Search

Social scientists should seek greater involvement in interdisciplinary scientific committees, which often play important roles in natural resource management. In addition to our acknowledged areas of expertise, we have the ability to educate other disciplines about social sciences and, importantly, also about the realities of biophysical science input into policy processes. Two examples are worth noting. First, the asymmetry of scientific challenge can mean that biophysical science views/interpretations with favorable implications for organized groups’ interests may have been “accepted” with little scrutiny, relative to work having unfavorable implications. Second and paradoxically, the structure of decision making can mean that preferences for “scientific caution” will result in resource management decisions that are anything but cautious. These and other observations need to be tested through participant observation by a greater number of social scientists on scientific committees in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that applied settings offer opportunities for analysis as well as employment. The theme is discussed in the context of a recent Congressional Fellowship. The first half of the article is a relatively straightforward report on Congressional staffers and their activities: it presents background information and identifies three areas of dynamic tension that seem to deserve greater attention in future research. Building on this information. the second half of the article provides examples of three types of substantive conclusions that deserve to be encouraged in future applied work. The first is the application, in a new context, of previously familiar concepts. An example in the present case is that. despite the mans ways in which Congress is unique, it is also very much like a "typicaI" small town. The second is the questioning of common assumptions: despite the frequent criticisms of the so-called "rational model of decision making," for example, information and analysis play a significant role in policy outcomes, and knowledge is indeed power in many Congressional deliberations. The third is the recognition of broader challenges to the discipline: an example in the Congressional context is that social scientists, and sociologists in particular, have been extraordinarily ineffective in educating policy- makers on the nature of their work. Individually, each of these conclusions has implications for sociologists: collectively, they are meant to illustrate the importance of looking to applied settings as a source of insights, not just income. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]