IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v77y2017icp211-220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The authority of science in sustainability governance: A structured comparison of six science institutions engaged with the Sustainable Development Goals

Author

Listed:
  • van der Hel, Sandra
  • Biermann, Frank

Abstract

Over the past decades, numerous science institutions have evolved around issues of global sustainability, aiming to inform and shape societal transformations towards sustainability. While these science-based initiatives seem to take on an ever growing active role in governance for sustainable development, the question arises how they can claim any political authority in the first place. We present here a structured comparison of six international science-based initiatives, all engaged in governance processes related to the recently established Sustainable Development Goals. We focus on the material and rhetorical strategies employed by these science institutions to acquire authority by fostering perceptions of salience, credibility and legitimacy among governance actors. We distinguish three modes of scientific authority: an assessment-oriented mode that combines a strategy of salience through integration, with credibility by formal mechanisms of review, and legitimacy through representation; an advice-oriented mode, which appeals to salience through the promise of independent and timely science advice, to credibility through the credentials of the scientists involved, and to legitimacy through formal recognition by governance actors; and a solution-oriented mode, with science institutions claiming relevance based on the promise to contribute to solutions for global sustainability, while credibility is sought by invoking support of the scientific community, and legitimacy through a strategy of participation. Based on this analysis, we provide a framework for reflection on the claims and strategies of science-based initiatives, and their role and responsibility in governance for sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Hel, Sandra & Biermann, Frank, 2017. "The authority of science in sustainability governance: A structured comparison of six science institutions engaged with the Sustainable Development Goals," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 211-220.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:77:y:2017:i:c:p:211-220
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2017.03.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290111730254X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.03.008?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Harald Heinrichs, 2021. "Aesthetic Expertise for Sustainable Development: Envisioning Artful Scientific Policy Advice," World, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Ulrike Zeigermann, 2021. "Scientific Knowledge Integration and the Implementation of the SDGs: Comparing Strategies of Sustainability Networks," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 164-175.
    3. Judith Janker & Stefan Mann & Stephan Rist, 2018. "What is Sustainable Agriculture? Critical Analysis of the International Political Discourse," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Robin Fears & Claudia Canales Holzeis & Volker ter Meulen, 2020. "Designing inter-regional engagement to inform cohesive policy making," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-5, December.
    5. Christoph Kehl & Steffen Albrecht & Pauline Riousset & Arnold Sauter, 2021. "Goodbye Expert-Based Policy Advice? Challenges in Advising Governmental Institutions in Times of Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Maki Hatanaka, 2020. "Technocratic and deliberative governance for sustainability: rethinking the roles of experts, consumers, and producers," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(3), pages 793-804, September.
    7. Cameron Allen & Graciela Metternicht & Thomas Wiedmann, 2021. "Priorities for science to support national implementation of the sustainable development goals: A review of progress and gaps," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 635-652, July.

    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:eee:enscpo:v:77:y:2017:i:c:p:211-220. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    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.