Science/Policy Interfaces

This week in class we got to really dive into the topic of the IPCC and Cop topics as we discussed them in their function and layout. I truly appreciated our instructors article that talked about the errors in the Himalaya estimates that cause confusion as well the other one which focused more on analysis and findings. What stood out to me in discussion was the idea of Science Policy Interface. This concept is a step further than just science and policy. When looking through a postmodern lens, one can help but notice how “not” rational it is. In contrast with the idea of the modern rationality (that suggests scientific discovery leads to political decisions), post modern interfaces between science and policy is much more complex. The system as a whole encompasses multiple factors and viewpoints that all contribute to one idea, such as climate change. As a relevant example, using climate policy, various parties take part in the matter that is often overlooked. We see activist art for example promoting messages encourage individual action and behavioral change. These multiple factors thus provide us a bigger picture in order to understand these boundary spaces, (as Mahony calls them), because the answer certainly doesn’t only rely on more science. The science is there and pretty clear (that doesn’t say at all to stop doing science because that would be crazy), it’s just we would be better off incorporating all post-modern elements into policy like: NGO’s, activism art, implementers of government, research institutions, corporations, the IPCC, and others.