1
Opening up the politics sustainabilityrecon
ciling science, participation and power
Sussex Energy Group

• Andy Stirling, SPRU
• science and technology policy research
• presentation to seminar series on Between a Rock
  a Hard Place The Politics of Regulating for
  Sustainability at the Department of Politics and
  International Relations,
  University of Westminster, 18th November 2008

2
Sussex Energy Group
Opening up the politics sustainabilityrecon
ciling science, participation and power

• 1 the general politics of innovation
• 2 plural pathways to sustainability
• 3 science and sustainability appraisal
• 4 participation and framing
• 5 opening up and closing down
• 6 science, participation and sustainability

3
The Politics of Innovation for Sustainability
on general technology policy we need more
pro innovation policies
Gordon Brown as Chancellor, 2004
on public attitudes to technologythere is
an anti-technology culture in the UK ?a pro-
technology culture must be created
- UK Council for Science and Technology, 2000
on political process politicians in power are
affected by the anti-science or anti-technology
feelings of influential intellectuals.
- EU HIGH LEVEL GROUP on ST
4
Innovation as Linear Progress
conventional linear understandings of
technology change still prevail in mainstream EU
technology governance
TECHNOLOGY
progress
SCIENCE
5
Polarised Politics of Innovation
conventional linear understandings of
technology change still prevail in mainstream
technology governance
FUTURE
eg history is a race to advance technology
- UK Royal Academy of
Engineeringanti-technology protestors are
members of the 'flat earth society, opposed to
modern economics, modern technology, modern
science, modern life itself.
UN DDG
time
PAST
Treats innovation as homogeneous no
distinctions no alternatives no politics
no choice !
No room for nonspecialist partticipation in
configuring of technology.Attempts to this end
risk inefficiency, delay, politicisation,
obstruction,ee
6
Technology Change as Market Closure
space of technologicalpossibilities
time
Received wisdom is that technical optimisation
and market competition lead to clear
technological closure
7
Technology Change as Social Choice
space of technologicalpossibilities
time
reveals hidden politics underlying choice of
sustainable pathways
8
Sustainable Energy Options
No shortage of possible pathways to energy
sustainability
biomass energy?
energy efficiency?
landfill gas?
small hydroelectricity?
tidal barrages?
waste energy conversion?
offshore tidal enclosures?
onshore wave power?
tidal stream?
subsea wave arrays?
onshore windfarms?
geothermal energy?
offshore wind arrays?
solar thermal power?
integrated micro-wind?
centralised photovoltaics?
high-altitude kites?
integrated photovoltaics?
desert solar wind towers?
nuclear power?
carbon capture storage ?
but which direction will we go?
9
The Dynamics of Lock-in
Economics, history, management, political
science, social studies
show path-dependence, momentum, lock-in around
poor choices
VHS and Betamax media standards Windows
software
Narrow Gauge Railways urban transport
internal combustion engine
QWERTY keyboards light water reactors
military systems
Deliberately or not we make our technological
futures
10
The Dynamics of Lock-in
space of technologicalpossibilities
time
- not all possibilities can be fully realised
(especially in global markets)
nuclear centralised renewables energy
services carbon capture distributed
renewables etc
11
The Dynamics of Lock-in
space of technologicalpossibilities
time
- not all possibilities can be fully realised
(especially in global markets)
nuclear centralised renewables energy
services carbon capture distributed
renewables etc
12
The Dynamics of Lock-in
space of technologicalpossibilities
time
- not all possibilities can be fully realised
(especially in global markets)
nuclear centralised renewables energy
services carbon capture distributed
renewables etc
13
The Missing Politics of Choice
eg Sir David King former UK Chief
Scientist current president of BAAS
We have no alternative to nuclear power if
there were other sources of low carbon energy I
would be in favour, but there aren't.
Independent, July 2006
We need to do everything we
cannot afford not to use nuclear power.
BBC Radio 4, December 2007
14
The Politics of Expectation
Directions for technology change are driven by
expectations
1 assume future electricity infrastructures
shift towards distributed, low-voltage,
smart-metered electricity systems, subject to
intelligent control and flexible supply contracts
invest in small scale renewables and energy
service innovations
2 assume persistence of traditional large
centralised steam-cycle power stations,
presiding over high-voltage transmission systems,
with one-way distribution and conventional
tariffs
incremental innovation along traditional fossil
and nuclear paths
David King is not objectively observing
inevitabilities he is tacitly helping to
make invisible political choices
15
Sound Science and Sustainability Strategies
Politics of sustainable technology justified
by science
on genetic modification this government's
approach is to make decisions on the basis of
sound science
on chemicals sound science will be the basis
of the Commission's legislative proposal
- EC RTD Commissioner, Philippe
Busquin
former UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair
on energy now is the right time for
a cool-headed, evidence based assessment of the
options open to us I want to sweep away
historic prejudice and put in its place evidence
and science
UK Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks
Treats sustainable technology strategies as a
matter for science
16
Sound Science of Sustainable Energy

