C. Adelle, A. Jordan, and J. Turnpenny, Proceeding in Parallel or Drifting Apart? A Systematic Review of Policy Appraisal Research and Practices, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, vol.12, issue.3, pp.401-415, 2012.
DOI : 10.1068/c11104

N. Amara, M. Ouimet, and R. Landry, New Evidence on Instrumental, Conceptual, and Symbolic Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies, Science Communication, vol.26, issue.1, pp.75-106, 2004.
DOI : 10.1177/1075547004267491

T. Bauler, An analytical framework to discuss the usability of (environmental) indicators for policy, Ecological Indicators, vol.17, pp.38-45, 2012.
DOI : 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.05.013

U. Beck, Reflexive Governance: Politics in the Global Risk Society, Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, pp.31-56, 2006.
DOI : 10.4337/9781847200266.00011

J. M. Beyer and H. M. Trice, The Utilization Process: A Conceptual Framework and Synthesis of Empirical Findings, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.27, issue.4, pp.591-622, 1982.
DOI : 10.2307/2392533

K. Bickerstaff, I. Lorenzoni, N. F. Pidgeon, W. Poortinga, and P. Simmons, Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste, Public Understanding of Science, vol.17, issue.2, pp.145-169, 2008.
DOI : 10.1177/0963662506066719
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00571101

P. Boulanger, Political uses of social indicators: overview and application to sustainable development indicators, International Journal of Sustainable Development, vol.10, issue.1/2, pp.14-32, 2007.
DOI : 10.1504/IJSD.2007.014411

F. Chateauraynaud, Argumenter dans un Champ de Forces, 2011.

K. Forss, C. C. Reubien, and J. Carlsson, Process Use of Evaluations: Types of Use that Precede Lessons Learned and Feedback, Evaluation, vol.8, issue.1, pp.29-45, 2002.
DOI : 10.1177/1358902002008001515

G. C. Gallopin, Environmental and sustainability indicators and the concept of situational indicators. A systems approach, Environmental Modeling & Assessment, vol.20, issue.12, pp.101-117, 1996.
DOI : 10.1007/BF01874899

D. Gambetta, ???Claro!???: An Essay on Discursive Machismo, Deliberative Democracy, pp.19-43, 1998.
DOI : 10.1017/CBO9781139175005.003

J. Greenaway, S. Robert, J. Smith, and . Street, Deciding factors in British politics: A case studies-approach, 1992.

H. Grupp and T. Schubert, Review and new evidence on composite innovation indicators for evaluating national performance, Research Policy, vol.39, issue.1, pp.67-78, 2010.
DOI : 10.1016/j.respol.2009.10.002

H. Gudmundsson, The Policy Use of Environmental Indicators: Learning from Evaluation Research, Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies, vol.2, issue.2, pp.1-12, 2003.

P. Hardi and T. Zdan, Assessing Sustainable Development: Principles in Practice, International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1997.

G. T. Henry and M. M. Mark, Beyond Use: Understanding Evaluation's Influence on Attitudes and Actions, American Journal of Evaluation, vol.24, issue.3, pp.293-314, 2003.

A. A. Hezri and S. R. Dovers, Sustainability indicators, policy and governance: Issues for ecological economics, Ecological Economics, vol.60, issue.1, pp.86-99, 2006.
DOI : 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.11.019

C. Hood, Public Service Management by Numbers: Why Does it Vary? Where Has it Come From? What Are the Gaps and the Puzzles?, Public Money and Management, vol.8, issue.4, pp.95-102, 2007.
DOI : 10.1111/j.1467-9302.2007.00564.x

S. Jasanoff, Contested Boundaries in Policy-Relevant Science, Social Studies of Science, vol.17, issue.2, pp.195-230, 1987.
DOI : 10.1177/030631287017002001

J. Knott and A. Wildavsky, If Dissemination Is the Solution, What Is the Problem ?, Science Communication, vol.1, issue.4, pp.537-578, 1980.
DOI : 10.1177/107554708000100404

M. Lehtonen, OECD Environmental Performance Review Programme: Accountability (f)or Learning?, Evaluation, vol.11, issue.2, pp.169-188, 2005.
DOI : 10.1177/1356389005055536
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.530.1849

G. Mackerron, Lessons from the UK on Urgency and Legitimacy in Energy Policymaking, Energy for the Future: A New Agenda, pp.76-88, 2009.
DOI : 10.1057/9780230235441_5

S. F. Mccool and G. H. Stankey, Indicators of Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities at the Interface of Science and Policy, Environmental Management, vol.33, issue.3, pp.294-305, 2004.
DOI : 10.1007/s00267-003-0084-4

M. Meul, F. Nevens, and D. Reheul, Validating sustainability indicators: Focus on ecological aspects of Flemish dairy farms, Ecological Indicators, vol.9, issue.2, pp.284-295, 2009.
DOI : 10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.05.007

P. Mickwitz and M. Melanen, The role of co-operation between academia and policymakers for the development and use of sustainability indicators ??? a case from the Finnish Kymenlaakso Region, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol.17, issue.12, pp.1086-1100, 2009.
DOI : 10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.12.003

J. Newig, Governance for Sustainable Development: Coping with Ambivalence, Uncertainty and Distributed Power, 2008.
DOI : 10.1080/15239080701622832

M. Ortega-cerdà, Sustainability Indicators as Discursive Elements, Paper presented at the 6th International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, pp.14-17, 2005.

