1

THE MUTUAL ADAPTATION OF SCIENCE AND POLITICS

Understanding the interaction of science and politics through complexity theory

By: Neil E. HarrisonExecutive Director, The Sustainable

Development Institute University of Wyoming, USADraft paper available from: nharriso@uwyo.edu

2

PRIOR VIEWS OF SCIENCE-POLITICS

Epistemic Communities: scientists interpret technical uncertainty through their values and beliefs and attempt to influence national policy

Discursive Practices: cognitive structures of power-knowledge determine what can be thought in politics and science

Mutual Construction: science goals and methods influenced by political needs

3

COMMON FINDINGS AMONG PRIOR THEORIES

Politics and science in international environment not separable

Links can cross levels of analysis Effects may be disproportionate to causes

4

CONCEPTS OF COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS (CAS)

myriad interactions between very many agents agents self-seeking through cooperation agents use internal models to find niche in system system behavior emerges from agent interactions system adapts to environment (other systems) path dependent and irreversible small causes may produce large effects non-linear and unpredictable

5

CAS SYSTEMS MODEL OF SCIENCE-POLITICS

Science and politics are mutually adaptive complex systems

Events at one level affect decisions at another - emergence links up, adaptation links down

Incommensurate causes and effects Science and politics systems interact at all levels THUS, CAS IS A COMPREHENSIVE MODEL

OF SCIENCE-POLITICS

6

THE IMPORTANCE OF RULES IN CAS

Because of emergence and the large number of (often) small causes for any effect, it is not practical to search for specific cause-effect relationships. CAS systems are understood through the rules (institutions) that govern system processes:

complex systems may be simulated using a few rules of agent behavior

social systems emerge from rules of behavior (also called “institutions”)

science and politics are social systems

7

RULES OF SCIENCE & POLITICS

8

RULES OF SCIENCE SYSTEM

Primary: Peer review determines those methods, theories, and empirical evidence that are generally accepted by scientists.

Operational: Consensual “knowledge” evolves from peer review Force policy relevant conclusions on the state of

science in response to demand from politics Interpret scientific data, limitations, and

uncertainties to politics

9

RULES OF POLITICS SYSTEM

Primary: Form collective internal models (that determine agent behavior) from discourse among individual internal models (derived from values operating on “facts” and knowledge).

Operational: Determine values in issue (environmental conservation,

equity, growth, free trade, etc.) Select meaning of science (apply values to knowledge) Compare values to other issues and rank Assess alternate strategic choices Adapt to prior rules and institutions (laws, treaties, etc.) and

the values they embody

10

AGENTS AND INTERNAL MODELS

‘Nations’ are meta-agents: agents that are themselves CAS. Thus, agent rules operate at all levels of analysis Internal Models:

Agents use internal models (IMs) to anticipate, plan, and set goals and attribute meaning to data

Internal models come from: (1) knowledge (science) and (2) values (beliefs about right & wrong, good and bad)

11

EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 1

Force conclusions on state of science: FAR (1990) interim conclusions much hedged

but indicative of problem SAR (1995) summary wording negotiated In SAR warming was “discernible,” carefully

chosen wording intended to minimize obstruction to mitigative policy

12

EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 2

Interpret science to politics – individual level: In UK: Tickell persuades Thatcher who

proposes Earth Summit In US (1991): Bromley, Sununu say science

uncertain & Watson, EPA ignored - Bush refuses to act

13

EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 3

Interpret science to politics – national level (US) : US Committee on Earth Sciences US Global Change Program M.A.R.S working group

14

EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 4

Interpret science to politics – international level: IPCC charged by UN with defining state of science IPCC assessment reports to INC & COP in 1991,

1995, and 2000 accepted by politics as knowledge of climate change causes and effects for selecting policy and distributing costs thereof

IPCC chair presents reports to plenary INC & COPs, explains and interprets

15

EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 5

Determine values affected by issue - individual level:

past polluters (developed countries preserving wealth) vs. future polluters (developing countries)

environment (mitigative policies) vs. development (GDP)

Human rights (per capita emissions ) vs. sovereignty (national reduction targets

16

EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 6

Determine values affected by issue – national level:

For US, economic cost during ’91 recession At Kyoto sovereignty & cost for US, AUS,

Japan, etc. For AOSIS states, their existence

17

EXAMPLES OF RULES IN ACTION IN CLIMATE CHANGE - 7

Determine values affected by issue – international level:

UNFCCC Article 3, as amended, states principles and norms

Specific UNFCC reference to priority of free trade Sovereignty explicitly accepted Protection of intellectual property Weak, unspecified references to equity, sustainable

development

18

LINKS BETWEEN LEVELS - 1

Domestic politics influence on international: UK in 1988: Tories lose much support in EU

elections for poor environmental record. Climate change viewed as cost-free environmental issue

US in 1993: Congress rejects carbon tax; Clinton Administration refuses to lead at COP 1

US in 1995: Policies of Republican majority spurs environmental backlash opening door for Clinton “green” foreign policy and COP 2 deal

19

LINKS BETWEEN LEVELS –2

International politics influence on domestic: 1988 Toronto conference organized by

Environment Canada officials coincides with North American drought leads to extensive media reporting. US Senate hearings ensue

1991 International negotiations precede domestic debate in most countries

Kyoto & Bush rejection spur media interest and public concern in Europe & North America

20

LINKS BETWEEN LEVELS –3

Individual influence on national and international: In UK government scientist (Fiske) credited with

educating all senior officials in several parliaments In US (1990-92) Bush decision to keep climate

policy in White House leaves EPA “outside looking in” and permits economic arguments to dominate

Gore as VP credited with ‘greening’ Clinton White House and foreign policy

21

ADVANTAGES OF A CAS MODEL

Inclusive: uses many potential factors, not few hypothesized cause-effect relations

Holistic: integrates main concepts from all prior theories Dynamic with feedbacks to values and science

consensus Understanding: no explanation in complex human

systems Find few rules to comprehend system ops. Near-term projections and scenarios possible

22

DISADVANTAGES OF CAS

Simulations of rule interaction used to compare modeled with actual outcomes can be time-consuming

Extensive data collection Interpretation required to identify values from

behaviors etc. Radical ontology shift from simple models not well

accepted Several epistemological problems

23

LEVERAGE POINTS – SCIENCE

Evolving consensus: propose conclusions around which agreement may coalesce

Scientific conclusions: stretch the envelope in interpretation of available data. E.g. interpret uncertainty aggressively

Interpretation of science: influence meaning of science for influential policymakers

24

LEVERAGE POINTS – POLITICS

Ranking values affected: explicitly state values affected & debate comparative with contending issues

Domestic politics: mobilize popular concern esp. in democratic states, emphasizing values, practical ethics (human rights, education, etc.)

Public debate using rhetoric (e.g. ethics) not only facts (science)

Propose creative, ethical (value-based) strategies: “contraction and convergence”

25

RESEARCH AGENDA

Identify more rules Simulate interaction among rules Case studies on application to other

environmental issues Case studies on leverage points in this and

other issues Case studies on non-environmental technically

dependent issues