Making systematic sense of public discontents with expert knowledge: Two analytical approaches and a case study

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 105-122

  Yearley, Steven ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000894556     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/9/2/302     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Ulrich Beck, Risk Society (London: Sage, 1992), p. 166.
2. Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity (Cambridge: Polity, 1990), pp. 124-134.
3. For a review see Brian Wynne, "Public understanding of science," in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (London: Sage, 1995), 361-388; for case studies, those in Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne, ed., Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology (Cambridge: CUP, 1996); for one author's overview Alan Irwin, Citizen Science (London: Routledge, 1995) and for an explicit evaluation of risk society notions, Brian Wynne, "May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide," in Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, ed. Scott Lash, Bronislaw Szerszynski, and Brian Wynne (London: Sage, 1996), 44-83.
4. For a review see Brian Wynne, "Public understanding of science," in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (London: Sage, 1995), 361-388; for case studies, those in Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne, ed., Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology (Cambridge: CUP, 1996); for one author's overview Alan Irwin, Citizen Science (London: Routledge, 1995) and for an explicit evaluation of risk society notions, Brian Wynne, "May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide," in Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, ed. Scott Lash, Bronislaw Szerszynski, and Brian Wynne (London: Sage, 1996), 44-83.
5. For a review see Brian Wynne, "Public understanding of science," in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (London: Sage, 1995), 361-388; for case studies, those in Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne, ed., Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology (Cambridge: CUP, 1996); for one author's overview Alan Irwin, Citizen Science (London: Routledge, 1995) and for an explicit evaluation of risk society notions, Brian Wynne, "May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide," in Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, ed. Scott Lash, Bronislaw Szerszynski, and Brian Wynne (London: Sage, 1996), 44-83.
6. For a review see Brian Wynne, "Public understanding of science," in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (London: Sage, 1995), 361-388; for case studies, those in Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne, ed., Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology (Cambridge: CUP, 1996); for one author's overview Alan Irwin, Citizen Science (London: Routledge, 1995) and for an explicit evaluation of risk society notions, Brian Wynne, "May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide," in Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, ed. Scott Lash, Bronislaw Szerszynski, and Brian Wynne (London: Sage, 1996), 44-83.
7. Brian Wynne, "Misunderstood misunderstanding: social identities and public uptake of science," Public Understanding of Science 1 (1992): 281-304.
8. Alan Irwin, "Deciding about risk: expert testimony and the regulation of hazard," in Environmental Threats: Perception, Analysis and Management, ed. J. Brown (New York: Belhaven, 1989), 19-32.
9. On this point see Steven Yearley, The Green Case (London: Routledge, 1992), pp. 32-33 & 46, and Sheila Jasanoff, "Civilization and madness: the great BSE scare of 1996," Public Understanding of Science 6 (1997) 221-232.
10. On this point see Steven Yearley, The Green Case (London: Routledge, 1992), pp. 32-33 & 46, and Sheila Jasanoff, "Civilization and madness: the great BSE scare of 1996," Public Understanding of Science 6 (1997) 221-232.
11. Brian Wynne "Knowledge in context," Science, Technology and Human Values 16(1991): 111-21; on trust see also Steven Yearley, "Understanding science from the perspective of the sociology of scientific knowledge: an overview," Public Understanding of Science 3 (1994): 245-258.
12. Brian Wynne "Knowledge in context," Science, Technology and Human Values 16(1991): 111-21; on trust see also Steven Yearley, "Understanding science from the perspective of the sociology of scientific knowledge: an overview," Public Understanding of Science 3 (1994): 245-258.
13. Steven Yearley, "The environmental challenge to science studies," in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (London: Sage, 1995), 457-479.
14. On the concentration of radiation see Steven Yearley, The Green Case (London: Routledge, 1992), p. 163; biological systems can also concentrate radioactive material-for example, sheep and cows eating contaminated grass can accumulate the polluting materials, thus endangering meat-eating humans, and so on.
15. See Steven Yearley. "What does science mean in the 'public understanding of science'," in Between Understanding and Trust: The Public, Science and Technology, ed. M. Dierkes and C. von Grote, (Amsterdam: Harwood Academic, 2000), 217-236.
16. Sheila Jasanoff, "What judges should know about the sociology of science," Jurimetrics 32 (1992): 345-59; see also the initial attempt at systematization in Steven Yearley, "Understanding science from the perspective of the sociology of scientific knowledge: an overview," Public Understanding of Science 3 (1994): 245-258.
17. Sheila Jasanoff, "What judges should know about the sociology of science," Jurimetrics 32 (1992): 345-59; see also the initial attempt at systematization in Steven Yearley, "Understanding science from the perspective of the sociology of scientific knowledge: an overview," Public Understanding of Science 3 (1994): 245-258.
18. Frank N. Laird, "Participatory analysis, democracy, and technological decision making," Science, Technology and Human Values 18(1993): 341-361, and also Richard E. Sclove, Democracy and Technology (New York: Guilford Press, 1995).
19. Frank N. Laird, "Participatory analysis, democracy, and technological decision making," Science, Technology and Human Values 18(1993): 341-361, and also Richard E. Sclove, Democracy and Technology (New York: Guilford Press, 1995).
20. The main reference is Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," in Ecological Economics, ed. R. Costanza, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), 137-152, though see also idem, "Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science," in Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1992), 251-273. Other helpful papers include: idem, "The good, the true and the post-modern," Futures 24, no. 10 (1992): 963-976; "Risk management as a post-normal science," Risk Analysis 12, no. 1 (1992): 95-97; and "Science for the post-normal age," Futures 25, no. 7 (1993): 740-755.
