英语翻译However,we conjecture that the mainreason is that a part

英语翻译
However,we conjecture that the main
reason is that a particular set of understand-
ings about the role of such an expert advisory
body has become sedimented in the standard
operating procedures of government,and
that this understanding is reinforced by the
familiar sociological fact that circles of
acquaintance are always relatively small,and
that like tends to recommend like.In other
words,once the compositional character of
the Royal Commission was set in 1970,it was
always going to be difficult to widen the disci-
plinary background of its membership
beyond a certain level.
Does the disciplinary composition make
any difference?Would any of the reports have
been different with a different membership?
These are difficult questions to answer,since
they involve complex counterfactual assess-
ments.One can certainly point to examples,
like the establishment of Her Majesty’s
Inspectorate of Pollution which had long been
advocated by the RCEP,where some of the
difficulties of implementing the policy,most
notably the difficulties of combining the
traditions of different bodies,might well have
been anticipated by someone with an exper-
tise in public administration and organiza-
tion studies.However,how general this phe-
nomenon is remains an area for further
research.For the moment,we simply note
that some disciplines seem to find it harder to
show their relevance than others.
Conclusions
Clearly,the impact of the recommendations of
the RCEP depends very much on the relation-
ship it maintains with government.The act of
balancing independent assessment,which
may be critical,urging for precautionary
approaches which may not be politically
expedient,and yet remaining on good enough
terms with government for the reports to be
taken seriously,is obviously a crucial one for
the chair of the RCEP.Thus,it is imperative
that scientific information is reviewed and
vetted before it is used to back up criticisms
or recommendations,and public concern is
regarded as a significant factor both in inves-
tigations and in reporting findings.As public
involvement in environmental issues has
increased,so the RCEP has apparently
become more concerned with those aspects of
its role which consider and inform public
opinion.This would seem to indicate that
ideas such as sustainability and precaution
will remain important in the work of the
RCEP,and that its reports will continue to be
significant in providing an almost moral
frame of reference for the scientific advice
which Government requires it to deliver.As
such,it must be concluded that the RCEP
fulfils its role as innovator and evaluator.
Both functions become more vital as environ-
mental issues become more difficult to deal
with in traditional ways,so it must be hoped
that the work continues in the same vein.
终于完了

然而,我们猜想主要的原因是一系列有关于专家本身对于政府的标准的分支程序的角色的理解.对相似的社会学的加强,圈子很小或倾向于被推荐.换句话说,皇家委员会的主要部分成立于1970年,在一定的水平内很难拓宽成员间的纪律背景.
纪律的组成是否有任何的不同?不同成员之间的报告是否不同?这些很难去回答,因为他们涉及复杂的反事实的制度.能够指出一些例子,如,污染方面的建立哪一个是反对于RCEP的,政治实施的困难性,来自不同的主体有不同的困难.然而,这个现象是多么的普遍.就目前而言,一些纪律者很难去显示他们的相关性.
结论
很明显的,RCEP的影响依靠于他与政府的关系.平衡独立协议的行动,受到批判,对于RCEP的主席来说是残酷的.这样,科学信息被提及.那被用来批判或推荐,公共的关注被认为是在调查和报告的发现中起到重要的作用.公共致力于环境问题被提升,所以RCEP更多的关注于这些角色的那些方面,其关注和通知公众.这表明了这些想法在RCEP中起着重要的作用.这些报告会继续显示道德构架的科学意见.那必须包含rcep的主要成果的创新性和培养性.两者成为主流,环境问题在用传统的方式变得很难处理.所以希冀于工作能够延续同样的方式.