From the perspective of reflexive governance, this study probes into the transformative capacity and roles of government and civil society, and aims to determine how the authoritative developmental neo-liberalism state was challenged by civil society in democratization from the end of the 1980s, when it encountered a crisis of governance legitimacy. By analyzing the anti-petrochemical movement of the recent two decades, this paper recognizes the important historic line, and proposes that without innovative governance, a regime of expert politics with hidden and delayed risk will result in higher degrees of mistrust and confrontational positions by the public. In contrast to the government, local and civil societies are growing through the anti-pollution appeals of simple group protests into systematic and robust civic knowledge and strategic action. By administrative, legislative, judicial, and risk statement paths, such strategic mobilizations break through authoritative expert politics and reshape new civic epistemology. The process of reflexive governance is extremely radical. When two parties cannot commit to dealing with a high degree of mistrust, they will not be able to manage the more dramatic threat of climate change. Fundamentally speaking, a robust civil society will be an important driving power competing with government, in terms of constructing innovative governance.
How climate models came to gain and exercise epistemic authority has been a key concern of recent climate change historiography. Using newly released archival materials and recently conducted interviews with key actors, we reconstruct negotiations between UK climate scientists and policymakers which led to the opening of the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in 1990. We historicize earlier arguments about the unique institutional culture of the Hadley Centre, and link this culture to broader characteristics of UK regulatory practice and environmental politics. A product of a particular time and place, the Hadley Centre was shaped not just by scientific ambition, but by a Conservative governmental preference for ‘sound science’ and high evidential standards in environmental policymaking. Civil servants sought a prediction programme which would appeal to such sensibilities, with transient and regional climate simulation techniques seemingly offering both scientific prestige and persuasive power. Beyond the national level, we also offer new insights into the early role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and an evolving international political context in the shaping of scientific practices and institutions.
Scientific knowledge is often not used in policymaking, even when the aim of the research is to produce policy-relevant results and these are communicated clearly and timely. The problem of the discrepancy between scientific outcomes and usable knowledge for policymaking is often labeled "science–policy gap." Boundary organizations "bridge" this gap. Boundary organizations are intermediary organizations that produce information that is useful in policymaking and at the same time qualify as scientific (here this includes all academic research, including humanities and social sciences). However, boundary organizations are not just "knowledge brokers" that reconcile a demand (by policy makers) for knowledge with the supply (by academics) of knowledge. The knowledge-brokering perspective on science–policy interaction assumes that parcels of knowledge produced by academics are transmitted unchanged to policy makers, along a linear pathway of knowledge transfer from academia to policy makers.Several decades of close study of science–policy interactions has revealed that the production of policy advice cannot realistically be described in terms of clear boundaries between science and politics, nor can it be conceived as linear knowledge transfer leading to knowledge use. The production of policy-relevant information requires mutual engagement by scientists and policy makers in processes of knowledge co-production. Through the co-production process other concerns than purely scientific ones, such as political acceptability, are integrated in the result. Boundary organizations are sites where this co-production is institutionalized. Boundary organizations engage in quality and relevance assessments of existing scientific research and the production of policy advice reports, but also the design of innovative policy instruments and commissioning of new research and the evaluation of policy impacts of prior output. These activities are labeled "boundary work." They are inherently tricky because they require a balancing act between scientific credibility and policy usefulness. Science and politics are normally demarcated spheres with different procedures and quality criteria. Boundary organizations endeavor to coordinate these apparently incompatible demands through boundary work.Boundary organizations are often presented as "silver bullet" that will solve all frictions and frustrations in science–policy interactions. However, the extent to which boundary organizations can fulfill such expectations depends on several factors: the (inter)national political culture regarding the status and role of science in policymaking, the culture of the policy domain regarding the same, the characteristics of the policy problem itself, and the availability of boundary working skills. Conversely, in many cases the time-consuming and sensitive creation of boundary organizations is not necessary. By extension, it is not possible to define "best practice" on boundary organizations or boundary work. What works is highly context dependent, but also time-dependent, so changes with time.
Connecting Virtues examines the significant advances within the fast-growing field of virtue theory and shows how research has contributed to the current debates in moral philosophy, epistemology, and political philosophy.-Includes groundbreaking chapters offering cutting-edge research on the topic of the virtues -Provides insights into the application of the topic of virtue, such as the role of intellectual virtues, virtuous dispositions, and the value of some neglected virtues for political philosophy -Examines the relevance of the virtues in the current debates in social epistemology, the epistemology of education, and civic education -Features work from world-leading and internationally recognized philosophers working on the virtues today.
