpenAlex | W2808002441 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 39 |
This paper examines how the Harper Government of Canada (2006-2015) shut down both debate about threats and research into environmental risk, a strategy that Canadian scientists characterized as the "death of evidence." Based on interviews with scientists who research risks to the marine environment, we explore the shifting relationship between science and the Canadian government by tracing the change in the mode of risk calculation supported by the Harper administration and the impact of this change. Five themes emerged from the interviews: erosion of science research capacity, resulting limitations in understanding risk, declining influence on policy and regulation, redirection of public science funds to support the private sector, and the need to broaden the science knowledge base. The Canadian death of evidence controversy represents a challenge to science and technology studies (STS) scholars who wish to maintain a critical and reflexive perspective on the scientific enterprise without supporting attacks on evidence. While subsequent Canadian governments may simply return science to an unreflexively privileged knowledge status, we view this as equally damaging to broad risk calculation and democratic science. We suggest instead that a broader gathering of matters of concern will always be essential to risk assessment
Democracy · Environmental ethics · Political science · Politics · Private sector · Public relations · Reflexivity · Risk society · Science policy · Social science · Sociology · Sociology of scientific knowledge · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Law · Public Administration · Risk Perception and Management
Dynamic Sustainabilities
Keep it complex
Academic Research in the 21st Century
Handbook of Science and Technology Studies
Risk, Environment and Modernity
Anthropology and Risk
Getting It Right
Tenure, the Canadian tar sands and ‘Ethical Oil’
How science makes environmental controversies worse
Power at the heart of the present
Uncertainty and environmental learning 1, 2Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm
Economic Efficiency of Federal Provision of Scientific Information and Support for Science Research in Canada
The Politics of Talk
The Science Wars
The New Nature of Things? Canada's Conservative Government and the Design of the New Environmental Subject
Technologies of Humility
The Construction of Global Warming and the Politics of Science
Normalizing Complaint
Commercialization of the University and Problem Choice by Academic Biological Scientists
Situated Knowledges
The Rights of Science and the Rights of Politics
Rethinking neoliberalism
Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern
The cultural nature of risk
Of risk and pork
Impact of Aquaculture on Commercial Fisheries
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,83 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2023 (4) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |