Post-normal institutional identities
This paper suggests adopting a 'post-normal science' (PNS) style and practice in scientific advice, and motivate the urgency of this methodological stance with the increasing complexity, and polarisation affecting the use of science-based evidence for policy. We reflect on challenges and o...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2017 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:186360 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/186360 https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.1016/j.futures.2016.11.009 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Post-normal science Quality Scientific advice Policy Trust Reflexivity Ethos of care |
| Sumario: | This paper suggests adopting a 'post-normal science' (PNS) style and practice in scientific advice, and motivate the urgency of this methodological stance with the increasing complexity, and polarisation affecting the use of science-based evidence for policy. We reflect on challenges and opportunities faced by a 'boundary organisation' that interfaces between science and policy, taking as example the European Commission's Directorate General Joint Research Centre, whose mission is stated as that to be the "in-house science service". We suggest that such an institution can be exemplary as to what could be changed to improve the quality of evidence feeding into the policy processes in the European Union. This paper suggests how an in-house culture of reflexivity and humility could trigger changes in the existing styles and methods of scientific governance; at the JRC, taken as example, this would mean opening up to the existing plurality of norms and styles of scientific inquiry, and adopting more participatory approaches of knowledge production, assessment and governance. We submit that the institutional changes advocated here are desirable and urgent in order to confront the ongoing erosion of trust in 'evidence based policy', anticipating controversies before they become evident in the institutional setting in which institutions operate. |
|---|