Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
The term 'deliberation' means that values and facts are constructed within a
participatory practice, where they are moulded in a process of mutual confronta-
tion. In deliberative processes it is expected that people through interrogation
will discover values - what is important to them, to others, and to society - and
learn about their and society's interests. It is this fundamental commitment to
learning that characterizes the use of 'confrontation' and 'interrogation' among
ideas and value. The institutionalization of 'deliberation' - i.e. the simultaneous
interrogation of knowledge and values - can transform political decision-making
(Smith 2000) . This process is also described by Habermas as deliberative
democracy (1996) .
Habermas distinguishes three models for the relation between science and policy,
among which “the pragmatic model” recognises that “… there is interdependence
between values and facts … and the strict separation between the functions of the
expert and the politician is replaced by a critical inter-relation” (Van den Hove 2007) .
Drawing on Habermas' classification of science-policy relations the SEAMLESS-IF
procedure can be viewed as a pragmatic, process-oriented science-policy
interface. The main reason for this stems from the fact that SEAMLESS-IF
procedures recognise interdependence between values expressed by organisations
and techniques to satisfy value-oriented needs. In SEAMLESS-IF procedures, the
strict separation between the functions of scientists and policy makers is replaced by
a critical inter-relation.
In the assessment procedure, the choice of which scientific knowledge is
required - i.e. which problem situations will be considered and which are left
aside - involves dynamics that pertain to both the scientific and policy domains.
The identification of the issue at stake, the choice of relevant disciplines, method-
ologies, scales, variables, and boundaries, and the strategies to articulate them are
elements of the scientific process that are in no way isolated from the socio-political
context. In other words, the framing of the question to be considered in the
assessment involves value judgements and decisions about what will be considered
and what not - from policy experts, and about who will be involved and how - from
integrative modellers. Hence the first domain of intersection between science
and policy in the SEAMLESS-IF procedure is a result of the fact that processes of
selecting, framing and addressing a problem as well as the design of potential
solutions pertain to both the scientific and the political spheres.
The second domain of intersection between science and policy relates to
the selection of models and indicators used to identify impacts of the policy to be
tested. Value judgements are also embedded in decisions about which results
will be used and how they are interpreted. The essential point here is that the
SEAMLESS-IF selection process of models and indicators belongs both to the
scientific process and to the policy process. Policy experts may influence the scientific
validation process in the direction of interest and values of their organisations.
Integrated modellers might feed scientific knowledge into the policy process in
accordance with values of the scientific networks by which 'scientists build up their
cognitive authority'. Scientific networks may be used as 'a powerful vehicle for
channelling scientific input to policy-making' (Van den Hove 2007 : 813).
Search WWH ::




Custom Search