Objectivity versus narrative coherence : science , environmental policy , and the U . S . Data Quality Act

In this paper it is argued that mischaracterization concerning the use of science in the U.S. policy process has lead to unreasonable expectations about the role that scientific information can play in the development of environmental and public health policies. This in turn has lead to implementation of misguided and self-defeating policy initiatives designed to ensure the objectivity or “soundness” of scientific inputs to the policy process. This argument is illustrated through critical deconstruction of the recently implemented U.S. Data Quality Act. The interpretative and socially constructed character of scientific findings is well established across fields as diverse as the philosophy and history of science, science and technology studies, and the sociology of science. It is demonstrated that scientific assessment in a policy context rarely – if ever – lends itself to dichotomous characterizations such as “objective/non-objective.” This suggests the futility of policy initiatives designed to insure the purported objectivity of data and information used for political deliberation and/or policy decisions. An alternative perspective regarding the role of science in political deliberation and public policy is offered, drawing on the narrative school of policy analysis as articulated by Giandomenico Majone, Emery Rowe, Barry Bozeman and others. Under this view, scientific findings draw much of their validity through the context of their application in policy narratives. As a coda to the essay, it is suggested that similar perspectives underlie debates concerning both The Skeptical Environmentalist and the Data Quality Act. © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.