Utrum sit una tantum vera enumeratio virtutum moralium / Sophie Grace Chappell -- Generosity : a preliminary account of a surprisingly neglected virtue / Christian B. Miller -- An eye on particulars with the end in sight : an account of Aristotelian phronesis / Maria Silvia Vaccarezza -- Honesty as a virtue / Alan T. Wilson -- Virtue epistemology, enhancement, and control / J. Adam Carter -- Epistemic paternalism and the service conception of epistemic authority / Michel Croce -- Neuromedia and the epistemology of education / Duncan Pritchard -- Epistemic vice and motivation / Alessandra Tanesini -- Senses of humor as political virtues / Phillip Deen -- Citizens' political prudence as a democratic virtue / Valeria Ottonelli -- Hope as a democratic civic virtue / Nancy E. Snow
Why compare? -- Controlling narratives -- A question of Europe -- Unsettled settlements -- Food for thought -- Natural mothers and other kinds -- Ethical sense and sensibility -- Making something of life -- The new social contract -- Civic epistemology -- Republics of science
Climate change policy is a prime example for the growing importance of expert ad-vice to inform decision‐making. Consequently, a plethora of advisory bodies and pro-cesses have emerged around the world. However, there are marked differences in the way the interactions between science and politics are organized and practiced depending on a country’s political system and culture. The degree of political compe-tition, the role of state vis-à-vis non-state actors and the dominant modes of interest mediation provide specific conditions for the ways expertise is consulted and used in decision-making. Against this background, the paper presents the landscape of scientific advice in Austrian climate policy and asks in how far the traditionally strong culture of corporat-ism in Austrian politics manifests itself in practices of climate policy advice. Concep-tually, the paper draws on analytical dimensions derived from the concepts of “na-tional styles of policy-making” and “civic epistemology”. Methodically it bases on an interview series and a workshop with representatives from science, politics, and in-termediary organizations. Our analysis provides a differentiated picture: the neo-corporatist culture still leaves its imprint in Austrian climate policy advice. But at the same time, the emergence of a new policy field, such as climate policy, undoubtedly opens up possibilities for new actors and forms of policy advice.
Abstract In mid-2006, the Indonesian government announced a plan to build nuclear power plants geared towards meeting soaring demands for energy in the country. After prolonged procrastination, the government is determined that time is ripe for Indonesia to go nuclear. While discussions on adopting nuclear power are steadily gaining currency among high officials and political elites, it is simulta-neously being contested by an antinuclear alliance consisting of multiple groups that form an organized resistance. The organized resistance is primarily driven by suspicions that the current government does not possess the capacity to handle high-risk technology. Using combined approaches of STS and social movement studies, the paper discusses the contestation of nuclear risk discourses and how lack of trust in the government has led to the ascendancy of antinuclear movements. In situating the paper within postauthoritarian Indonesia, this paper observes how shifts towards democratic change has allowed a network of civil society groups to organize resistance against nuclear power both at the national and local levels. The paper also highlights the way in which civic epistemology guides antinuclear groups to produce popular risk assessments that confront scientific calculations of nuclear risk. Lastly, it presents a vignette of how civil society groups mobilize local resources to explore alternative energy systems that ultimately undermine the government’s nuclear ambitions.
This paper deals with the problem of philosophical and scientific (epistemological) reflection of the value assumptions in political thinking. The authors of the paper use the concept of civic consciousness to demonstrate the relationship of historical axiological senses of political thinking in the context of holistic comprehension of the state life of people.
While wind power is now considered both technologically mature and economically feasible, it faces bitter opposition from local communities on the grounds of visual pollution. The role that visual impact analyses play in policy debates about the siting of wind energy facilities is critically examined. The production of viewshed simulations and their reception by members of diverse publics are examined in the context of the Cape Wind project in the United States. The official public comments record for this project is used to explore how viewshed controversies challenge administrative politics. Some ways in which visual impact assessments can better register cultural rationality and enroll civic epistemologies are suggested. Adapted from the source document.
Many political theorists argue that cross-cultural communication within multicultural democracies is not best served by a commitment to identity politics. In response, I argue that identity politics only interfere with democratic participation according to an erroneous interpretation of the relationship between identity and reasoning. I argue that recognizing the importance of identity to the intelligibility of reasons offered in the context of civic deliberation is the first step towards the kind of dialogue that democratic participation requires.
