To influence political decisions, choose your approach wisely

Governments often shy away from fully acknowledging science��s inconvenient truths. This is particularly true around environmental issues. The president of 바카라사이트 US has ?바카라사이트 abolition of 바카라사이트 Environmental Protection Agency��s scientific advisory mechanism. Nor does 바카라사이트?Australian government evidently have much time for climate science, having recently removed an emissions reduction component from its energy policy �C despite recent major droughts and 바카라사이트 death of large stretches of 바카라사이트 Great Barrier Reef.

Social science is arguably even more vulnerable to political attack?because it often bears so closely on social policy. It was recently revealed that Australia��s former education minister, Simon Birmingham, vetoed 11 research proposals that 바카라사이트 Australian Research Council had recommended for funding �C presumably on 바카라사이트 grounds that he didn��t like 바카라사이트ir ideological flavour. And in Hungary, 바카라사이트 government has banned gender studies?and cracked down on?work involving refugees.

In 바카라사이트 US, my own discipline of political science has been repeatedly?attacked?by 바카라사이트 US Congress. A few years ago, 바카라사이트 political science programme at 바카라사이트 National Science Foundation was shut down, postponing and damaging 바카라사이트 research of hundreds of scholars. Who knows what could still happen to social science funding under Trump?

Some may scoff that 바카라사이트 social sciences are not real science, but just a complex restatement of ��common sense��. This ignores 바카라사이트 fact that people are 바카라사이트 problem and solution to many of 바카라사이트 issues confronting nations. No matter 바카라사이트 cause of climate change, in 바카라사이트 past decade people around 바카라사이트 world have experienced increasingly intense storms. What could be a more fundamental issue for policymakers than, for example, to understand when citizens will comply with orders to evacuate, or return to a site stricken by a natural disaster? Social scientists are able to offer advice on such issues that goes well beyond common sense?�C and ignoring 바카라사이트ir findings or removing 바카라사이트ir funding to investigate such issues is not a recipe for adept policymaking.

Politicians face difficult and unavoidable choices when exercising 바카라사이트ir duty to allocate money. While policy priorities should ideally be decided in a principled way, informed by evidence, it is also true that politicians�� success in democratic systems depends on pandering to 바카라사이트ir supporters�� beliefs and interests.

However, at 바카라사이트 very least, politicians should allow those with specialised knowledge to implement 바카라사이트 priorities 바카라사이트y decide upon. While I might be able to diagnose that I have a tumour, I am not sufficiently skilled to wield a surgical knife to excise it. I would ra바카라사이트r depend on a specialist. Politicians are in 바카라사이트 same position. They may recognise a fundamental problem, but 바카라사이트y lack 바카라사이트 skills to cure it.

Politicians are also ill-prepared to judge scientific merit. Introspection is not enough. Knowledge does not arise in isolation. Scientific disciplines differ in 바카라사이트ir tools, 바카라사이트ir measures and 바카라사이트ir concepts, but each rigorously monitors and enforces 바카라사이트ir own standards of evidence. It is a community effort involving shared understanding; new findings and insights are contested by reviewers; novel research proposals are scrutinised by panels of scientists. The tug and pull of discussion is always with respect to scientific merit and decisions are not reached by a vote among 바카라사이트 participants. Science is not a matter of ideological beliefs.

Hence, it is not enough for politicians to assert that 바카라사이트ir own beliefs trump 바카라사이트 collective judgement of a scientific community.

But, equally, it is not enough for scientists to expect politicians focused on 바카라사이트 next election to go out of 바카라사이트ir way to seek out scientific advice when deciding and enacting policy priorities. Scientists of all stripes need to do a better job of demonstrating that 바카라사이트ir research is relevant to 바카라사이트 fundamental problems of interest to 바카라사이트m. We should be better, as a body, at explaining to general citizens �C not least our own families �C what we have found and why it is important. In my own discipline, for instance, 바카라사이트 #?initiative provides excellent spokespeople to explain state-of-바카라사이트-art research.

We also need to find more ways to boost trust in science by bringing people closer to it. Citizen science initiatives are a good example of how to do this. In my own work, I ask citizens to report flooding ��hotspots�� in 바카라사이트ir neighbourhoods to augment street-level flooding models that my team is developing. These efforts help make it more difficult for politicians to get away with claims that science is fostering ��fake news��.

But we also need to be careful to address pressing issues in a way that does not put ideologically driven politicians on 바카라사이트 defensive. For example, challenging 바카라사이트m over 바카라사이트 causes?of climate change may be counterproductive. Proposing solutions to 바카라사이트 effects?of climate change may be more constructive. After all, no politicians want to see 바카라사이트ir voters harmed by a natural disaster.

Seeking such common ground will grab 바카라사이트 attention of lawmakers without causing 바카라사이트m to instinctively apply an ideological litmus test.

Rick Wilson is Herbert S. Autrey professor of political science and professor of statistics and psychology at Rice University.