ABSTRACT
Notable differences between the drought science-policy interfaces in Australia and the United States are the far more developed state of drought science and the engagement of scientists in policy development in the United States. As described elsewhere in this volume, the US government has invested in the development of the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) and related programmes and research and, in particular, the United States now leads the world in drought monitoring. Furthermore, in the United States, scientists have had a greater role as policy entrepreneurs (Kingdon 1995) in promoting a transition from a crisis response to drought to a risk management approach (Botterill forthcoming), which favours ‘preparedness over insurance, insurance over relief, and incentives over regulation’ (National Drought Policy Commission 2000, v). There has not, however, been matching political will or capacity to take this risk management-based approach through to national policy.
