IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v25y1998i4p218-226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reviewing the science-policy relationship: The policy as theory alternative (PAST)

Author

Listed:
  • Merle Jacob
  • Tomas Hellström

Abstract

Much extant analysis of the science-policy relationship is based on there being two distinct epistemic entities. Recently analysts have posited that there is a significant shift in the way knowledge in science is produced, communicated and used, and that policy and policymaking have several characteristics in common with the production of knowledge in science. In the light of this, a concept is developed of the science-policy relationship that builds on the Blume-Majone notion of policy as theory (PAST), in which policy is seen as developing its own ‘quasi-scientific’ imperatives, leading to an informal knowledge production that is policy-specific rather than bound to the scientific sphere. By explicating the nature of PAST, an alternative approach is proposed to the science-policy interface in which bureaucracy and administration assume a defining role. A number of suggestions are made as to how to understand and manage the science-policy dialogue in the light of PAST. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Merle Jacob & Tomas Hellström, 1998. "Reviewing the science-policy relationship: The policy as theory alternative (PAST)," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 218-226, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:25:y:1998:i:4:p:218-226
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/spp/25.4.218
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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:oup:scippl:v:25:y:1998:i:4:p:218-226. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.