{"title":"Does Science Shape Sentiment? Scientific Inputs and the Deliberations in the Convention on Biological Diversity","authors":"Casey Stevens","doi":"10.1177/10704965231157318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Can the tone of scientific reports shape the ensuing political debates? This question is of utmost importance as global science bodies like the IPCC and IPBES release increasingly fervent calls to action. This article seeks an initial study about whether global science bodies can influence the negotiations by state parties by performing a multifaceted sentiment analysis of scientific inputs into the debates of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The article articulates two social learning pathways in which science can influence the tone of debates: pushing and participation. It then finds these pathways lacking in the incorporation of science into the CBD negotiations, and empirical work demonstrates limited effect on the sentiment or tone of debates as a result of scientific inputs. The conclusion reflects on the role that multifaceted sentiment analysis can play in understanding the increasingly complex politics of science on global governance institutions and particularly in the case of biodiversity governance.","PeriodicalId":47090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environment & Development","volume":"32 1","pages":"147 - 164"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environment & Development","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10704965231157318","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Can the tone of scientific reports shape the ensuing political debates? This question is of utmost importance as global science bodies like the IPCC and IPBES release increasingly fervent calls to action. This article seeks an initial study about whether global science bodies can influence the negotiations by state parties by performing a multifaceted sentiment analysis of scientific inputs into the debates of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The article articulates two social learning pathways in which science can influence the tone of debates: pushing and participation. It then finds these pathways lacking in the incorporation of science into the CBD negotiations, and empirical work demonstrates limited effect on the sentiment or tone of debates as a result of scientific inputs. The conclusion reflects on the role that multifaceted sentiment analysis can play in understanding the increasingly complex politics of science on global governance institutions and particularly in the case of biodiversity governance.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Environment & Development seeks to further research and debate on the nexus of environment and development issues at the local, national, regional, and international levels. The journal provides a forum that bridges the parallel debates among policy makers, attorneys, academics, business people, and NGO activists from all regions of the world. The journal invites submissions in such topics areas as the interaction between trade and environment; the role of local, national, regional, and international institutions in environmental governance; analysis of international environmental agreements; the impact of environmental regulation on investment policy; legal and scientific issues related to sustainable development.