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

摘要

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.; 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.