Which Science - Whose Science - How Scientific Disciplines Can Shape Environmental Law
Which Science - Whose Science - How Scientific Disciplines Can Shape Environmental Law
复制标题
哪门科学 - 谁的科学 - 科学学科如何塑造环境法
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Eric Biber
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Eric Biber
环境法从根本上依赖于环境科学对信息的生产。然而，环境科学中不可避免的不确定性意味着政策必然与科学交织在一起，从而允许机构、利益集团和政治家在科学的光环下隐藏价值选择和权衡。学者和决策者一直在为如何解决这个“科学谜题”而苦苦挣扎。本文通过仔细研究环境法中科学学科的多样性，提出了一种新的方法来应对潜在的挑战。每个科学学科都有自己的观点，这些观点部分基于价值观，并塑造了它们所产生的信息。这样理解，法律与科学的交集就可以大大简化。我们可以根据产生相关信息的学科，对科学和政策如何相互作用进行概括，而不是试图将每一个重要的个人决策分离出来。我们也可以将科学学科理解为设计任何监管或管理系统的重要组成部分。例如，某些学科可能在法律或体制结构中享有特权，以帮助推进具体的政策目标；我们可以将决策过程与妨碍实现这些目标的纪律隔离开来；或者我们可以平衡多个学科，以减少干扰决策的学科盲点的风险。
Environmental law fundamentally depends on the production of information by environmental science. However, the inevitable uncertainty in environmental science means that policy will necessarily intertwine with science, allowing for the concealment of value choices and trade-offs by agencies, interest groups, and politicians under a patina of science. Scholars and decision-makers have struggled over how to resolve this “science charade.” This paper proposes a new approach to the underlying challenge by closely examining the diversity of scientific disciplines in environmental law. Scientific disciplines each develop their own perspectives that are based in part on values and that shape the information they produce. Understood this way, the intersection of law and science can be greatly simplified. Instead of attempting to separate science and policy out for every significant individual decision, we can make generalizations about how science and policy will interact depending on the discipline that produces the relevant information. We can also understand scientific disciplines as essential components to the designing of any regulatory or management system. For instance, particular disciplines might be privileged in the legal or institutional structure to help advance specific policy goals; we might insulate the decision-making process from disciplines that interfere with the accomplishment of those goals; or we might balance multiple disciplines in order to reduce the risk of disciplinary blindspots that interfere with policymaking.