An official website of the United States government
Abstract Regulatory agencies aim to protect the public by moderating risks associated with innovation, but a good regulatory regime should also promote justified public trust. After introducing the USDA 2020 SECURE Rule for regulation of biotech innovation as a case study, this essay develops a theory of justified public trust in regulation. On the theory advanced here, to be trustworthy, a regulatory regime must (1) fairly and effectively manage risk, must be (2) “science based” in the relevant sense, and must in addition be (3) truthful, (4) transparent, and (5) responsive to public input. Evaluated with these norms, the USDA SECURE Rule is shown to be deeply flawed, since it fails appropriately to manage risk, and similarly fails to satisfy other normative requirements for justified trust. The argument identifies ways in which the SECURE Rule itself might be improved, but more broadly provides a normative framework for the evaluation of trustworthy regulatory policy-making.
more »
« less
The Discontents of Truth & Trust in 21st Century America
Abstract Credible fact-making for policy demands the same legitimating moves as are required for credible politics. Experts, like politicians, must represent the world in ways that respect diverse standpoints, aggregate disparate opinions to produce a semblance of objectivity, and find persuasive ways to bridge gaps between available and ideal states of knowledge. Every society, moreover, commands its own culturally recognized approaches to producing and testing public knowledge, and expert practices must conform to these to be broadly accepted. Insisting on the superior authority of science without attending to the politics of reason and persuasion will not restore trust in either knowledge or power. Instead, trust can be regained with more inclusive processes for framing policy questions, greater attentiveness to dissenting voices and minority views, and more humility in admitting where science falls short and policy decisions must rest on prudence and concern for the vulnerable.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10469347
- Publisher / Repository:
- American Academy of Arts and Sciences
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Daedalus
- Volume:
- 151
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0011-5266
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 25 to 42
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Amid the growth of circular economy research, policy, and practice, there are increasingly loud calls for a unified and singular definition of circularity. This unity is needed, proponents argue, to enable swift action in the face of climate and environmental crises. Our work interrogates the ideal of convergence around the circular economy. We ask whether circularity must be singular and uniform in order to be effective. Based on convergence science research and social theory rooted in ideas of divergence, our paper draws on observations of a convergence science workshop, focus groups, interviews, and questionnaires with US-based circular economy professionals to explore shared and divergent understandings and practices of circularity. We find that even among a relatively homogeneous group of research participants (in terms of race, class, and education), there is significant divergence in terms of both practices and perceptions of circular economy principles. We focus in this paper on how research participants understand innovation in the circular economy as just one potential illustration of divergent circularity. Our research contributes to an understanding of circular economy knowledge politics, illuminating how circularity is contested even among those who advocate most strongly for its implementation. We ultimately find opportunity and promise precisely in the spaces of contestation, and see divergence as a way to hold space for multiple ways of being and relating to economies, materials, and beings. These more inclusive pathways, we argue, may be necessary to ensure just and effective transitions to more circular economic forms.more » « less
-
Co-production has become a cornerstone of research within the sustainability sciences, motivating collaborations of diverse actors to conduct research in the service of societal and policy change. This review examines theoretical and empirical literature from sustainability science, public administration, and science and technology studies (STS) with the intention of advancing the theory and practice of co-production within sustainability science. We argue that co-production must go beyond stakeholder engagement by scientists to the more deliberate design of societal transitions. Co-production can contribute to such transitions by shifting the institutional arrangements that govern relationships between knowledge and power, science and society, and state and citizens. We highlight critical weaknesses in conceptualizations of co-production within sustainability sciences with respect to power, politics, and governance. We offer suggestions for how this can be rectified through deeper engagement with public administration and STS to offer a broad vision for enhancing the use, design, and practice of a more reflexive co-production in sustainability science. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Environment and Resources Volume 44 is October 17, 2019. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.more » « less
-
Abstract Scholars and practitioners often promote direct engagement between policymakers, health workers and researchers as a strategy for overcoming barriers to utilizing scientific knowledge in health policy. However, in many settings public health officials rarely have opportunities to interact with researchers, which is a problem further exacerbated by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. One prominent theory argues that policy actors will trust and utilize research findings when they perceive them to be salient, credible and legitimate. We draw on this theory to examine the conditions facilitating greater uptake of new knowledge among health officials when engagement is out of reach and they are instead exposed to new ideas through written mass communication. Using data from a survey experiment with about 260 health workers and administrators in Honduras, we find that messages from a technocratic sender based on statistical evidence improved perceptions of salience, credibility and legitimacy (SCL). Additionally, perceptions of SCL are three contextual features that operate as joint mediators between knowledge and action, and several individual characteristics also influence whether officials trust research findings enough to apply them when formulating and implementing health policies. This research can help inform the design of context-sensitive knowledge translation and exchange strategies to advance the goals of evidence-based public health, particularly in settings where direct engagement is difficult to achieve.more » « less
-
Abstract In 2020, Arizonans approved Proposition 207, the Smart and Safe Arizona Act, which legalized recreational marijuana sales. Previous research has typically used non‐spatial survey data to understand marijuana legalization voting patterns. However, voting behavior can, in part, be shaped by geographic context, or place, which is unaccounted for in aspatial survey data. We use multiscale geographically weighted regression to analyze how place shaped Proposition 207 voting behavior, independently of demographic variations across space. We find significant spatial variability in the sensitivity of voting for Proposition 207 to changes in several of the predictor variables of opposition and support for recreational marijuana legalization. We argue that local statistical modeling approaches provide a more in‐depth understanding of ballot measure voting behavior than the current use of global models. Related ArticlesBranton, Regina, and Ronald J. McGauvran. 2018. “Mary Jane Rocks the Vote: The Impact of Climate Context on Support for Cannabis Initiatives.”Politics & Policy46(2): 209–32.https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12248.Brekken, Katheryn C., and Vanessa M. Fenley. 2020. “Part of the Narrative: Generic News Frames in the U.S. Recreational Marijuana Policy Subsystem.”Politics & Policy49(1): 6–32.https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12388.Fisk, Jonathan M., Joseph A. Vonasek, and Elvis Davis. 2018. “‘Pot'reneurial Politics: The Budgetary Highs and Lows of Recreational Marijuana Policy Innovation.”Politics & Policy46(2): 189–208.https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12246.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01942
