Interactions Between Policymakers And Scientists - Essay Example

Interactions between Policymakers and Scientists in Shaping Climate Change Policy Interactions between Policymakers and Scientists in Shaping Climate Change Policy In the twenty-first-century, there are myriad problems that many people link to global warming. Most of the individuals blame the uncontrolled industrialization in developed countries as the main factor that cause global warming. Nevertheless, the idea of lacking proper supporting evidence in the past and uncertainty by the scientists about the future affect the formation of policies. Most people assert that the cost of trying to solve the climate change will bear more cost in future than if we find a solution now. The solutions to this problem seem simple but often prove challenging for most states in taking the first step. The understanding of the political leaders often originates from those whom they interact with and their environment. Hence, knowledge due to scientist interacting with policy makers and politicians contribute significantly in trying to find the solutions to the global warming while formulating regulations. Global warming brings together the policy makers and scientists who try to determine causes and possible solution. The continuous exchange of ideas between scientists and policymakers across the globe shows the urgency of the matter. Moreover, these interactions between scientists and policymakers define the types of regulations in place in trying to control climate change. Governments use many ways in an attempt to control climate change based on the scientific evidence. However, there are opposing groups of people that view climate change as a natural factor that do not require human intervention (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 17). This contradicting opinions and uncertainty from science play a significant role in the formation of climate change policies. In the scientific context, uncertainty involves lack of understanding or measurement of something. In the past, scientists had limited access to policymakers that deterred their interaction and exchange of ideas. The scientist had the knowledge of possible future impacts if people take no actions to limit the emission of global warming. However, the passing scientific knowledge to politicians proved challenging until the introduction of scientists in the government department. Besides, the formation of IPCC involving both policy makers and scientists increased their interaction (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 75). There were also limitations in passing the information between the policymakers and scientists due to the language that scientist used in the description. According to IPCC, it is part of the scientists’ duty to translate the terms of the scientific language and make it understandable to politicians. In the current situation, scientists have access to policy makers that directly provide the necessary knowledge in deciding the kind of regulation to formulate. The scientists in these offices carry out research to provide information that shapes decision of politicians. The presences of scientists that support policies in the government departments to control human activities contribute positively to such regulations. The scientists’ increased access to policymakers causes them to have more influence in the formulation of policies affecting the environment by offering advice. The knowledge and data they provide to these policymakers after research is vital in determining measures to take. The research has data that the politicians base their arguments while advocating for better rules to govern the emission of greenhouse gases. The policymakers must evaluate the cost of not taking such appropriate actions and the extent of its effect on the affected parties. An example is a policy to control the emission of carbon and its impact on the economy of the industrialised countries. The politicians will only adjust the regulation to an acceptable level by all parties involved; hence, may not achieve the required levels recommended by scientists. However, the information from the research causes the policymakers to take action in mitigating effects or preventing further increase of global warming. Some of these include green taxes in regulations. The uncertainties in the evidence presented from the scientific research also influence the decision by the policymakers. Most of them would not prefer to advocate and pass regulations that lack surety. Some have the opinion that greenhouse gases emissions that are due to human activities will be the leading cause of climate calamities in future. The ability of politicians to agree on the policies that govern the global warming remains a challenge (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 126). An example is the United States not joining the Kyoto protocol even though most individuals view it as the best option for reducing greenhouse gases into the environment. The uncertainty in the scientific evidence to predict future events on global warming and outcomes contributes partly to the politicians’ reluctance in joining Kyoto protocol. The uncertainties in the data that the scientist project is due to the number of factors affecting climate change. Nonetheless, the models used in predicting these changes often consider a small number of variables (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 73). The inclusion of all the variables in predicting the climate change is cumbersome and often leaves some unforeseen factors out. Even though politicians often make decisions on policies with high levels of uncertainties, most of them are not willing to take actions that will make voters lose trust in them. They are hesitant to advocate for policies like the ones reducing climate change but have a high economic price to the consumers. Hence, there are often some levels of certainty associated with these scientific predictions that make it hard to decide which side to take and policies to advocate for by the politicians. To reduce the level of uncertainty, IPCC looks into areas that lack surety and suggest the ones requiring future research. IPCC consist of both scientists and policymakers from different states. The two groups take care of climate issues while considering the national interest of their countries. In their duties, they carry out the process of drafting policies that involve three stages. The first stage involves mainly scientists while the following stages involve both the scientist and policymakers. Such involvements enable keeping the integrity of the new policies. Most of the politicians perceive the problem of climate change differently. The example is the George Bush government that believed there is no sufficient evident to link human contributions to global warming. Considering Bush’s opinion, he sees no need to take actions in trying to change emission rate of greenhouse gases. There are further allegations of the political movements interfering with the evidence supporting climate change that scientists collect (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 93). Contrary, governments in the EU like Germany see the global warming issue as an urgent matter that need swift interventions to prevent more problems in future. These differences in opinions of politicians often originate from the social influences, interests and knowledge on the subject. The opinion is also in line with beliefs of some scientists that the climate change is a natural process due to earth’s evolution. Scientists proposing that increased climate change is due people’s actions have the task of proving that the human contributions cause the climate change. The opposing view that climate change is due to natural causes by some individuals has an adverse impact on those who are trying to formulate policies to control greenhouse gas emission. Such arguments create room for the investors who have industries that emit high amounts of the greenhouse to defend their firms and influence political decisions (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 75). The pressures from these other players in the formation of the policies always undermine the efforts of scientists advocating for strict measures to reduce global warming. In the recent past, most of the policies are moving voluntary agreements to command and control styles. An example is a regulation governing the rate of carbon emission per kilometre in vehicles. Even though the scientists influence on policies increased recently, other factors cause constraints in the formulation and use of the climate control regulation. An example is political constraints where after cooperation in signing policies, come nation perceive they are victims of injustice (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 37). These issues cause lack of adequate response from the state that should act in regulating the emission of greenhouse gases. The economic power of countries such as the United States has significant influence in the direction for the implementation of policies that regulate human activities, which affect the climate. Furthermore, these powerful countries do not often suffer greatly due to their practices compared to developing countries. The economic impact of following these rules is one of the primary concerns why most of the countries hesitate to accept any agreement. Besides, if one country decides not to follow the new policies, it creates an imbalance in the competitiveness. The states that follow these new regulations will incur high expenditure; hence, giving the non-complying countries a competitive advantage (Humphreys, Blowers, James & Jehlicka, p. 34). Creation of such unbalanced competition is the main reason that the UK had to lessen its commitment to reducing emission of greenhouse gases from 15% to 8%. Countries such as the United States were unwilling to cut any of their emission rates causing others to lower their ability to cutting down amounts of greenhouse gases. Conclusion The scientists gained more access to policymakers and policy-making process recently that causes more regulations to limit global warming. The interactions are through the employment of scientists in the government departments and IPCC where they assist in policy formulation. The scientists explain the process in a language that politicians can easily understand in their meetings. These new regulations have effects on all players making some countries to disagree. Nonetheless, the process meets some setbacks due to differing political opinions and other players that have conflicting interests. The reluctance of some countries to commit to reducing greenhouse gases emission always reduces the abilities of other states to act. There are also allegations of interference with scientific evidence from some government like the United States. Bibliography Humphreys David, Blowers Andrew, James Nick & Jehlicka Petr. (2014). Earth in crisis: A Warming World. Chapter 2-4. Read More