Debate over "The Skeptical Environmentalist" by Bjørn Lomborg

The 2004 special issue of Environmental Science & Policy (ESP) comprised of five papers, which offered "a set of critical perspectives on the controversy over TSE, and its broader implications, in order to stimulate debate and discussion about the role of scientists (including social scientists) in policy and politics" (Pielke and Rayner, 2004, p. 356).

Here are all five papers from the special issue in ESP along with comments from P. Dougherty, who commented on C. Harrison's "Peer review, politics and pluralism" and E. Lövbrand and G. Öberg, who commented on D. Sarewitz's "How science makes environmental controversies worse" and R. Pielke's "When scientists politicise science: making sense of the controversy over the skeptical environmentalist". Both discussions were published in ESP's April 2005 edition. Also listed below is a response to Lövbrand and Öberg from D. Sarewitz and R. Pielke, which also appeared in the April 2005 edition.

Pielke, Jr., R. A. and S. Rayner, 2004. Editors' Introduction, Environmental Science & Policy, volume 7, pp. 355-356.

(1) Harrison, C., 2004. Peer review, politics and pluralism, ESP, volume 7, pp. 357-368.

Dougherty, P. J., 2005. Comment on "Peer review, politics and pluralism" by Chris Harrison, ESP, volume 8, pp. 191-193.

(2) Oreskes, N., 2004. Science and public policy: what's proof got to do with it?, ESP, volume 7, pp. 369-383.

(3) Sarewitz, D., 2004. How Science makes environmental controversies worse, ESP, volume 7, pp. 385-403.

(4) Pielke, Jr., R. A., 2004. When scientists politicize science: making sense of controversy over The Skeptical Environmentalist, ESP, volume 7, pp. 405-417.

Lövbrand, E. and G. Öberg, 2005. Comment on ‘‘How science makes environmental controversies worse’’ by Daniel Sarewitz, and ‘‘When Scientists politicise science: making sense of the controversy over The Skeptical Environmentalist’’ by Roger A. Pielke Jr., ESP, volume 8, pp. 195-197.

Sarewitz, D. and R. A. Pielke, Jr., 2005. Response to Lövbrand and Öberg, ESP, volume 8, pp. 199-200.

(5) Herrick, C. N., 2005. Objectivity versus narrative coherence: science, environmental policy, and the U.S. Data Quality Act, ESP, volume 7, pp. 419-433.