Scientists urged to get in the game

JCU adjunct Associate Professor Noel Preece is the lead author of a paper examining why environmental policies are often agreed to, but never implemented.

He said the research team used as an example the decline of the Spectacled Flying-fox, despite programs designed to protect it having been signed off by government.

“The Australian population of Spectacled Flying‐fox decreased by 75% between 2004 and 2017, even though a recovery plan was officially approved in 2010.

“No active recovery team was established until volunteers did so in 2020. This is not an uncommon outcome for endangered species’ recovery plans,” said Dr Preece.

He said the researchers found policy and practice failures, lip service to conservation plans, dismantling of good policy, avoidance of legal responsibilities, and the disregard of scientific evidence had ruined many programs.

“While implementation of conservation plans is ultimately the government's responsibility, there appears to be no administrative means to ensure that action is taken. For instance, specific funding was not made available for most of the 25 key actions identified in the Flying-fox recovery plan,” said Dr Preece.

He said the situation cannot be improved by scientists simply providing more data.

“Instead, a deeper understanding of the science‐policy‐politics interface, as well as governance threats and power relationships, is essential. It’s also important to recognise that industrial lobbying and regulatory capture hold great sway over government decision‐making,” said Dr Preece.

He said the research team’s new paper points out several common mistakes made, and misconceptions held, by those looking to protect the environment.

“Scientists need to accept that their evidence, while crucial, is only one component in a broader decision‐making process. We must recognise this and strategise on how to effectively influence outcomes under these circumstances,” said Dr Preece.

Link to paper here.