ACIA's implementation plan, as it was approved in Barrow in 2000, includes the production of a summary document. It is described as "[a] comprehensive summary that synthesizes the main findings of the assessment and places in a policy-makers framework the state of our knowledge concerning the consequences of climate change over the entire Arctic region." For an analysis of science-policy interactions such a document is interesting because it is more likely to be read by a wide audience, including policy makers, than a detailed scientific report. If the messages in the report do not support a certain climate policy, there may be an increased need for policy makers to either control the content or discredit or distance themselves from it. At the same time, actors agreeing with its major messages may feel a need to protect its scientific credibility. The dynamics of how ownership over the document becomes decided and how it is framed in relation to the other ACIA documents can thus be used to analyze the tensions between science and policy in the ACIA process.
Was this article helpful?