Cargando…

On allegations of invasive species denialism

Science denialism retards evidenced‐based policy and practice and should be challenged. It has been a particular concern for mitigating global environmental issues, such as anthropogenic climate change. But allegations of science denialism must also be well founded and evidential or they risk erodin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Munro, David, Steer, Jamie, Linklater, Wayne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6850308/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30624797
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13278
_version_ 1783469396506705920
author Munro, David
Steer, Jamie
Linklater, Wayne
author_facet Munro, David
Steer, Jamie
Linklater, Wayne
author_sort Munro, David
collection PubMed
description Science denialism retards evidenced‐based policy and practice and should be challenged. It has been a particular concern for mitigating global environmental issues, such as anthropogenic climate change. But allegations of science denialism must also be well founded and evidential or they risk eroding public trust in science and scientists. Recently, 77 published works by scholars, scientists, and science writers were identified as containing invasive species denialism (ISD; i.e., rejection of well‐supported facts about invasive species, particularly the global scientific consensus about their negative impacts). We reevaluated 75 of these works but could find no examples of refutation of scientific facts and only 5 articles with text perhaps consistent with one of the 5 characteristics of science denialism. We found, therefore, that allegations of ISD were misplaced. These accusations of science denialism may have arisen because invasion biology defines its subjects—invasive species—based on multiple subjective and normative judgments. Thus, more than other applied sciences its consensus is one of shared values as much as agreed knowledge. Criticisms of invasion biology have largely targeted those subjective and normative judgments and their global imposition, not the knowledge on which the discipline is based. Regrettably, a few invasion biologists have misinterpreted the critique of their values‐based consensus as a denial of their science when it is not. To make invasion biology a more robust and widely accepted science and to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings and conflicts, invasion biologists could be more accepting of perspectives originating from other disciplines and more open to values‐based critique from scholars and scientists outside their field. This recommendation applies to all conservation sciences, especially those addressing global challenges, because these sciences must serve and be relevant to communities with an extraordinary diversity of cultures and values.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6850308
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68503082019-11-18 On allegations of invasive species denialism Munro, David Steer, Jamie Linklater, Wayne Conserv Biol Essays Science denialism retards evidenced‐based policy and practice and should be challenged. It has been a particular concern for mitigating global environmental issues, such as anthropogenic climate change. But allegations of science denialism must also be well founded and evidential or they risk eroding public trust in science and scientists. Recently, 77 published works by scholars, scientists, and science writers were identified as containing invasive species denialism (ISD; i.e., rejection of well‐supported facts about invasive species, particularly the global scientific consensus about their negative impacts). We reevaluated 75 of these works but could find no examples of refutation of scientific facts and only 5 articles with text perhaps consistent with one of the 5 characteristics of science denialism. We found, therefore, that allegations of ISD were misplaced. These accusations of science denialism may have arisen because invasion biology defines its subjects—invasive species—based on multiple subjective and normative judgments. Thus, more than other applied sciences its consensus is one of shared values as much as agreed knowledge. Criticisms of invasion biology have largely targeted those subjective and normative judgments and their global imposition, not the knowledge on which the discipline is based. Regrettably, a few invasion biologists have misinterpreted the critique of their values‐based consensus as a denial of their science when it is not. To make invasion biology a more robust and widely accepted science and to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings and conflicts, invasion biologists could be more accepting of perspectives originating from other disciplines and more open to values‐based critique from scholars and scientists outside their field. This recommendation applies to all conservation sciences, especially those addressing global challenges, because these sciences must serve and be relevant to communities with an extraordinary diversity of cultures and values. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-03-13 2019-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6850308/ /pubmed/30624797 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13278 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Essays
Munro, David
Steer, Jamie
Linklater, Wayne
On allegations of invasive species denialism
title On allegations of invasive species denialism
title_full On allegations of invasive species denialism
title_fullStr On allegations of invasive species denialism
title_full_unstemmed On allegations of invasive species denialism
title_short On allegations of invasive species denialism
title_sort on allegations of invasive species denialism
topic Essays
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6850308/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30624797
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13278
work_keys_str_mv AT munrodavid onallegationsofinvasivespeciesdenialism
AT steerjamie onallegationsofinvasivespeciesdenialism
AT linklaterwayne onallegationsofinvasivespeciesdenialism