‘When knowledge matters’: the role and influence of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution

Adopting a ‘knowledge perspective’, in which policy-making is seen as a process of collective learning through argument and persuasion, this paper assesses the record of the UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution as an advocate of concepts and reforms associated with ecological modernization. Drawing on extensive empirical research, it considers how the social and political climate in which the Commission has operated, as well as certain characteristics of the Commission as an advisory body, have conditioned its degree of influence over time. It argues that in various roles—as knowledge broker, policy entrepreneur and persuasive advocate—the Commission has been able to exert a significant influence on environmental policy in the UK and beyond. The paper also reflects on the utility of different approaches in theorizing the role of advisory bodies in the policy process. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  P. Sheriff.  State Theory, Social Science, and Governmental Commissions , 1983 .

[2]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. , 1991 .

[3]  P. Sabatier.  Knowledge, Policy-Oriented Learning, and Policy Change , 1987 .

[4]  P. Haas.  Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination , 1992, International Organization.

[5]  A. Mol.  Ecological modernisation and institutional reflexivity: environmental reform in the late modern age. , 1996 .

[6]  Alvin M. Weinberg,et al.  Science and trans-science. , 1972 .

[7]  B. Peters,et al.  Advising West European governments : inquiries, expertise and public policy , 1993 .

[8]  T. Cartwright.  Royal commissions and departmental committees in Britain: A case-study in institutional adaptiveness and public participation in government , 1975 .

[9]  Giandomenico Majone,et al.  The Critical Appraisal of Scientific Inquiries with Policy Implications , 1985 .

[10]  P. Hall.  The Political Power of Economic Ideas: Keynesianism across Nations , 1989 .

[11]  Paul A. Sabatier,et al.  The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe , 1998 .

[12]  Maarten A. Hajer,et al.  The Politics of Environmental Discourse , 1997 .

[13]  D. Weimer,et al.  Analysis as Retrograde Action: The Case of Strategic Petroleum Reserves , 1985 .

[14]  Frank Fischer,et al.  The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning , 1993 .

[15]  The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution , 1975 .

[16]  A. Jordan,et al.  The Precautionary Principle in UK Environmental Law and Policy , 1995 .

[17]  Giandomenico Majone,et al.  Evidence, Argument, and Persuasion in the Policy Process , 1989 .

[18]  Chris Park,et al.  The Environment , 2010 .

[19]  E. Millstone,et al.  Lead toxicity and public health policy , 1995, Journal of the Royal Society of Health.

[20]  P. May.  Policy Learning and Failure , 1992, Journal of Public Policy.

[21]  Peter Christoff,et al.  Ecological Modernisation, Ecological Modernities , 1996, The Ecological Modernisation Reader.

[22]  Claudio M. Radaelli,et al.  The role of knowledge in the policy process , 1995 .

[23]  John W. Kingdon,et al.  Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy. , 1985 .

[24]  Frans Berkhout,et al.  Radioactive Waste: Politics and Technology , 1993 .