Framing science: the Endangered Species Act and the Scientization of Politics

References

• Adler, J. 2017. “The Science Charade in Species Conservation.” Supreme Court Economic Review 24 (1): 109–138.
   Google Scholar
• Au, L., and G. Eyal. 2022. “Whose Advice is Credible? Claiming Lay Expertise in a COVID-19 Online Community.” Qualitative Sociology 45:1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-021-09492-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergthaller, H., and P. Mortensen. 2018. Framing the Environmental Humanities. Leiden: Brill Rodopi.
   Google Scholar
• Bertuol‐Garcia, D., C. Morsello, N. El‐Hani, and C. P. Renata. 2018. “A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Perspectives on the Causes of the Science–Practice Gap in Ecology and Conservation.” Biological Reviews 93 (2): 1032–1055. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Besek, J. 2019. “Invasive Uncertainties: Environmental Change and the Politics of Limited Science.” Environmental Sociology 5 (4): 416–427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bijker, W., T. Hughes, and T. Pinch. 1987. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technological Systems. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cairney, P. 2016. The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Carolan, M. 2008. “The Politics in Environmental Science: The Endangered Species Act and the Preble’s Mouse Controversy.” Environmental Politics 17 (3): 449–465.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chong, D., and J. Druckman. 2007. “Framing Theory.” Annual Review of Political Science 10:103–126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, G., M. Rodriguez, P. Lanier, and D. Gibbs. 2022. “Text-Mining Open-Ended Survey Responses Using Structural Topic Modeling: A Practical Demonstration to Understand parents’ Coping Methods During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Singapore.” Journal of Technology in Human Services 40 (4): 296–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228835.2022.2036301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, H., and R. Evans. 2019. Rethinking Expertise. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Congress, U. S. 1973. “Endangered species act.” US Code 16:1534–1544.
   Google Scholar
• Cornelissen, J., and M. Werner. 2014. “Putting Framing in Perspective: A Review of Framing and Frame Analysis Across the Management and Organizational Literature.” The Academy of Management Annals 8 (1): 181–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeSoucey, M., and M. Waggoner. 2022. “Another Person’s Peril: Peanut Allergy, Risk Perceptions, and Responsible Sociality.” American Sociological Review 87 (1): 50–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietz, T., R. Shwom, and C. Whitley. 2020. “Climate Change and Society.” Annual Review of Sociology 46:135–158. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054614.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doremus, H. 2010. “The Endangered Species Act: Static Law Meets Dynamic World.” Wash UJL & Pol’y 32:175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(03)00036-4.
   Google Scholar
• Eyal, G. 2019. The Crisis of Expertise. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, J. 2015. The Battle for Yellowstone: Morality and the Sacred Roots of Environmental Conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gieryn, T. 1983. “Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists.” American Sociological Review 48 (6): 781–795. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gundersen, T., D. Alinejad, T. Y. Branch, B. Duffy, K. Hewlett, C. Holst, S. Owens, et al. 2022. “A new dark age? Truth, trust, and environmental science.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 47:5–29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-120920-015909.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harding, S. 2008. Sciences from Below: Feminisms, Postcolonialities, and Modernities. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hulme, M., N. Obermeister, S. Randalls, and M. Borie. 2018. “Framing the Challenge of Climate Change in Nature and Science Editorials.” Nature Climate Change 8 (6): 515–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isoaho, K., D. Gritsenko, and E. Mäkelä. 2021. “Topic Modeling and Text Analysis for Qualitative Policy Research.” Policy Studies Journal 49 (1): 300–324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, O., and W. Xun. 2016. “Embracing Uncertainty in Policy-Making: The Case of the Water Sector.” Policy and Society 35 (2): 115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2016.07.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koop-Monteiro, Y., M. Stoddart, and D. Tindall. 2023. “Animals and Climate Change: A Visual and Discourse Network Analysis of Instagram Posts.” Environmental Sociology 9 (4): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2023.2216371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lichterman, P., and K. Dasgupta. 2020. “From culture to claimsmaking.” Sociological Theory 38 (3): 236–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275120947133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingstone, D. 2019. Putting Science in Its Place: Geographies of Scientific Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
   Google Scholar
• Mace, G. 2014. “Whose Conservation?” Science 345 (6204): 1558–1560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbet, M., and T. Newman. 2015. “Framing, the Media, and Environmental Communication.” In The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication, edited by A. Hansen and R. Cox, 345–358. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Raymond, C., I. Fazey, M. Reed, L. Stringer, G. Robinson, and A. Evely. 2010. “Integrating Local and Scientific Knowledge for Environmental Management.” Journal of Environmental Management 91 (8): 1766–1777.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, M., B. Stewart, and D. Tingley. 2019. “Stm: An R Package for Structural Topic Models.” Journal of Statistical Software 91 (2): 1–40. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v091.i02.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turnhout, E. 2009. “The Effectiveness of Boundary Objects: The Case of Ecological Indicators.” Science & Public Policy 36 (5): 403–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vucetich, J., and M. Nelson. 2013. “The Infirm Ethical Foundations of Conservation.” In Ignoring Nature No More: The Case for Compassionate Conservation, edited by M. Beckoff, 9–25. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, W. 1995. “Science Charade in Toxic Risk Regulation.” The Colum L Rev 95 (7): 1613. https://doi.org/10.2307/1123193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weingart, P., F. van Schalkwyk, and L. Guenther. 2022. “Democratic and Expert Legitimacy: Science, Politics and the Public During the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Science & Public Policy 49 (3): 499–517. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scac003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wyman, K. M. 2012. “Politics and Science in Endangered Species Act Listings.” In Institutions and Incentives in Regulatory Science, edited by J. Johnson, 99–130. Lexington Books: Lanham.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. 2006. “Public Engagement as a Means of Restoring Public Trust in Science–Hitting the Notes, but Missing the Music?” Public Health Genomics 9 (3): 211–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar