On allegations of invasive species denialism
| Autor: | David A. Munro, Wayne L. Linklater, Jamie Steer |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
0106 biological sciences
Conservation of Natural Resources Essay media_common.quotation_subject Creating shared value 010603 evolutionary biology 01 natural sciences Denialism datos Denial science denialism valores values Scientific consensus negación de la ciencia invasion biology Ecology Evolution Behavior and Systematics Nature and Landscape Conservation media_common Essays 否定科学主义 入侵生物学 价值观 事实 论述 规范性 主观性 Ecology Global challenges subjetivo 010604 marine biology & hydrobiology facts biología de la invasión Environmental ethics discurso normative Policy Public trust Normative discourse normativo Introduced Species Diversity (politics) subjective |
| Zdroj: | Conservation Biology |
| ISSN: | 1523-1739 |
| Popis: | 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. Article impact statement: False, unsupported claims of invasive species denialism threaten diversity, interdisciplinarity, and progress in invasion biology. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text