179
Stirling’s approach to discern different types of incomplete knowledge, with
regard to scientifi c uncertainty and sociopolitical ambiguity , has also been addressed,
for example, through the concept of post-normal science (PNS) as put forward by
Funtowicz and Ravetz ( 1993 ). Similar to Stirling’s notion of ‘ ignorance’ , the concept of PNS proposes that under conditions of high uncertainty (limited knowledge
on probabilities) and high social stakes (limited knowledge on possible outcomes),
management responses to environmental problems need to seek solutions not only
based on input from science, as evaluated by traditional peer review, but assembled
also in an open dialogue with all affected stakeholders, something the authors call
‘extended peer communities’ (ibid.). These extended peer communities serve to
employ additional information , knowledge and values for an active, more effective
and legitimate process to identify possible solutions to specifi c environmental
problems .
Following this classifi cation of different forms of incomplete knowledge, Stirling
also proposes a number of methodological responses that should ‘illustrate the rich
variety of alternatives that exist if risk assessment is not properly applicable’
(Stirling 2007 : 312; Fig. 8.2 ). However, such alternative approaches should not be
taken as a ‘neat one-to-one mapping of specifi c methods to individual states of
knowledge’ (ibid.) but rather serve as an array of more adequate reactions to different types of uncertainty problems that complement (and not necessarily substitute
for) the traditional risk assessment-based approach.
The different categories of science-policy interactions summarised in Fig. 8.2
illustrate a more diversifi ed picture than the ‘ideal causal chain’ model of applying
only a traditional scientifi c defi nition of environmental problems in a linear fashion
to management processes (Fig. 8.1 ). While traditional scientifi c assessment and
science-based management offer powerful tools under the condition of risk (comparatively low uncertainty and known outcomes), this approach is not solely applicable to the other three categories identifi ed by high levels of uncertainty, ambiguity
and ignorance . However, contrary to such insights, the traditional scientifi c approach
to only apply the best available (natural) scientifi c knowledge to policy- and
decision- making often prevails and causes problems and controversy . As Stirling
notes, ‘ persistent adherence to these reductive methods, under conditions other than
the strict state of risk, are irrational, unscientifi c and potentially misleading’ (Stirling
2007 : 311).
Following this line of reasoning, we investigate whether and how different roles
and approaches of science-based advice and adaptations to them in the form of
management responses have evolved in our fi ve cases of environmental governance
in accordance with Stirling’s typology. After analysing science-policy interfaces of
the fi ve cases in the following section, we will comparatively discuss the appropriateness of the different approaches to science and policymaking with respect to
different forms of incomplete knowledge and draw conclusions on how to deal with
the discovered science-policy challenges.
With respect to the theoretical context described above, our analysis focuses on
two sets of questions to investigate assessment -management (science-policy)
interactions in the fi ve cases, linked to the implementation of EAM :
8 Science-Policy Interfaces in Baltic Sea Environmental Governance: Towards…
Stirling’s approach to discern different types of incomplete knowledge, with
regard to scientifi c uncertainty and sociopolitical ambiguity , has also been addressed,
for example, through the concept of post-normal science (PNS) as put forward by
Funtowicz and Ravetz ( 1993 ). Similar to Stirling’s notion of ‘ ignorance’ , the concept of PNS proposes that under conditions of high uncertainty (limited knowledge
on probabilities) and high social stakes (limited knowledge on possible outcomes),
management responses to environmental problems need to seek solutions not only
based on input from science, as evaluated by traditional peer review, but assembled
also in an open dialogue with all affected stakeholders, something the authors call
‘extended peer communities’ (ibid.). These extended peer communities serve to
employ additional information , knowledge and values for an active, more effective
and legitimate process to identify possible solutions to specifi c environmental
problems .
Following this classifi cation of different forms of incomplete knowledge, Stirling
also proposes a number of methodological responses that should ‘illustrate the rich
variety of alternatives that exist if risk assessment is not properly applicable’
(Stirling 2007 : 312; Fig. 8.2 ). However, such alternative approaches should not be
taken as a ‘neat one-to-one mapping of specifi c methods to individual states of
knowledge’ (ibid.) but rather serve as an array of more adequate reactions to different types of uncertainty problems that complement (and not necessarily substitute
for) the traditional risk assessment-based approach.
The different categories of science-policy interactions summarised in Fig. 8.2
illustrate a more diversifi ed picture than the ‘ideal causal chain’ model of applying
only a traditional scientifi c defi nition of environmental problems in a linear fashion
to management processes (Fig. 8.1 ). While traditional scientifi c assessment and
science-based management offer powerful tools under the condition of risk (comparatively low uncertainty and known outcomes), this approach is not solely applicable to the other three categories identifi ed by high levels of uncertainty, ambiguity
and ignorance . However, contrary to such insights, the traditional scientifi c approach
to only apply the best available (natural) scientifi c knowledge to policy- and
decision- making often prevails and causes problems and controversy . As Stirling
notes, ‘ persistent adherence to these reductive methods, under conditions other than
the strict state of risk, are irrational, unscientifi c and potentially misleading’ (Stirling
2007 : 311).
Following this line of reasoning, we investigate whether and how different roles
and approaches of science-based advice and adaptations to them in the form of
management responses have evolved in our fi ve cases of environmental governance
in accordance with Stirling’s typology. After analysing science-policy interfaces of
the fi ve cases in the following section, we will comparatively discuss the appropriateness of the different approaches to science and policymaking with respect to
different forms of incomplete knowledge and draw conclusions on how to deal with
the discovered science-policy challenges.
With respect to the theoretical context described above, our analysis focuses on
two sets of questions to investigate assessment -management (science-policy)
interactions in the fi ve cases, linked to the implementation of EAM :
8 Science-Policy Interfaces in Baltic Sea Environmental Governance: Towards…