@conference {bnh-2935,
	title = {The social life of science in bushfire policy and planning: tales from Victoria and the Northern Territory},
	booktitle = {AFAC16},
	year = {2016},
	month = {08/2016},
	publisher = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC},
	organization = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC},
	address = {Brisbane},
	abstract = {<p>Quite rightly, practitioners in the natural hazards sector hold science in high regard. Scientific research has provided significant insights into our predictions of, and preparation for, events whose behaviours and occurrence are both high consequence and highly uncertain. As such, it is unsurprising that government agencies often emphasise their commitment to having {\textquoteleft}science-led{\textquoteright} or {\textquoteleft}evidence-based{\textquoteright} policies. But the routes between science, policy and planning are complex and variable. That is, while we may often hear (or say) that there is a straightforward relationship between scientific research, natural hazards policy and management practice this is based more in aspiration than reality. Experience suggests that having more scientific research does not always lead to less scientific uncertainty, just as having more scientific research or less scientific uncertainty does not always lead to more political action.</p>},
	author = {Timothy Neale}
}
