Scientific Review in Oregon: A summary of the Independent Multidisciplinary Science Team's Technical Workshop
Loading...
Permanent Link
Author/Creator
Author/Creator ORCID
Date
2015-02-09
Type of Work
Department
Program
Citation of Original Publication
Robert M. Hughes, Carl Schreck and J. Alan Yeakley, Scientific Review in Oregon: A summary of the Independent Multidisciplinary Science Team's Technical Workshop, Technical Report 2015-1, Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, Salem, Oregon, https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/technical_reports/k0698758p?locale=en
Rights
This item is likely protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. Unless on a Creative Commons license, for uses protected by Copyright Law, contact the copyright holder or the author.
Subjects
Abstract
This report synthesizes the findings of a workshop, held by Oregon’s Independent Multidisciplinary Science Team (IMST) in January, 2015, to discuss state-level science review and how to best formulate a panel to conduct scientific review of a broad suite of natural resources management activities for the state of Oregon. Invited participants included representatives of most of the state’s natural resource agencies as well as others with familiarity of review systems. The workshop identified numerous benefits of scientific review, grouped in four categories: the benefits of the scientific process; a contribution to more ethical behavior; an ability to overcome institutional limitations; and the role in helping inform and facilitate policy decisions. The workshop compared and contrasted five different models of scientific review that operate at either state or national levels. Aspects of the panels that were compared included: appointing authorities; committee selection criteria and process; funding sources; productivity; level of financial support for staff and panelists; and peer review requirements.