EPIDEMICS · Epistemology and Democracy in Complex Societies (EPIDEMICS)

Epistemology and Democracy in Complex Societies

Project objectives It is often said that the sciences should be brought into democracy, but conceptual frameworks for making sense of that aspiration are surprisingly underdeveloped. This project will meet the need for a richer theoretical account of democratic theory in the context of scientific governance, drawing on the sociology of knowledge and political theory. The EPIDEMICS project has three overall aims: - Theoretical: to develop an interdisciplinary framework that clarifies the philosophical commitments behind studies of governance-driven democratisation; - Applied: this project will begin from and relate back to the wide range of policy innovations associated with the 'democratisation' of scientific governance in both the EU and North America; - Organisational: the project will develop mechanisms to transfer the knowledge and research networks acquired in the overseas phase to EU researchers across disciplines. Work performed In the first period of the project (Jan-Dec 2010), I completed a survey of the field and began work on the development of a theoretical framework that would enable me to relate the concepts of authority and expertise to a range of traditions and concepts in contemporary democratic theory. By engaging with writings on expertise and authority in social studies of science and in political theory, I began to formulate a democratic concept of expert authority. Within this concept, expert authority depends ultimately on the judgment of those called to accept it, and this in turn depends on institutions that can enable and support lay judgment. I held a successful intra-university workshop at UBC to initiate discussions and build connections with other researchers at the university. I completed two publications and presented three conference papers. I began work on a book proposal. And I completed a grant proposal to the Canadian SSHRC Situating Science programme requesting $10 000 to support an international conference at UBC during period 2 (which was subsequently awarded in full). In the second period (Jan-Dec 2011), I deepened and consolidated my work on the theoretical framework. In particular, I analysed the conceptual relationship between scientific and political authority, and began to formulate these ideas in a draft book chapter and separately in a joint paper with John Beatty, a philosopher at UBC. I also attempted to articulate the problem of expertise in democratic theory and practice, advancing a democratic 'systems' approach to the problem of specifying the relations between expert authority and democratic ideals and practices of equality and contestation. I presented both of these pieces in their early form at an international conference on 'Scientific Authority in Democratic Societies', held at the Peter Wall Centre for Advanced Studies at UBC. I also presented work at five conferences in North America and Europe, and submitted three single-authored papers to key peer-reviewed journals. In the third period (Jan-Dec 2012), I applied the theoretical framework developed in the project to cases of public involvement and institutional innovations in scientific governance, and began the task of producing a book manuscript, taking up the suggestions made in the initial feedback on the book proposal submitted in 2011. I submitted three papers to peer-reviewed journals. I also engaged in knowledge transfer through a graduate seminar on 'epistemology and democracy' at the return host in June 2012. And I extended my network development activities, presenting chapters and papers in progress at the Science Democracy Network meeting in Paris and as an invited speaker in seminars at the LSE, Arizona State University and Harvard University. Project results The key substantive result at the end of this period was a draft book manuscript applying the innovative theoretical framework developed in the project to contemporary practices and institutions for public involvement in science and expertise. The book emphasises the importance of the interrelation between agonistic practices of contestation and republican institutions of collective self-government. The key problem, as I present it, is not how to remove public suspicion of science and expertise, but how to organise public mistrust into the production of authoritative expertise. Further results from this period include the submission of three articles to peer-reviewed journals, and the successful completion of planned network development activities. From the project as a whole there have now been six articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals, along with a survey article and a book review. Two of those journal articles are now in print, one is forthcoming, and the others are either under review or revision. Two further articles are in preparation. Expected final results and potential impact In bringing together the disciplines of political theory and science studies, this project has provided conceptual resources for further and deeper engagement between these two fields with respect to the study of new democratic innovations and practices of scientific governance. This in turn will help in the analysis and evaluation of the effects of existing governance innovations and in the exploration of new ways of organising public mistrust into the governance of science and expertise. Such work is important because the prosperity and competitiveness of the EU depends not only on technological development, but also on the cultivation of stable, reflective and responsible governmental practices and public spheres. The organisational and network development aspects of the project are also having an impact, primarily through building new collaborative relationships between scholars in political theory and science studies.

Текст от CORDIS, на английски · Данни: CORDIS, © Европейски съюз