S. Owens, T. Rayner, and O. Bina, New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research, Environment and Planning A, vol.4, issue.1, 1943.
DOI : 10.1068/a36281

M. Q. Patton, Discovering Process Use, Evaluation, vol.4, issue.2, pp.225-233, 1998.
DOI : 10.1177/13563899822208437

R. Pawson, Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective, 2006.
DOI : 10.4135/9781849209120

L. Pintér, P. Hardi, and P. Bartelmus, Indicators of Sustainable Development: Proposals for a Way Forward. Discussion Paper Prepared under a Consulting Agreement on behalf of the UN Division for Sustainable Development, PLACE: IISD ? International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2005.

M. Pregernig, Putting science into practice: the diffusion of scientific knowledge exemplified by the Austrian ???Research Initiative Against Forest Decline???, Forest Policy and Economics, vol.1, issue.2, pp.165-176, 2000.
DOI : 10.1016/S1389-9341(99)00008-8

E. Rametsteiner, H. Pülzl, J. Alkan-olsson, and P. Frederiksen, Sustainability indicator development???Science or political negotiation?, Ecological Indicators, vol.11, issue.1, pp.61-70, 2011.
DOI : 10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.06.009

R. F. Rich and C. H. Oh, Rationality and Use of Information in Policy Decisions: A Search for Alternatives, Science Communication, vol.22, issue.2, pp.173-211, 2000.
DOI : 10.1177/1075547000022002004

K. Ritz, H. I. Black, C. D. Campbell, J. A. Harris, and C. Wood, Selecting biological indicators for monitoring soils: A framework for balancing scientific and technical opinion to assist policy development, Ecological Indicators, vol.9, issue.6, pp.1212-1221, 2009.
DOI : 10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.02.009

U. Rosenström, The Potential for the Use of Sustainable Development Indicators in Policy Making in Finland, Futura, vol.21, issue.2, pp.19-25, 2002.

I. Rutledge and P. Wright, UK Energy Policy and the End of Market Fundamentalism, 2011.

P. A. Sabatier, Knowledge, Policy-Oriented Learning, and Policy Change: An Advocacy Coalition Framework, Science Communication, vol.8, issue.4, pp.649-692, 1987.
DOI : 10.1177/0164025987008004005

A. Saltelli, J. Jesinghaus, A. Manca, M. Mascherini, M. Nardo et al., Indicators for Lisbon Post-2010: Business as Usual? " JRC Scientific and Technical Reports, JRC, vol.57104, 2010.

L. Sébastien and T. Bauler, Is There a Real Demand for Composite Indicators for Sustainability, Presentation at the International Conference of Ecological Economics, pp.22-25, 2010.

L. Sébastien and T. Bauler, Use and influence of composite indicators for sustainable development at the EU-level, Ecological Indicators, vol.35, 2013.
DOI : 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.04.014

V. Sonntag, Designing Sustainability Indicator Frameworks for Information Flow: A Case Study of B-Sustainable, Applied Research in Quality of Life, vol.59, issue.4, pp.325-339, 2010.
DOI : 10.1007/s11482-010-9115-5

S. L. Star, This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept, Science, Technology & Human Values, vol.35, issue.5, pp.601-617, 2010.
DOI : 10.1177/0162243910377624

J. E. Stiglitz, A. Sen, and J. Fitoussi, Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn't Add Up. The Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, 2010.

A. Stirling, Analysis, participation and power: justification and closure in participatory multi-criteria analysis, Land Use Policy, vol.23, issue.1, pp.95-107, 2006.
DOI : 10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010

E. Turnhout, The effectiveness of boundary objects: the case of ecological indicators, Science and Public Policy, vol.36, issue.5, pp.403-412, 2009.
DOI : 10.3152/030234209X442007

J. Turnpenny, C. M. Radaelli, A. Jordan, and K. Jacob, THE POLICY AND POLITICS OF POLICY APPRAISAL: EMERGING TRENDS AND NEW DIRECTIONS, Journal of European Public Policy, vol.38, issue.4, pp.640-653, 2009.
DOI : 10.2307/3109916

V. Valovirta, Evaluation Utilization as Argumentation, Evaluation, vol.8, issue.1, pp.60-80, 1999.
DOI : 10.1177/1358902002008001487

E. Vedung, Public Policy and Program Evaluation, 1997.

J. -. Voss, R. Peter, and . Kemp, Sustainability and Reflexive Governance: Introduction, Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, pp.3-28, 2006.

C. H. Weiss, Research for Policy's Sake: The Enlightenment Function of Social Research, Policy Analysis, vol.3, issue.4, pp.531-545, 1977.

C. H. Weiss, The Interface between Evaluation and Public Policy, Evaluation, vol.5, issue.4, pp.468-486, 1999.
DOI : 10.1177/135638909900500408

. February, 01/finland-ranks-highest-environmental- index-us-lags-new-environmental-performance-study-com, 2002.

. Weiss, 471) defines enlightenment as " the percolation of new information, ideas and perspectives into the arenas in which decisions are made 5 Including in particular the conventional determinants of the quality of scientific information such as validity, reliability, specificity, and sensitivity to changes, but also more broadly aspects relating to the structuring of data, selection of the variables, weighting schemes, timeliness, robustness of the methodology, availability of accurate and appropriate data sources, methods of communication, construction, aggregation, and presentation of indicators, 1999.