the mutual adaptation of science and politics
DESCRIPTION
THE MUTUAL ADAPTATION OF SCIENCE AND POLITICS. Understanding the interaction of science and politics through complexity theory By: Neil E. Harrison Executive Director, The Sustainable Development Institute University of Wyoming, USA Draft paper available from: [email protected]. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
THE MUTUAL ADAPTATION OF SCIENCE AND POLITICS
Understanding the interaction of science and politics through complexity theory
By: Neil E. HarrisonExecutive Director, The Sustainable
Development Institute University of Wyoming, USADraft paper available from: [email protected]
2
PRIOR VIEWS OF SCIENCE-POLITICS
Epistemic Communities: scientists interpret technical uncertainty through their values and beliefs and attempt to influence national policy
Discursive Practices: cognitive structures of power-knowledge determine what can be thought in politics and science
Mutual Construction: science goals and methods influenced by political needs
3
COMMON FINDINGS AMONG PRIOR THEORIES
Politics and science in international environment not separable
Links can cross levels of analysis Effects may be disproportionate to causes
4
CONCEPTS OF COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS (CAS)
myriad interactions between very many agents agents self-seeking through cooperation agents use internal models to find niche in system system behavior emerges from agent interactions system adapts to environment (other systems) path dependent and irreversible small causes may produce large effects non-linear and unpredictable
5
CAS SYSTEMS MODEL OF SCIENCE-POLITICS
Science and politics are mutually adaptive complex systems
Events at one level affect decisions at another - emergence links up, adaptation links down
Incommensurate causes and effects Science and politics systems interact at all levels THUS, CAS IS A COMPREHENSIVE MODEL
OF SCIENCE-POLITICS
6
THE IMPORTANCE OF RULES IN CAS
Because of emergence and the large number of (often) small causes for any effect, it is not practical to search for specific cause-effect relationships. CAS systems are understood through the rules (institutions) that govern system processes:
complex systems may be simulated using a few rules of agent behavior
social systems emerge from rules of behavior (also called “institutions”)
science and politics are social systems
7
RULES OF SCIENCE & POLITICS
8
RULES OF SCIENCE SYSTEM
Primary: Peer review determines those methods, theories, and empirical evidence that are generally accepted by scientists.
Operational: Consensual “knowledge” evolves from peer review Force policy relevant conclusions on the state of
science in response to demand from politics Interpret scientific data, limitations, and
uncertainties to politics
9
RULES OF POLITICS SYSTEM
Primary: Form collective internal models (that determine agent behavior) from discourse among individual internal models (derived from values operating on “facts” and knowledge).
Operational: Determine values in issue (environmental conservation,
equity, growth, free trade, etc.) Select meaning of science (apply values to knowledge) Compare values to other issues and rank Assess alternate strategic choices Adapt to prior rules and institutions (laws, treaties, etc.) and
the values they embody
10
AGENTS AND INTERNAL MODELS
‘Nations’ are meta-agents: agents that are themselves CAS. Thus, agent rules operate at all levels of analysis Internal Models:
Agents use internal models (IMs) to anticipate, plan, and set goals and attribute meaning to data
Internal models come from: (1) knowledge (science) and (2) values (beliefs about right & wrong, good and bad)
11
EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 1
Force conclusions on state of science: FAR (1990) interim conclusions much hedged
but indicative of problem SAR (1995) summary wording negotiated In SAR warming was “discernible,” carefully
chosen wording intended to minimize obstruction to mitigative policy
12
EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 2
Interpret science to politics – individual level: In UK: Tickell persuades Thatcher who
proposes Earth Summit In US (1991): Bromley, Sununu say science
uncertain & Watson, EPA ignored - Bush refuses to act
13
EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 3
Interpret science to politics – national level (US) : US Committee on Earth Sciences US Global Change Program M.A.R.S working group
14
EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 4
Interpret science to politics – international level: IPCC charged by UN with defining state of science IPCC assessment reports to INC & COP in 1991,
1995, and 2000 accepted by politics as knowledge of climate change causes and effects for selecting policy and distributing costs thereof
IPCC chair presents reports to plenary INC & COPs, explains and interprets
15
EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 5
Determine values affected by issue - individual level:
past polluters (developed countries preserving wealth) vs. future polluters (developing countries)
environment (mitigative policies) vs. development (GDP)
Human rights (per capita emissions ) vs. sovereignty (national reduction targets
16
EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 6
Determine values affected by issue – national level:
For US, economic cost during ’91 recession At Kyoto sovereignty & cost for US, AUS,
Japan, etc. For AOSIS states, their existence
17
EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 7
Determine values affected by issue – international level:
UNFCCC Article 3, as amended, states principles and norms
Specific UNFCC reference to priority of free trade Sovereignty explicitly accepted Protection of intellectual property Weak, unspecified references to equity, sustainable
development
18
LINKS BETWEEN LEVELS - 1
Domestic politics influence on international: UK in 1988: Tories lose much support in EU
elections for poor environmental record. Climate change viewed as cost-free environmental issue
US in 1993: Congress rejects carbon tax; Clinton Administration refuses to lead at COP 1
US in 1995: Policies of Republican majority spurs environmental backlash opening door for Clinton “green” foreign policy and COP 2 deal
19
LINKS BETWEEN LEVELS –2
International politics influence on domestic: 1988 Toronto conference organized by
Environment Canada officials coincides with North American drought leads to extensive media reporting. US Senate hearings ensue
1991 International negotiations precede domestic debate in most countries
Kyoto & Bush rejection spur media interest and public concern in Europe & North America
20
LINKS BETWEEN LEVELS –3
Individual influence on national and international: In UK government scientist (Fiske) credited with
educating all senior officials in several parliaments In US (1990-92) Bush decision to keep climate
policy in White House leaves EPA “outside looking in” and permits economic arguments to dominate
Gore as VP credited with ‘greening’ Clinton White House and foreign policy
21
ADVANTAGES OF A CAS MODEL
Inclusive: uses many potential factors, not few hypothesized cause-effect relations
Holistic: integrates main concepts from all prior theories Dynamic with feedbacks to values and science
consensus Understanding: no explanation in complex human
systems Find few rules to comprehend system ops. Near-term projections and scenarios possible
22
DISADVANTAGES OF CAS
Simulations of rule interaction used to compare modeled with actual outcomes can be time-consuming
Extensive data collection Interpretation required to identify values from
behaviors etc. Radical ontology shift from simple models not well
accepted Several epistemological problems
23
LEVERAGE POINTS – SCIENCE
Evolving consensus: propose conclusions around which agreement may coalesce
Scientific conclusions: stretch the envelope in interpretation of available data. E.g. interpret uncertainty aggressively
Interpretation of science: influence meaning of science for influential policymakers
24
LEVERAGE POINTS – POLITICS
Ranking values affected: explicitly state values affected & debate comparative with contending issues
Domestic politics: mobilize popular concern esp. in democratic states, emphasizing values, practical ethics (human rights, education, etc.)
Public debate using rhetoric (e.g. ethics) not only facts (science)
Propose creative, ethical (value-based) strategies: “contraction and convergence”
25
RESEARCH AGENDA
Identify more rules Simulate interaction among rules Case studies on application to other
environmental issues Case studies on leverage points in this and
other issues Case studies on non-environmental technically
dependent issues