IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v62y2019i2p229-247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Procedural influences on scientific advisory work: the case of chemical hazard characterization

Author

Listed:
  • Laura Maxim

Abstract

The quality of science for policy depends as much on the robustness of available scientific knowledge as it does on the procedural settings and working procedures in safety agencies. Using a report on Bisphenol A as a case study, and a set of original criteria, we provide an understanding of procedural influences on the results of scientific advisory committees and about literature reviews for chemical hazard characterization. Expert elicitation revealed that three aspects are critically important for the results of the advisory activity and for the selected case study: the method used to combine different studies, the interpretation of the review results in terms of level of evidence and conclusiveness, and the choice of uncertainty factors. Our results also show how procedural settings and working procedures can promote the invisible influence of values and policy on scientific advisory activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura Maxim, 2019. "Procedural influences on scientific advisory work: the case of chemical hazard characterization," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(2), pages 229-247, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:62:y:2019:i:2:p:229-247
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2017.1407299
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2017.1407299
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2017.1407299?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:62:y:2019:i:2:p:229-247. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.