From consensus to credibility

Abstract

The development of consensual science has greatly influenced the international environmental negotiation processes. This is not least the case for the Convention on Long‐range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). Negotiators as well as regime analysts regard CLRTAP as a successful example of how scientists have succeeded in influencing international policy making through consensus‐building strategies. Drawing on Ulrich Beck's work on reflexive scientization and the concept of ‘stage management’ from the field of the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge (SSK), this paper critically analyzes the role of science in the regulation of transboundary air pollution. It discusses the consensus‐building strategies developed by scientists as well as contemporary strategies for making science matter in regulative work. It is argued that scientific credibility is crucial for attracting political and public attention, but that credibility does not necessarily have to be based on scientific consensus. The challenge for science is not so much to create consensus but to strengthen its credibility by elaborating new relations with its stakeholders.

Notes

This paper was written in the framework of the ASTA—International and National Abatement Strategies for Transboundary Air Pollution—research programme which includes some 30 researchers and is financed by Mistra—the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research (see http://asta.ivl.se). The programme aims to support the revision of international agreements on transboundary air pollution expected to take place within CLRTAP and the EU. As members of this programme we have taken part in the planning of meetings and strategic discussions as well as some workshops where scientists and policy makers got together.