Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34868803›Full record

ArticleJournal of environmental studies and sciences2022

The lesson learned from COVID-19 and the climate crisis is not to let experts decide on policies: a response to Robert C. Schmidt.

Annette Elisabeth Toeller, Sonja Blum, Michael Boecher, Kathrin Loer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of environmental studies and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Annette Elisabeth ToellerChair for Policy Research & Environmental Politics, FernUniversitaet in Hagen, Universitaetsstr. 33, 58084 Hagen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8666-2299
Sonja BlumChair for Policy Research & Environmental Politics, FernUniversitaet in Hagen, Universitaetsstr. 33, 58084 Hagen, Germany.
Michael BoecherChair for Political Science and Sustainable Development, Otto-Von-Guericke-Universitaet Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany.
Kathrin LoerChair for Political Science, Hochschule Osnabrueck, Caprivistraße 30a, 49076 Osnabrueck, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is a response to the commentary by Robert C. Schmidt in this journal, in which the author suggests that for specific problems such as climate change or the current pandemic, decisions on policies should be made by scientific experts rather than by politicians. We argue that such ideas, which were brought up in the late 1960s and reconsidered more recently, do not take sufficient account of the nature of science politics, and their interaction. Furthermore, problem structures and resulting challenges for science and politics are not similar, but essentially different between climate change and the pandemic. Therefore, different solutions to the problems are required. There is a need to improve politics' reliable recourse to scientific evidence in many cases. Yet, giving scientific experts such a strong position in decision-making ignores that most decisions, even if based on the state of scientific evidence (if there

Indexed as

Climate changeDemocracyPandemicPoliticsScience

Identifiers

PMID34868803
PMCPMC8626278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.