This article contributes to comparative environmental politics by integrating comparative analysis with debates about ontological politics as well as science and technology studies. Comparative environmental analysis makes two tacit assumptions: that the subject of comparison (e.g., an environmental policy framework) is mobile and can be detached from its contexts; and that studying this subject in more than one location can identify its diffusion and implementation anywhere. These assumptions are sites of ontological politics by predetermining (or restricting) environmental outcomes. Environmental analysis needs to consider how its own comparative acts might reify supposedly global frameworks rather than acknowledging how different localities appropriate and give meaning to them in diverse ways. The concept of civic epistemologies illustrates how domestic politics are organized around supposedly global concepts, rather than how global concepts diffuse around the world, as illustrated here by a comparative analysis of the United Nations' Green Economy Initiative. Adapted from the source document.
Is it possible to design public policieswhich are thought and implemented upon citizen's preferences ? Behavioral approaches to policy ma- king aim to create environments which improve de- cisions , based on the complexity of social and co- gnitive factors that affect the decision process . Their implementation is guided by the evidence of the results obtained once policies are tested . In this way the institutions and policy makers have one to- ol to promote a civic behavior for individual citizens and the community expanding freedom of choice and simplifying the regulatory policies . This article examines the epistemology of planning a correct choice architecture.
Habermas claims that an inclusive public sphere is the only deliberative forum for generating public opinion that satisfies the epistemic and normative conditions underlying legitimate decision-making. He adds that digital technologies and other mass media need not undermine – but can extend – rational deliberation when properly instituted. This paper draws from social epistemology and technology studies to demonstrate the epistemic and normative limitations of this extension. We argue that current online communication structures fall short of satisfying the required epistemic and normative conditions. Furthermore, the extent to which Internet-based communications contribute to legitimate democratic opinion and will formation depends on the design of the technologies in question.
This article aims to reflect an interest in epistemological and civic issues and its implications in education research. It presents different politico-epistemological bases to carry out research in the environmental education area. Emphasizes their importance to the scientific culture and environmental citizenship. Admits the contribution of environmental education to new forms of citizenship of an environmental nature must not be limited to dealing with issues of knowledge but it cannot ignore them either. It also admits the current lack of epistemological trust in modern science forces us to think about new epistemological dimensions. At a time, when we are beginning an era of more or less radical critique of modernity and we already envision the contours of a new order - that of 'post-modernity' - we must not only pay heed to the "ethos" of modern science but also to that of techno-science or post-modern science. Therefore, the aims of this article are: to question environmental education research based on epistemology of science that 'forgets' that not all conditioning factors of scientific procedures are inherent to scientific work; to show socio-environmental imperatives that force us to think about a 'new' epistemology; to discuss the current lack of epistemological trust in modern science; to rethink and to revaluate traffics and links among epistemological criterions that legitimate different forms of citizenship, of science and of environmental education; to break with the positivist paradigm that modern science has been based on; to face a re-evaluation of the relation science/citizens; to compare the construction of technique rationalities with the construction of environmental rationalities that favour overcoming the cognitive "schism" science-citizens and keeping in mind a "new" social and technological science dimension - an ethically ambivalent dimension that builds up and destroys the world. ; Este artigo pretende reflectir o interesse por questões epistemológicas e cívicas e por suas implicações na pesquisa em educação. Apresenta diferentes bases político-epistemológicas para a pesquisa na área da educação ambiental (EA). Enfatiza a sua importância para a cultura científica e para a cidadania ambiental. Admite que o contributo da EA para novas formas de cidadania de cariz ambiental não se pode limitar a tratar questões de conhecimento, embora não as possa ignorar. Supõe que a actual falta de confiança epistemológica na ciência moderna nos obriga a pensar novas dimensões da epistemologia; quando estamos a iniciar uma época de crítica, mais ou menos radical, à modernidade e quando já podemos divisar os contornos de uma nova ordem - a da 'pós-modernidade" - há que ter em atenção não apenas o "ethos" da ciência moderna, mas também o da tecnociência ou ciência pós-moderna. Assim, os propósitos deste artigo são: questionar uma pesquisa em EA radicada numa epistemologia da ciência que "esquece" que nem todos os factores condicionantes dos procedimentos científicos são interiores ao trabalho científico; mostrar imperativos socioambientais que nos forçam a pensar numa nova epistemologia; debater razões para a actual falta de confiança epistemológica na ciência moderna; repensar e reavaliar trânsitos e conexões entre critérios epistemológicos que legitimam diferentes formas de cidadania, de ciência e de educação ambiental; romper com o paradigma positivista em que se tem apoiado a ciência e a cidadania modernas; enfrentar uma reavaliação da relação ciência/cidadãos; comparar a construção de racionalidades técnicas com a de racionalidades ambientais, que contrariam o "cisma" cognitivo ciência-cidadãos; e questionar o valor e o papel da reconfiguração da matriz social e tecnológica da ciência - uma dimensão, eticamente ambivalente, que constrói e destrói o mundo.