Precaution in public: the social perception of the role of science and values in policy making

Abstract

This article presents the results of a study of public perception recently completed in Spain which questioned citizens about their views on the precautionary principle, the role of science in policy making, as well as their level of trust in science. The results show that Spanish citizens, by a significant margin, consider that scientists may be influenced by economic interests, that values play a key role in policy making, and that policy should be guided by precaution. Two groups were identified, one with a moderate and the other one with a more stringent interpretation of precaution. The results indicate that public policies that do not sufficiently take into account precaution and exclude values from decision making are likely to encounter resistance among many citizens.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

De Marchi, B. and Funtowicz, S. (2004) “La gobernabilidad del riesgo en la Unión Europea,” in J.L. Luján and J. Echeverría (eds) Gobernar los riesgos, pp. 153-65. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.

Elzinga, A. and Jamison, A. (1995) “Changing Policy Agendas in Science and Technology,” in S. Jasanoff , G. E. Markle , J. C. Petersen and T. Pinch (eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, pp. 572-597. London: SAGE Publications .

European Commission (1999) White Paper on Food Safety, COM (1999) 719 final. Brussels: European Commission .

European Commission (2000) Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle, COM 1 (2000). Brussels: European Commission .

European Commission (2001a) Science and Society Action Plan, COM 714 final (4/12/2001). Brussels: European Commission .

European Commission (2001b) European Governance: a White Paper, COM 428 (25/07/2001). Brussels: European Commission .

European Commission (2001c) Eurobarometer 55.2: Europeans, Science and Technology. Luxembourg: European Commission .

European Commission (2002) On the Collection and Use of Expertise by the Commission: Principles and Guidelines, COM 713 final (11/12/2002). Brussels: European Commission .

European Parliament and Council (2002) “Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28/1/2002, Laying Down the General Principles and Requirements of Food Law, Establishing the European Food Safety Authority and Laying Down Procedures in Matters of Food Safety,” Official Journal of the European Communities 45: 1-24 .

10.

FECYT (2005) Percepción social de la ciencia y la tecnología en España—2005. Madrid: FECYT.

11.

Jasanoff, J. (1990) The Fifth Branch. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press .

12.

Kallerund, E. and Ramberg, I. (2002) “The Order of Discourse in Surveys of Public Understanding of Science,” Public Understanding of Science 11: 213-224 .

13.

Luján, J. L. and Todt, O. (2000) “Perceptions, Attitudes and Ethical Valuations: the Ambivalences of the Public Image of Biotechnology in Spain,” Public Understanding of Science 9: 383-392 .

14.

National Research Council (1996) Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences .

15.

OECD (2001) Social Sciences and Innovation, Information Society. Paris: OECD .

16.

Raffensperger, C. and Tickner, J. , eds (1999) Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Washington, DC: Island Press .

17.

Santillo, D. , Johnston, P. and Stringer, R. (1999) “The Precautionary Principle in Practice: a Mandate for Anticipatory Preventive Action,” in C. Raffensperger and J. Tickner (eds) Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle, pp. 36-50. Washington, DC: Island Press .

18.

Sarewitz, D. (1996) Frontiers of Illusion: Science, Technology and the Politics of Progress. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press .

19.

Slovic, P. (1997) “Risk Perception and Trust,” in V. Molak (ed.) Fundamentals of Risk Analysis and Risk Management, pp. 233-245. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Lewis Publishers .

20.

Stirling, A. (1999) On Science and Precaution in the Management of Technological Risk: Vol. 1. Brussels: EC Joint Research Center .

21.

Tesh, S. N. (2000) Uncertain Hazards: Environmental Activists and Scientific Proof. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press .

22.

Todt, O. (2003) “Designing Trust,” Futures 35: 239-251 .

23.

Todt, O. (2004) “Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology under Uncertainty,” Safety Science 42: 143-158 .

24.

Todt, O. and Luján, J. L. (2000) “Spain: Commercialization Drives Public Debate and Precaution,” Journal of Risk Research 3(3): 237-245 .

25.

Von Schomberg, R. (1996) “The Laborious Transition to a Discursive Policy Process on the Release of Genetically Modified Organisms,” in A. van Dommelen (ed.) Coping with Deliberate Release, pp. 147-156. Tilburg: ICHPA (International Centre for Human and Public Affairs) .