How has American environmentalism affected the U.S. scientific enterprise? After two decades
of intense and often rancorous debate about environmental protection, has the environmental
movement changed the pursuit of scientific knowledge in significant ways? This article examines
the relationship between environmentalists and scientists on four dimensions: (a) the degree to
which scientific research has become more applied; (b) the relative success or failure of efforts
to integrate and coordinate research projects and programs; (c) the amount of synthesis of
scientific information for policy purposes that has taken place; and (d) the level of professionalizing that has occurred in environmental science, economics, policy, and management. Results
indicate that environmentalism has had little impact on science.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). AAAS report XV: Research and development, FY 1991.Washington, DC: Author .
2.
Barfield, C.E. (1982). Science policy from Ford to Reagan.Washington, DC: American Enterprise institute for Public Policy Analysis.
3.
Bromley, D.A. (1990). Keynote address In S. L Sauer (Ed.), Science and technology and the changing world order (pp. 7-16). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science .
4.
Burek, D. M. (Ed.). (1991). Encyclopedia of associations.Detroit: Gale Research.
5.
Busch, P.L. (1990). Earth day: Building an environmental ethicEnvironmental Science and Technology, 24, 408-409.
6.
Cahn, R., & Cahn, P. (1990, September). Did earth day change the world?Environment, pp. 16-20, 36-43.
7.
Caldwell, L.K. (1982). Science and the National Environmental Policy Act: Redirecting policy through procedural reform.Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
8.
Caldwell, L.K. (1990). Between two worlds: Science, the environmental movement, and policy choiceNew YorkCambndge University Press.
9.
Commoner, B. (1988, May). Acceptable risks: Who decides?Harper's Magazine, p. 28.
10.
Conservation Foundation. (1984). State of the environment: An assessment at mid-decade.Washington, DC: Conservation Foundation.
11.
Cook, J.R., Jr. (1989, December). The CIEP Fund, IncEnvironment, p. 33.
12.
Corell, R. (1990). A paradigm emergingEarthQuest , 4, 1-4.
13.
Day, K., & Ruttan, V. (1991). The deficit in natural resources researchBioScience, 41, 37-40, 46.
14.
Devall, B., & Sessions, G. (1985). Deep ecology: Living as if nature matteredSalt Lake City: G. M. Smith .
15.
Dickson, D. (1984). The new politics of science.New York: Pantheon.
16.
Dietz, T.M., & Rycroft, R.W. (1987). The risk professionals.New York: Russell Sage.
17.
Executive Office of the President. (1990). Budget of the United States government, fiscal year 1991.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
18.
Fri, R. ( 1991, January 7-20). The environment's space programSpace News, pp. 15, 19.
19.
Hansen, J., Rossow, W., & Fung, I. (1990). The missing data on global climate changeIssues in Science and Technology, 7, 62-69.
20.
Hileman, B. (1989, March 13). Global warmingChemical & Engineering News, pp. 25-44.
21.
Ingram, H.M., & Mann, D.E. (1989). Interest groups and environmental policy In J. P. Lester (Ed.), Environmental politics and policy: Theories and evidence (pp. 135-157). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
22.
Kash, D.E., & Rycroft, R.W. (1985). Energy policy: How failure was snatched from the jaws of successPolicy Studies Review , 4, 433-444.
23.
Landy, M.K., Roberts, M.J., & Thomas, S.R. (1990). The environmental protection agency: Asking the wrong questions.New York: Oxford University Press.
24.
Langton, S. (1984). Environmental leadershipCambridge, MA: Lexington Books.
25.
Lester, J.P. (1990). A new federalism? Environmental policy in the states In N. J. Vig & M. E. Kraft (Eds.), Environmental policy in the 1990s: Toward a new agenda (pp. 59-79). Washington, DC.Congressional Quarterly Press.
26.
Mathews, J. (1990, December 23). Romance of the manned space missionsWashington Post, p. C7.
27.
Milbrath, L. (1984). Environmentalists: Vanguard for a new society.Albany: State University of New York Press.
28.
National Academy of Sciences. (1983). Risk assessment in the federal government: Managing the process.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29.
National Academy of Sciences. (1990). One earth, one future: Our changing global environment.Washington, DC: National Academy Press .
30.
National Science Board. (1985). Science indicators—The 1985 report.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
31.
National Science Board. (1989). Science indicators—1989Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
32.
National Science Foundation. (1970-1979). Federal funds for research, development, and other scientific activitiesWashington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
33.
National Science Foundation. (1990). Research and development expenditures of state government agencies: Fiscal years 1987 and 1988.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
34.
Paehlke, R.C. (1989). Environmentalism and the future of progressive politicsNew Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
35.
Pennisi, E. (1990, November 12). Ecologists hope planned NAS evaluation will lead to new environmental instituteScientist , pp. 1, 10.
36.
Pittock, A.B. (1990, May). Our changing planet: The FY 90 research plan and the FY 1991 U.S. global change research programEnvironment , pp. 25-28.
37.
Regens, J.L., & Rycroft, R.W. (1988). The acid rain controversy.Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
38.
Reich, R.B. (1985). Public administration and public deliberation: An interpretive essayYale LawJournal , 94, 1617-1641.
39.
Ridley, M. (1989). The pace and complexity of developments in science: Social, economic and environmental implications for policy makers (Conference Report No. D89/9Oxfordshire, United Kingdom: Ditchley Foundation.
40.
Roberts, L. (1990, August 10). Counting on science at EPAScience, pp. 616-618.
41.
Ruckelshaus, W.D. (1983, September 9). Science, risk, and public policyScience, pp. 1026-1028.
42.
Ruckelshaus, W.D. (1989, September). Toward a sustainable worldScientific American, pp. 166-174.
43.
Russell, D. (1989, March 27). Environmental tensions: We are all losing the warThe Nation, pp. 403-408.
44.
Russell, M. (1987). Risk-based environmental protectionIssues in Science and Technology, 3, 12-13.
45.
Schneider, S. (1988). The whole earth dialogueIssues in Science and Technology, 4, 93-99.
46.
Shapely, W.H., Breslow, G.J., Teich, A.H., & Kidd, C.V. (1980). Research and development: AAAS report V.Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
47.
Shea, E. (1990). The 1990 CES report: A framework for U.S. global change researchEarthQuest, 4, 4-5.
48.
Smith, B.L.R. (1990).American sciencepolicy since World War IIWashington, DC: Brookings.
49.
Speth, J.G. (1989). The greening of technologyThe Bridge, 19, 3-5.
50.
Steinhart, P. (1990, January). Bridging the gap: Can earth day 1990 bring together greens and mainline conservationists?Audubon, pp. 20-23.
51.
Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agriculture Research, and Environment. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. (1988). National acid precipitation assessment program.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
52.
Subcommittee on Select Education. House Committee on Education and Labor. (1990). The national environmental education act.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
53.
Traux, H. (1989, January/February). Surviving the 1980s at EPAEnvironmental Action, pp. 12-16.
54.
von Vorys, B. (Ed.). (1990). Peterson's guides.Princeton, NJ: Peterson's Guides.
55.
Waldrop, M.M. (1989). The U S. global change program — A political perspectiveEarthQuest, 3, 4-7.
56.
Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in the age of high technology.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
57.
Zurer, P. (1989, September 19). Global-change plan to coordinate agencies' environmental researchChemical & Engineering News, pp. 19-19.
