5 minute read
Of science & responsibility
Next Article
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.
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.
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
WRITTEN BY JERSEY GANDING
to a problem which also concerns them. Science then becomes commensurable to the different sectors in the society and more capable of adapting to the changing times.
Post-normal science in the Philippines
Applying the concept of post-normal science closer to home, we can cite the 2011 metallic mining issue in the province of Romblon as an example. In a paper published by the Romblon State University, the role of the post-normal science approach is highlighted as a way in tackling the issue regarding the entry of an international mining company in the province. The university itself became active in the organization of extended peer communities where different groups other than the science and political community – such as the religious sector, women, senior citizens and indigenous people – participated and gave way to a plurality of legitimate perspectives. These accounts alongside the scientific evidence gathered on the effects of such large-scale mining pressured local political leaders to take action, concluding a strong opposition against the entry of international mining companies.
Meanwhile, another example of a situation with a high uncertainty and high decision stake is the recent Dengvaxia controversy that put into question the science policy-making in the country. Before a budget proposal is done, information about the efficacy of the dengue vaccine remains in great uncertainty. In such a situation, post-normal science is highly recommended but has failed to be applied. Also, part of the problem lies in the lack of proper scientific training on the policy-makers alongside the lack of an extended peer community dialogue for the known risks of the vaccine. In fact, even though situations such as the Romblon mining issue do exist, policy decisions such as in the Dengvaxia controversy is more common in the Philippines, according to UP Diliman Science, Technology and Society (STS) professor, Benjamin Vallejo Jr.
In his paper, “Postnormal science and Filipinos at risk,” Vallejo said that the Philippine state relies on normal science. Part of the problem stems from the small science community in the country and the lack of support for science and technology from the government. More relevant approaches such as post-normal science then fail to come across the public sphere and to gain a more appropriate stand in solving science issues. Moreover, in an industry created by science and technology, the same normal approach will fail.
... 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.
Ultimately, the still persistent knocking of post-normal science on the doors of science and politics in the Philippines demands an urgent answer. According to Vallejo, using science research in policy-making is a political act. Communication of the risks to the Filipino people must be sufficiently established. More importantly, with the same words which ended Vallejo’s paper: “Public participation with the scientific community becomes even more essential, if the social good is to be achieved. Achieving the social good is the ultimate political act.” ●
Fetalvero E., Fetalvero, S., and De Luna, A. (2013). Fostering environmentalism in a post-normal science context, Romblon State University, Philippines.
Funtowicz, S. and Ravetz, J.R. (1993). Science for the Post-Normal Age. Futures, 25, 735-755.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of the Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ravetz, J.R. (1999). What is post-normal science? Futures, 31, 647-653.
Vallejo, B. Jr. Postnormal science and Filipinos at risk. Readings in Science, Technology and Society.
