Risks,predictions and other optical illusions: Rethinking the use of science in social decision-making

This article examines two examples of what has been called mandated science - risk analysis and long-term energy demand forecasting - with a view to disentangling the implicit assumptions underlying their use in public policy debates and in the policy process. In both fields, there has emerged a growing and very similar challenge to traditional views of the role and status of mandated science in informing decision-making. This challenge has led to the reformulation of some of the attributes of the standard view, without however causing changes in the underlying view of the nature of the problem or the role of science in principle. A deeper critique suggests that mandated science is inherently value-laden, producing conclusions that are strongly affected by theoretical presuppositions that in turn reflect underlying values (e.g., about rationality, knowledge or the role of technology). Thus a sharp separation of science and policy is untenable and amounts to a hidden policy bias in favor of the business-as-usual policies supported by conventional science. There is a need for a new concept of science, one that is more integrated into the policy context, more contextual and openly value-laden, less oriented to mastery over natural and social processes, and more accessible to the public at large.