Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal Conservation
In response to unexpected election results across the world, and a perceived increase of policy decisions that disregard scientific evidence, conservation scientists are reflecting on working in a ‘post-truth’ world. This phrase is useful in making scientists aware that policy-making is messy and mu...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | Conservation & Society |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.conservationandsociety.org/article.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2018;volume=16;issue=4;spage=518;epage=524;aulast=Rose |
| _version_ | 1818128527976824832 |
|---|---|
| author | David Christian Rose |
| author_facet | David Christian Rose |
| author_sort | David Christian Rose |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In response to unexpected election results across the world, and a perceived increase of policy decisions that disregard scientific evidence, conservation scientists are reflecting on working in a ‘post-truth’ world. This phrase is useful in making scientists aware that policy-making is messy and multi-faceted, but it may be misused. By introducing three different scenarios of conservation decision-making, this perspective argues that a mythical era of ‘science or truth conservation’ has never existed. Since an ‘extended peer community’ of decision-makers (policy-makers, practitioners, stakeholders) are present in multi-layered governance structures, conservation has always been ‘post-normal’. To decrease the chances of ‘post-truth’ decision-making occurring, the perspective encourages scientists to think carefully about scientific workflows and science communication. Developing a conservation narrative which does not see values, beliefs, and interests, as key parts of modern functioning democracies risks upholding a perception of the disconnected ivory tower of science. Rather, co-productive relationships should be established with decision-makers, and we should harness the power of storytelling to engage people on a personal level. This perspective encourages scientists to take heed of research on stakeholder engagement and storytelling, and to embrace workflows suited to post-normal conservation, rather than trying to deny that a post-normal world exists. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-11T07:34:41Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-90a6e0a0336441338cf9e00d0784d49b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0972-4923 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-11T07:34:41Z |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Conservation & Society |
| spelling | doaj.art-90a6e0a0336441338cf9e00d0784d49b2022-12-22T01:15:44ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsConservation & Society0972-49232018-01-0116451852410.4103/cs.cs_17_131Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal ConservationDavid Christian RoseIn response to unexpected election results across the world, and a perceived increase of policy decisions that disregard scientific evidence, conservation scientists are reflecting on working in a ‘post-truth’ world. This phrase is useful in making scientists aware that policy-making is messy and multi-faceted, but it may be misused. By introducing three different scenarios of conservation decision-making, this perspective argues that a mythical era of ‘science or truth conservation’ has never existed. Since an ‘extended peer community’ of decision-makers (policy-makers, practitioners, stakeholders) are present in multi-layered governance structures, conservation has always been ‘post-normal’. To decrease the chances of ‘post-truth’ decision-making occurring, the perspective encourages scientists to think carefully about scientific workflows and science communication. Developing a conservation narrative which does not see values, beliefs, and interests, as key parts of modern functioning democracies risks upholding a perception of the disconnected ivory tower of science. Rather, co-productive relationships should be established with decision-makers, and we should harness the power of storytelling to engage people on a personal level. This perspective encourages scientists to take heed of research on stakeholder engagement and storytelling, and to embrace workflows suited to post-normal conservation, rather than trying to deny that a post-normal world exists.http://www.conservationandsociety.org/article.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2018;volume=16;issue=4;spage=518;epage=524;aulast=Roseevidence-informed policy; post-normal science; post-truth; science communication; science-policy |
| spellingShingle | David Christian Rose Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal Conservation Conservation & Society evidence-informed policy; post-normal science; post-truth; science communication; science-policy |
| title | Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal Conservation |
| title_full | Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal Conservation |
| title_fullStr | Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal Conservation |
| title_full_unstemmed | Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal Conservation |
| title_short | Avoiding a Post-truth World: Embracing Post-normal Conservation |
| title_sort | avoiding a post truth world embracing post normal conservation |
| topic | evidence-informed policy; post-normal science; post-truth; science communication; science-policy |
| url | http://www.conservationandsociety.org/article.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2018;volume=16;issue=4;spage=518;epage=524;aulast=Rose |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT davidchristianrose avoidingaposttruthworldembracingpostnormalconservation |