Of science & responsibility A NOT-SO-RECENT scientific approach is still persistently knocking on the doors of both the scientific and political spheres. In places where the door is fragile and broken, it is becoming clear that changes in the environment and society demands a change in the approach of science in addressing global issues and policies. This approach, called post-normal science is a problem-solving strategy occurring when uncertainties involve ethical or epistemological considerations and decisions are in conflict among those involved. Beginning with a definition of normal science in reference to the physicist and science philosopher, Thomas Kuhn – normal science pertains to the usual way of doing science. It is the typical experimentation or puzzle-solving stage that serves to extend only a pre-existing methodology or scientific idea. It follows an already determined set of rules where “uncertainties are managed automatically, values are unspoken, and foundational problems unheard of” (Funtowicz, 1993). When applied to a more global scale, normal science becomes limited. Scientific research does provide policy-makers the evidence and the foundation needed for policy-making but it is not the only influence considered especially in circumstances of complex reality when politics, ethics and culture are involved – which is always.
FEATURE
WRITTEN BY JERSEY GANDING
A striking quality of post-normal science is its proposal of an “extended peer community”. With the recognition of a complex and dynamic system vastly entangled in human affairs, scientific research and policy becomes not only an exclusive discussion among the technocrats but an inclusive dialogue that extends its reach even to those without certified scientific expertise. Such plurality of legitimate perspectives, according to Funtowicz and Ravetz, reduces uncertainty and helps in quantifying or in qualifying the decision risks. Issues and its consequences are shared and consulted by both accredited experts and lay-persons where the latter can help in data collection or give their experience and even imagined solutions
FEATURE
This is the same concept that the scientists Silvio Funtowicz and Jerome Ravetz discussed when they first coined the term post-normal science and developed the idea in the 1990s. In their 1993 article, “Science for the post-normal age,” the authors express the need to manage uncertainties, assert human values and relate the significance of history as part of
the scientific character. It is post-normal in a sense that the normal science as described by Kuhn is “no longer appropriate for the resolution of policy issues of risks and the environment.” In situations where uncertainty or scientific consensus is high and decision stakes are extreme, post-normal science is dominated by “soft values” rather than “hard facts” which is in contrast to the traditional approach. This is usually applied when environmental and human risks are involved and where further delay in action and policy due to inadequate scientific information might cause a greater social, economic and cultural upheaval. In short, the environment does not need to be trashed and human lives to be loss while waiting for an environmental law to be approved or waiting for precautions to be employed. As such, issues from climate change to AIDS are cases where the presence of post-normal science is beginning to be more applicable and where facts and values are becoming more inseparable.
11
