Content area
Full Text
Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne, eds.: Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
As a research program, the "Public Understanding of Science" (aka PUS) originated by investigating public distrust of science-based authority. PUS largely represented this problem as a public misunderstanding of science, indeed, as a public deficiency in appreciating objective knowledge as a basis for practical decisions. If only the sources of public misunderstanding could be diagnosed, then perhaps they could be overcome by a correct understanding, many thought.
By contrast, alternative approaches have challenged stereotypes of both "the public" and "science." Researchers have asked: How does science legitimate and/or constrict knowledge? How does it represent reality according to particular socio-natural models? How does it mediate power between social constituencies? Conversely, how do various publics interpret, challenge and even appropriate scientific knowledge?
Such critical approaches have been brought together in an edited collection, Misunderstanding Science? This review selects a few examples of environmental risk issues, which illustrate how expert claims are implicitly framed and publicly understood as relations of power. People evaluate the institutional context, for example, the motives of those who make claims, and the practical implications for those at risk.
The 1986 Chernobyl disaster led to a European-wide debate over the safety of food which may be contaminated with radioactive fallout. In the UK, this general issue became acute in the Cumbrian hill-farming economy of sheep-grazing. From the national headquarters of the Agriculture Ministry, farmers were told that the fallout warranted no long-term restrictions. After soil contamination persisted longer than officially expected, the...