Environmental Controversy - Science and Politics

Proper and good environmental decisions require all scientific information that is available. In the recent years, decision makers and other interests groups have argued that all environmental arenas should be facilitated by scientists since they have all the relevant information on what should be done. For this reason, I tend to disagree with the proposition that scientists should be cut out of the decision and policy making. Scientific research information should actually be the dominant factor in making any political judgment because knowledge is power (Newton, 2014).

 Politicians are very good in debates but their knowledge of environmental matters is minimal. Both politics and science has a role to play in decision making because for instance, when FDA is seeking to whether to allow the entrance of a certain drug or chemical it’s time for the scientists to bring on the table why or why not the drug should be allowed. Scientists may not have the full control of the decision making process but that should not be locked out (Newton, 2014).

Lobbying is one of the strongholds that guide the decision making process. They play an important role in influencing the passing or rejection of a certain policy. If they are environmental lobbyists, they simplify the policies in favor of the scientists (Newton, 2014). If the interest groups are not environmental, science is still powerful to silence them because science proves itself. With regard to these arguments, I therefore disagree that those lobbyists, interest groups and other people who influence policy making can hinder the solutions to be found concerning the environment issues. Science battles are not as those in politics and so the influence of lobbyists is minimal (Newton, 2014).

 

References

Newton, D. (2014). Science and Political Controversy. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.