The Ethics of Communicating Scientific Uncertainty: Understanding How Scientists, Environmental Lawyers, and Reporters Treat Uncertainty Workshops; Fall 2015 and Spring 2016

该奖项支持在华盛顿特区举办的两个多学科研讨会，在研讨会上，科学家、律师和媒体专业人士将探讨科学不确定性与道德和专业规范之间的关系，以有效和道德地沟通和教授复杂的科学、技术、工程和数学（STEM）概念。这些研讨会将建立在先前由美国国家科学基金会资助、由环境法研究所（ELI）运营的一个试点研讨会的基础上，该研讨会将科学家、律师和记者聚集在一起。研讨会的目标有三个方面：1)通过加深参与者对同行解决科学不确定性的方法以及这些方法背后的伦理和规范原因的理解，促进更有效的跨学科交流；2)通过加深公众对负责传播科学不确定性的科学、法律和媒体专业人员的伦理和纪律约束的理解，促进对重大科学问题的更透明和建设性的辩论；3)通过技术和非技术演讲、同行评审出版物以及面向非专业受众的产出，将理解和伦理交流科学不确定性和潜在解决方案方面的挑战带到最前沿。召开研讨会背后的动机是这样一种观念，即公共决策在很大程度上是由科学家、律师和媒体成员开发和传播的数据、信息和分析所决定的。然而，这些专业对科学不确定性的看法各不相同，这在很大程度上取决于他们自己的内部道德标准和专业规范。

This award supports two multi-disciplinary workshops in Washington, DC, at which scientists, lawyers, and media professionals will explore the relationship between scientific uncertainty and ethical and professional norms in communicating and teaching complex Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) concepts effectively and ethically. The workshops will build on a previous pilot workshop funded by the NSF and run by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) that brought scientists, lawyers, and journalists together. The goals of the workshops are three-fold: 1) to facilitate more effective cross-discipline communications by deepening participants' understanding of the approaches their peers take to address scientific uncertainty, and the ethical and normative reasons underlying these approaches; 2) to promote more transparent and constructive debate on major scientific issues by deepening public understanding of the ethical and disciplinary constraints on scientific, legal, and media professionals charged with communicating scientific uncertainty; and 3) to bring the challenges in understanding and ethically communicating scientific uncertainty and potential solutions to the forefront through technical and non-technical presentations, peer-reviewed publication, and outputs for lay audiences.The motivation behind convening the workshops is the notion that public decisions are heavily informed by the data, information, and analysis developed and communicated by scientists, lawyers, and members of the media. Yet each of these professions thinks about scientific uncertainty differently shaped in large part by their own internal ethical standards and professional norms.