ABSTRACT
In the daily practice of science for policy, as experienced by governmental agencies which inform the policy and the public on the state and outlook of the environment, there is a pressing need for guidance in assessing and communicating uncertainties. This need extends beyond the quantitative assessment of uncertainties in model results, and focuses on the entire process of environmental assessment, running from problem framing towards reporting the results of the study. Using the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (RIVM/MNP) as a case, the development, structure and content of such a guidance system is highlighted. Conditions for a successful implementation of the guidance system are discussed, and some prospects for future work are outlined.
Subject(s)
Communication , Environment , Uncertainty , Government Agencies , Netherlands , Policy Making , Public Policy , Risk AssessmentABSTRACT
There is a widespread recognition of a 'crisis' in official scientific expertise, related to the increase of 'uncertainty' and the loss of 'trust', and whose cure is believed to lie in 'participation'. I argue that the crisis results from structural features of the globalising knowledge economy, and the contradictory roles of governments, acting both as promoters of global business enterprise and also as regulators on behalf of a sophisticated and suspicious public. I explain the crisis by substituting 'safety' for 'risk' as the operative concept, and also using 'paradox' as an explanatory tool. I produce a closed-cycle paradox, analogous to the classic Catch-22, to exhibit the contradictions in the situation. I discuss ways of resolving these, which include the recognition of policy-critical ignorance and the adoption of the perspective of post-normal science.
