Scholars of science and society have long understood that in all but the most trivial of cases science cannot compel specific political outcomes. Rather, scientific understandings are frequently either intrinsically uncertain or diverse enough to be used to justify a range of competing political agendas. This paper argues that despite these understandings the use of science by scientists as a means of negotiating for desired political outcomes - the politicization of science by scientists - threatens the development of effective policies in contested issues. By tying themselves to politics, rather than policy, scientists necessarily restrict their value and the value of their science. The essay proceeds in four parts. It first discusses why the politicization of science by scientists might be worth our concern. Second, it reviews the debate over the publication of The Skeptical Environmentalist. Third, it suggests that arguments that embraces a "linear model" (i.e., get the facts right, then act) of science's relationship with policy encourage the politicization of science. The fourth section discusses a range of perspectives on the politicization of science by scientists, and the paper concludes with a discussion of an alternative way to think about the relationship between science, politics and policy. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
