TY - JOUR
T1 - The politicisation of science in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia
T2 - Discussion of ‘Scientific integrity, public policy and water governance’
AU - Stewardson, Michael J.
AU - Bond, Nick
AU - Brookes, Justin
AU - Capon, Samantha
AU - Dyer, Fiona
AU - Grace, Mike
AU - Frazier, Paul
AU - Hart, Barry
AU - Horne, Avril
AU - King, Alison
AU - Langton, Marcia
AU - Nathan, Rory
AU - Rutherfurd, Ian
AU - Sheldon, Fran
AU - Thompson, Ross
AU - Vertessy, Rob
AU - Walker, Glen
AU - Wang, Q. J.
AU - Wassens, Skye
AU - Watts, Robyn
AU - Webb, Angus
AU - Western, Andrew W.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2021/7/3
Y1 - 2021/7/3
N2 - Many water scientists aim for their work to inform water policy and management, and in pursuit of this objective, they often work alongside government water agencies to ensure their research is relevant, timely and communicated effectively. A paper in this issue, examining 'Science integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia’, suggests that a large group of scientists, who work on water management in the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) including the Basin Plan, have been subject to possible ''administrative capture'. Specifically, it is suggested that they have advocated for policies favoured by government agencies with the objective of gaining personal benefit, such as increased research funding. We examine evidence for this claim and conclude that it is not justified. The Efforts of scientists working alongside government water agencies appear ro have been misinterpreted as possible administrative capture. Although unsubstantiated, this claim does indicate that the science used in basin water planning is increasingly caught up in the politics of water management. We suggest actions to improve science-policy engagement in basin planning, to promote constructive debate over contested views and avoid the over-politicisation of basin science.
AB - Many water scientists aim for their work to inform water policy and management, and in pursuit of this objective, they often work alongside government water agencies to ensure their research is relevant, timely and communicated effectively. A paper in this issue, examining 'Science integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia’, suggests that a large group of scientists, who work on water management in the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) including the Basin Plan, have been subject to possible ''administrative capture'. Specifically, it is suggested that they have advocated for policies favoured by government agencies with the objective of gaining personal benefit, such as increased research funding. We examine evidence for this claim and conclude that it is not justified. The Efforts of scientists working alongside government water agencies appear ro have been misinterpreted as possible administrative capture. Although unsubstantiated, this claim does indicate that the science used in basin water planning is increasingly caught up in the politics of water management. We suggest actions to improve science-policy engagement in basin planning, to promote constructive debate over contested views and avoid the over-politicisation of basin science.
KW - administrative capture
KW - environmental science and policy
KW - Public trust
KW - science–policy interface
KW - social network analysis
KW - water resources
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85118457579&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85118457579&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13241583.2021.1996681
DO - 10.1080/13241583.2021.1996681
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85118457579
SN - 1324-1583
VL - 25
SP - 141
EP - 158
JO - Australasian Journal of Water Resources
JF - Australasian Journal of Water Resources
IS - 2
ER -