Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: Framing elite policy discourse : science and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants
Author: Templeton, Jessica
ISNI:       0000 0004 2715 8131
Awarding Body: London School of Economics and Political Science
Current Institution: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
Date of Award: 2011
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Rising levels of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in the environment have spurred governments around the world to engage in cooperative action on a global scale to control those chemicals that pose significant threats to human health and the environment. Political efforts to mitigate the risks posed by these chemicals are impeded by the technical complexity associated with POPs pollution, and are thus predicated on the scientific assessments of experts in fields such as chemistry and toxicology. Policymakers’ reliance on scientific expertise for guidance on risk assessment and management has reduced their control over policy and has given scientists authority to determine socially acceptable levels of risk, thus blurring the boundaries between science and politics. Conversely, the implications of science-based decision-making have increased the interest and involvement of political actors in a phase of evaluation that is often seen as objective, fact-based, and free of political interest. This thesis analyzes the ways in which various actors with scientific expertise – representatives of governments, industry, and environmental/public health NGOs – working under the auspices of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants have used strategic issue framing tactics to promote predetermined policy agendas during the scientific review of chemicals proposed for regulation. This research breaks new ground by analyzing the ways elite decision-makers strategically frame issues in order to influence the policy preferences of other elites, and by evaluating the role of issue framing in the context of live policy negotiations. Key findings include the following: 1) the formation of epistemic communities of technical experts is precluded by political pressure on scientists to represent government/organizational interests, and 2) scientists strategically frame issues in ways that support the social, economic or political interests of the governments or organizations with which they are affiliated, thus contributing to the politicization of science-based decision-making.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available
Keywords: GE Environmental Sciences ; JF Political institutions (General) ; KZ Law of Nations