Andy Stirling | University of Sussex (original) (raw)
Papers by Andy Stirling
PUBLISHED BY IMPERIAL COLLEGE PRESS AND DISTRIBUTED BY WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING CO. eBooks, Apr 1, 2000
When knowledge is uncertain, experts should avoid pressures to simplify their advice. Render deci... more When knowledge is uncertain, experts should avoid pressures to simplify their advice. Render decision-makers accountable for decisions, says Andy Stirling. Worldwide and across many fields, there lurks a hidden assumption about how scientific expertise can best serve society. Expert advice is often thought most useful to policy when it is presented as a single 'definitive' interpretation. Even when experts acknowledge uncertainty, they tend to do so in ways that reduce unknowns to measurable 'risk'. In this way, policy-makers are encouraged to pursue (and claim) 'science-based' decisions. It is also not uncommon for senior scientists to assert that there is no alternative to some scientifically contestable policy. After years researching-and participating in-science advisory processes, I have come to the conclusion that this practice is misguided.
International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, Oct 1, 2000
Routledge eBooks, May 1, 2018
Research Policy, Apr 1, 2023
Science of The Total Environment, Nov 1, 2020
The governance of the nexus between water, energy, and food (hereafter, 'the nexus') is p... more The governance of the nexus between water, energy, and food (hereafter, 'the nexus') is permeated by complex interactions of knowledge at a science-policy-society interface. This paper starts from a literature review to find the main narratives that allow us to understand what is at stake in this interface. By thematically synthesising 19 select articles, we reached three layers of knowledge interaction: 'knowledge application', 'knowledge integration', and 'knowledge transformation'. To avoid misleading simplifications, we discussed the constraints on this debate and some pressures for what we consider as 'closing down' knowledge about the nexus. We then developed a conceptual framework based on the 'technologies of humility' proposed by Jasanoff (2003, 2007) to create opportunities to 'open up' the nexus approach. Finally, we illustrated the four pillars proposed by some studies to describe what we have termed 'nexus of humility': framing, vulnerability, distribution, and learning. These foci seek to enable a humbler appreciation on all sides of the persistent sources of uncertainty, divergence, and conditionality in sustainability governance. This framework also contributes towards necessary transformations of knowledge about nexus and its challenging implementation.
Energy Policy, Apr 1, 2010
ABSTRACT This paper outlines a novel general framework for analysing energy diversity. A critical... more ABSTRACT This paper outlines a novel general framework for analysing energy diversity. A critical review of different reasons for policy interest reveals that diversity is more than a supply security strategy. There are particular synergies with strategies for transitions to sustainability. Yet – despite much important work – policy analysis tends to address only a subset of the properties of diversity and remains subject to ambiguity, neglect and special pleading. Developing earlier work, the paper proposes a more comprehensive heuristic framework, accommodating a wide range of different disciplinary and socio-political perspectives. It is argued that the associated multicriteria diversity analysis method provides a more systematic, complete and transparent way to articulate disparate perspectives and approaches and so help to inform more robust and accountable policymaking.
Environmental Values, Feb 1, 2002
Environmental Values, Nov 1, 2002
PUBLISHED BY IMPERIAL COLLEGE PRESS AND DISTRIBUTED BY WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING CO. eBooks, Apr 1, 2000
When knowledge is uncertain, experts should avoid pressures to simplify their advice. Render deci... more When knowledge is uncertain, experts should avoid pressures to simplify their advice. Render decision-makers accountable for decisions, says Andy Stirling. Worldwide and across many fields, there lurks a hidden assumption about how scientific expertise can best serve society. Expert advice is often thought most useful to policy when it is presented as a single 'definitive' interpretation. Even when experts acknowledge uncertainty, they tend to do so in ways that reduce unknowns to measurable 'risk'. In this way, policy-makers are encouraged to pursue (and claim) 'science-based' decisions. It is also not uncommon for senior scientists to assert that there is no alternative to some scientifically contestable policy. After years researching-and participating in-science advisory processes, I have come to the conclusion that this practice is misguided.
International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, Oct 1, 2000
Routledge eBooks, May 1, 2018
Research Policy, Apr 1, 2023
Science of The Total Environment, Nov 1, 2020
The governance of the nexus between water, energy, and food (hereafter, 'the nexus') is p... more The governance of the nexus between water, energy, and food (hereafter, 'the nexus') is permeated by complex interactions of knowledge at a science-policy-society interface. This paper starts from a literature review to find the main narratives that allow us to understand what is at stake in this interface. By thematically synthesising 19 select articles, we reached three layers of knowledge interaction: 'knowledge application', 'knowledge integration', and 'knowledge transformation'. To avoid misleading simplifications, we discussed the constraints on this debate and some pressures for what we consider as 'closing down' knowledge about the nexus. We then developed a conceptual framework based on the 'technologies of humility' proposed by Jasanoff (2003, 2007) to create opportunities to 'open up' the nexus approach. Finally, we illustrated the four pillars proposed by some studies to describe what we have termed 'nexus of humility': framing, vulnerability, distribution, and learning. These foci seek to enable a humbler appreciation on all sides of the persistent sources of uncertainty, divergence, and conditionality in sustainability governance. This framework also contributes towards necessary transformations of knowledge about nexus and its challenging implementation.
Energy Policy, Apr 1, 2010
ABSTRACT This paper outlines a novel general framework for analysing energy diversity. A critical... more ABSTRACT This paper outlines a novel general framework for analysing energy diversity. A critical review of different reasons for policy interest reveals that diversity is more than a supply security strategy. There are particular synergies with strategies for transitions to sustainability. Yet – despite much important work – policy analysis tends to address only a subset of the properties of diversity and remains subject to ambiguity, neglect and special pleading. Developing earlier work, the paper proposes a more comprehensive heuristic framework, accommodating a wide range of different disciplinary and socio-political perspectives. It is argued that the associated multicriteria diversity analysis method provides a more systematic, complete and transparent way to articulate disparate perspectives and approaches and so help to inform more robust and accountable policymaking.
Environmental Values, Feb 1, 2002
Environmental Values, Nov 1, 2002