Search results

For infectious disease dynamical models to inform policy for containment of infectious diseases the models must be able to predict; however, it is well recognised that such prediction will never be perfect. Nevertheless, the consensus is that although models are uncertain, some may yet inform effective action. This assumes that the quality of a model can be ascertained in order to evaluate sufficiently model uncertainties, and to decide whether or not, or in what ways or under what conditions, the model should be 'used'. We examined the uncertainty in modelling, utilising a range of data: interviews with scientists, policy-makers and advisers, and analysis of policy documents, scientific publications and reports of major inquiries into key livestock epidemics. We show that the discourse of uncertainty in infectious disease models is multi-layered, flexible, contingent, embedded in context and plays a critical role in negotiating model credibility. We argue that usability and stability of a model is an outcome of the negotiation that occurs within the networks and discourses surrounding it. This negotiation employs a range of discursive devices that renders uncertainty in infectious disease modelling a plastic quality that is amenable to 'interpretive flexibility'. The utility of models in the face of uncertainty is a function of this flexibility, the negotiation this allows, and the contexts in which model outputs are framed and interpreted in the decision making process. We contend that rather than being based predominantly on beliefs about quality, the usefulness and authority of a model may at times be primarily based on its functional status within the broad social and political environment in which it acts.

This article explores the nature of calls for risk-based policy present in expert discourse from a cultural theory perspective. Semi-structured interviews with professionals engaged in the research and management of livestock disease control provide the data for a reading proposing that the real basis of policy relating to socio-technical hazards is deeply political and cannot be purified through 'escape routes' to objectivity. Scientists and risk managers are shown calling, on the one hand, for risk-based policy approaches while on the other acknowledging a range of policy drivers outside the scope of conventional quantitative risk analysis including group interests, eventualities such as outbreaks, historical antecedents, emergent scientific advances and other contingencies. Calls for risk-based policy are presented, following cultural theory, as ideals connected to a reductionist epistemology and serving particular professional interests over others rather than as realistic proposals for a paradigm shift.

AbstractThis article explores the nature of calls for risk‐based policy present in expert discourse from a cultural theory perspective. Semi‐structured interviews with professionals engaged in the research and management of livestock disease control provide the data for a reading proposing that the real basis of policy relating to socio‐technical hazards is deeply political and cannot be purified through 'escape routes' to objectivity. Scientists and risk managers are shown calling, on the one hand, for risk‐based policy approaches while on the other acknowledging a range of policy drivers outside the scope of conventional quantitative risk analysis including group interests, eventualities such as outbreaks, historical antecedents, emergent scientific advances and other contingencies. Calls for risk‐based policy are presented, following cultural theory, as ideals connected to a reductionist epistemology and serving particular professional interests over others rather than as realistic proposals for a paradigm shift.