21. The main reference is Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," in Ecological Economics, ed. R. Costanza, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), 137-152, though see also idem, "Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science," in Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1992), 251-273. Other helpful papers include: idem, "The good, the true and the post-modern," Futures 24, no. 10 (1992): 963-976; "Risk management as a post-normal science," Risk Analysis 12, no. 1 (1992): 95-97; and "Science for the post-normal age," Futures 25, no. 7 (1993): 740-755.
22. The main reference is Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," in Ecological Economics, ed. R. Costanza, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), 137-152, though see also idem, "Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science," in Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1992), 251-273. Other helpful papers include: idem, "The good, the true and the post-modern," Futures 24, no. 10 (1992): 963-976; "Risk management as a post-normal science," Risk Analysis 12, no. 1 (1992): 95-97; and "Science for the post-normal age," Futures 25, no. 7 (1993): 740-755.
23. The main reference is Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," in Ecological Economics, ed. R. Costanza, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), 137-152, though see also idem, "Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science," in Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1992), 251-273. Other helpful papers include: idem, "The good, the true and the post-modern," Futures 24, no. 10 (1992): 963-976; "Risk management as a post-normal science," Risk Analysis 12, no. 1 (1992): 95-97; and "Science for the post-normal age," Futures 25, no. 7 (1993): 740-755.
24. The main reference is Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," in Ecological Economics, ed. R. Costanza, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), 137-152, though see also idem, "Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science," in Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1992), 251-273. Other helpful papers include: idem, "The good, the true and the post-modern," Futures 24, no. 10 (1992): 963-976; "Risk management as a post-normal science," Risk Analysis 12, no. 1 (1992): 95-97; and "Science for the post-normal age," Futures 25, no. 7 (1993): 740-755.
25. Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," p. 143.
26. Ibid., p. 144.
27. Tim O'Riordan and Steve Rayner, "Risk management for global environmental change," Global Environmental Change 1, no. 2 (1991): 91-108.
28. Sheila Jasanoff and Brian Wynne, "Science and decisionmaking," in Human Choice and Climate Change Vol. 1, ed. Steve Rayner and Elizabeth L Malone, 1-87 (Columbus, Ohio: Battelle Press, 1998), 1-87, and see pp. 11-13.
29. Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," p. 145.
30. Ibid., p. 149.
31. See Peter Bailey, Clair Gough, Michael Chadwick, and Gordon McGranahan, Methods for Integrated Environmental Assessment: Research Directions for the European Union (Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute, 1996).
32. Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," p. 148.
33. Ibid., p. 146.
34. Funtowicz and Ravetz make an attempt to deal with some of these issues in Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1990).
35. Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues," p. 150.
36. Ibid., p. 148.
37. On this role for environmental economics see Michael Jacobs, "The limits to neoclassicism: towards an institutional environmental economics," in Social Theory and the Global Environment, ed. Michael Redclift and Ted Benton (London: Routledge 1994), 67-91; see also Steven Yearley, Sociology, Environmentalism, Globalization (London: Sage, 1996), pp. 124-130.
38. On this role for environmental economics see Michael Jacobs, "The limits to neoclassicism: towards an institutional environmental economics," in Social Theory and the Global Environment, ed. Michael Redclift and Ted Benton (London: Routledge 1994), 67-91; see also Steven Yearley, Sociology, Environmentalism, Globalization (London: Sage, 1996), pp. 124-130.
39. Brian Wynne, "Uncertainty and environmental learning," Global Environmental Change 1 (1992): 111-127 and Brian Wynne, "May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide."
40. Brian Wynne, "Uncertainty and environmental learning," Global Environmental Change 1 (1992): 111-127 and Brian Wynne, "May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide."
41. Ibid., (1992), p. 117.
42. Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne, "Introduction," in Misunderstanding Science ? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology, ed. Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne (Cambridge: CUP, 1996), 1-17.
43. Brian Wynne, "Uncertainty and environmental learning," Global Environmental Change 1 (1992): 111-127, p. 123.
44. Brian Wynne, "May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide," p. 57; original emphases.
45. See David L. Morgan, Focus Groups: Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (London: Sage, 1988) and David L. Morgan, Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art (London: Sage, 1993).
46. See David L. Morgan, Focus Groups: Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (London: Sage, 1988) and David L. Morgan, Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art (London: Sage, 1993).
47. One of the referees noted that these data are not truly "naturally occurring," since they arise from focus groups convened by researchers. The intention behind describing them as naturally occurring was to stress that the model was an operational one implemented and run in "real life" by a particular local authority, rather than something devised by the researchers to elicit people's responses. For further empirical details of the study see Steven Yearley, "Computer models and the public's understanding of science: a case-study analysis," Social Studies of Science 29(1999): 845-866.
48. In the transcription citations, the first figure in square brackets refers to the group number (1 is the city's "Environment Forum," 4 is the public-sector group and so on; see the case-study-description section earlier in the paper for fuller details of the groups' composition) and the second figure refers to the page of the transcript. For anonymity's sake, group members are referred to only by number; the numbering is however consistent, so that, for example, utterances by "R2" in Group 4 are always by the same individual. Square brackets indicate words switched to preserve a measure of anonymity or other editorial substitutions. Curly brackets indicate actions or other non-verbal occurrences.