Flexible Interpretations of “Acid Rain” and the Construction of Scientific Uncertainty in Political Settings

Abstract

Much research in social studies of science addresses scientists' interpretative flexibility in the construction of scientific knowledge. This flexibility is readily visible among different scientists' competing knowledge-claims as well as in their accounts across different social settings. This article illustrates this process and discusses some of its implications through a case study of descriptions of acid rain in published scientific papers and Congressional testimony. As acid rain was flexibly reconstructed in Congressional testimony, its meanings and implications for control legislation became more contested. Some descriptions of acid rain that were intended to usefully clarify the phenomenon actually contributed to an impression of scientific uncertainty, and thereby further polarized debate.

Federal Uncertainty or Inconsistency? Releasing the New Agricultural-Environmental Biotechnology Into the Fields

“…The regulation of the new agricultural-environmental biotechnology is an example of how politics and science intertwine in policymaking. While politics plays a key role in other science policy arenas, such as acid rain (Zehr, 1994), alachlor, alar, asbestos, and radon (Harrison and Hoberg, 1994), what makes the new agricultural-environmental biotechnology so intriguing is that it is the first technology to be regulated before catastrophic risk has been proven (Hardy and Glass, 1985;Krimsky and Wrubel, 1996:233). Additionally, and perhaps more so than for any previous technology, regulatory triggers depend on the definition of what is natural and what is man-made, definitions that have been highly contested in policy debate.…”

“Teach the Controversy”

“…However, recent science issues such as stem cell research, global warming, and new advances in biotechnology bring with them controversy, which affects the structure of scientific news (Dunwoody, 1999;Nelkin, 1995;Nisbet et al, 2003;Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002;Rogers, 1999;Zehr, 1994Zehr, , 2000. These issues spark moral and political debates, and have resulted in a change in scientific reporting.…”

Constructing a Response to Ecological Problems under Scientific Uncertainty: A Comparison of Acid Rain and Climate Change Policy in Canada

“…The history of acid rain policy making in Western Europe as well as in North America has been widely reconstructed and studied from a variety of angles, some within a perspective shared by this paper (Roqueplo, 1988;Regens and Rycroft, 1988;Park, 1989;Boehmer-Christiansen and Skea, 1991;Forster, 1993;Zehr, 1994aZehr, , 1994bHajer, 1995;Herrick and Jamieson, 1995;Tessier, 1996;Mutton, 1998). That of climate change policy making is fast emerging (Brunner, 1991;Ungar, 1992;Jamieson, 1992;Boehmer-Christiansen, 1993;Hart and Victor, 1993;Roqueplo, 1995;Shackley andWynne, 1995, 1996;O'Riordan and Jäger, 1996;Timmerman, 1996;Fernmann, 1997;Weart, 1997).…”

“…The purpose of this paper is to address the question of how social actors respond to ecological problems and what kind of discourse they construct. Many writers and studies have shown that in environmental matters science is a necessary and critical variable, but not always the determining factor in formulating policies (Benedick, 1991;Zehr, 1994a;Lanchberry and Victor, 1995). Moreover, the science itself, which serves as a necessary basis for decision and policy, is most often reviewed severely, contested, or judged insufficient for action.…”