Geology Reference
In-Depth Information
Lessons for Coal Fires
J
.W. Powell
s vision of a scientific bureaucracy submitting policy proposals to a legislature cognizant of the
political neutrality represented in those proposals was achieved in the policy monopoly era following World
WarIIthatdidnotenduntilsometimeafter1980.Geoscientists coming of age professionally during the
monopoly years had the luxury of doing their science outside of politics. The discipline could specialize and
devote a very small proportion of its members to tending policy. Most could engage in good science being
confident that there would be incremental increases in budgets and an orderly development for worthy new
projects. A collapse of an iron triangle means that a much greater effort needs to be placed on policy than
had been the case during the monopoly phase. A new generation of politicians and constituents who were
not part of the old monopoly consensus must be educated to the advantages of policy proposals based on
scientific evidence.
'
Coal-fires policy making will only occur within the policy phase in place after 2002. In the United States in 2009
that means that a wide variety of political actors are aware that the progressive era agreement to move science out
of politics is no longer in place. There is evidence that a new administration is returning some of the privileged
positions once held by scientific evidence in the policy process. But only future election results will determine
whether the neutrality of science in the policy process will be promoted or rejected.
The United States case is explained here, but much of the trace of policy making is true for parliamentary structures
as well. Changing a policy requires overwhelming evidence that the previous policy is failing. That typically means
that a generation of failure must pass before it is obvious to the legislative body as a whole that a new approach is
needed. While some elected to the body may see the problem in the current light, others have grown accustomed to
believing this problem is fixed and that their favored problems are more pressing.
Coal-fires scientists might look to J.W. Powell for a strategic plan and for an understanding of the time scale
required for success. As seen in Figure 15.1.1, policy change is easier when there are large majorities in the
legislature. Consensus is easier to reach when large numbers of like minded politicians are elected, and when
subsequent elections bring additional like minded public servants to the institution. In the absence of a policy
consensus, personal appeals are likely to be more effective in attracting members to a coalition than a scientific
report. Taking the time to explain why coal fires are a serious problem for a particular representative
s constituents
is more effective than describing the magnitude of the problem for the nation or the world. While empirically
the latter may be true, only the voters in a particular district can retain a particular representative in office, or throw
the bum out and give someone else a chance to fix the problem. A representative must ensure his or her own ability
to continue in public service by showing responsiveness to constituents before being able to do good things for
the planet.
'
Another aspect of the policy process outside of the monopoly phase is that a proposal based on sound science will
not be accepted by legislators and passed into law as a whole. Instead, fragments of the proposal will pass as a
majority coalition is custom built for each piece of legislation. Political conditions will change daily. The political
process has shown a stubborn tendency to accept tremendous policy failures for decades in segments of the
economy. Opponents to change in the status quo will use every political tactic to undercut support, including lying.
Even George Washington and the other founders were not immune to attack by opponents who employed these
tactics. Laying the groundwork for a change in public policy can take 20 or 30 years, so a long-range strategy to
influence all aspects of the policy process is needed, as well as patience, and the belief that one
'
s efforts spent
influencing the policy process will not be wasted in the long run.
Acknowledgments
I
am grateful for the support of members of the faculty of Geology and Geography at Georgia Southern University
through invitations to Thursday afternoon seminars, as well as the faculty of my home department, Political
Science. The probing questions and encouragement I received at meetings of the Geological Society of America,
and the American Geophysical Union over the past 5 years allowed me to continue this line of inquiry. Dallas D.
Rhodes provided critical advice through discussions of how to translate the words and tables that are common in
political science into the figures needed for geologists to grasp concepts comfortably. His tips and emergency
assistance in drafting were invaluable. My department chairman, Richard Pacelle, also deserves special thanks for
never questioning why it is important for me to communicate political concepts to geoscientists.
