Ok, I'm now officially overwhelmed by the volume of response to the Washington Post piece and the American Academy paper. Over at DotEarth, for instance--and under the marvelous headline "Scientists From Mars Face Public From Venus"--Andy Revkin has solicited expert responses, and so we hear from Randy Olson, Matt Nisbet, Mike Hulme, John Horgan, Tom Bowman, Sheila Jasanoff, and Robert Brulle. They all have a lot to say. I like this from Nisbet:
The highlighted points of emphasis in the report have been the dominant focus of research in the field of science communication and science studies for the past 15 years and the basis for recent innovative projects such as the World Wide Views on Global Warming initiative. It is therefore deeply encouraging that these same points of emphasis emerged from the meetings convened by the American Academy. It’s a major sign that research in the field has contributed to a cultural shift in how leaders in U.S. science view public engagement. I agree, but I don't think the research alone has done this. I think that the timing was right for hard scientists to look across at social scientists and see what they had to say. Sheila Jasanoff of the Harvard Kennedy ...