• Science based evidence appears precise

coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
wind
solar
biomass
0.001
0.1
10
1000
low RISK high

• externality cUS/kWh (after Sundqvist et
  al, 2005)

17
Sound Science of Sustainable Energy

• , but is sensitive to framing

Science based evidence appears precise
n
minimum
maximum
coal
36
25 75
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
wind
solar
biomass
0.001
0.1
10
1000
low RISK high

• externality cUS/kWh (after Sundqvist et
  al, 2005)

18
Sound Science of Sustainable Energy

• , but is sensitive to framing

Science based evidence appears precise
n
coal
36
oil
20
gas
31
nuclear
21
hydro
16
wind
18
solar
11
biomass
22
0.001
0.1
10
1000
low RISK high

• externality cUS/kWh (after Sundqvist et
  al, 2005)

19
Sound Science of Sustainable Energy

• , but is sensitive to framing

Science based evidence appears precise
coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
wind
solar
biomass
Sustainability of energy technologies is
ambiguous and uncertain
20
Framing in Sound Science
Sustainability can be variously framed in
analysis
setting agendas defining problems
characterising options posing questions
prioritising issues formulating
criteria deciding context setting baselines
drawing boundaries discounting time
choosing methods including
disciplines handling uncertainties recruiting
expertise commissioning research constituti
ng proof exploring sensitivities
interpreting results
eg system boundaries offshore wind vs gas
generation
discounting the future nuclear energy
vs biomass
impact weightings coal climate vs wind
amenity
distributional priorities rooftop
solar vs oil emissions

• All analysis requires framing all framing
  involves value judgements
• answers given by sound science depend on the
  ways questions are asked

What is sustainable energy? about politics
as much as science!
21
A Role for Participation?

• Many different modes, contexts and perspectives
  in engagement

- transdisciplinary deliberation social science,
religious interests, ethicists, lay
membership eg strategic commissions ethics
councils, sustainable development commission
- stakeholder engagement employers, unions,
consumer organisations, social parttners,
special interests eg occupational health,
Agenda 21, chemicals forum, co-operative research
- citizen participation workers, local people,
consumers, citizens eg consensus conferences?
citizens juries? scenario workshops? focus
groups?
Driving aim in UK public engagement as fire
walls for sound science
22
Framing in Participation
Sustainability can be variously framed in
deliberation
identification of stakeholders phrasing of
questions bounding of remits recruitment of
participants provision of information choice of
focus personalities of protagonists medium of
discourse style of facilitation selection of
alternatives treatment of dissensus design of
process documentation of findings dynamics of
persuasion adoption of norms

• Participation is also open to contingency
  exercise of power

eg 1994 GM CC accused of biased
evidence and expertise
1999 Radwaste CC steered facilitation /
deliberation
2002 FSA CP contrived question
2003 Prajateerpu CJ
selective participation / information
2004 GM Dialogue self-selected engagement
2005 CORWM constrained remit
2006 nuclear consultation unlawful
procedure
Participation also offers means to justify
closing down politics
23
Opening Up through Participation?

• Three rationales / imperatives for
  participation (cf Fiorino, US NRC)

• 1 Normative (Democratic) the
  right thing to do in a democracy
• about process
  equity, inclusion, empowerment
• (even if ineffiective or
  inefficient according to incumbent interests)

• 2 Instrumental expedient
  means to some particular end
• about narrow interests trust,
  credibility, acceptance, sedation
• (offers justification
  and blame management in decision making)

• 3 Substantive improves general
  robustness of policy advice
• about broad consequences harm,
  benefit, sustainability, precaution
• (according to publicly reasoned,
  socially deliberated values and priorities)

24
Opening Up through Participation? (cf
Collingridge, 1980)
Just like expert and quantitative analysis,
participation can
obscure contextual, contingent and constructed
complexities in appraisal
be susceptible to influence by power to justify
decisions
Weak justification maximise trust and consent of
any decision minimise controversy and
conflict manage accountability and blame for
general institutions and procedures associated
with decision-making
Strong justification foster acceptance
and sedation of
specific decision construct
legitimacy and credibility manage
dissent and opposition benefiting particular
outcomes favoured by incumbent interests
As science-based appraisal loses public
confidence instrumental pressures for
justification are shifting to participation
25
Opening Up through Participation?
Some typical evaluation criteria
(eg Rowe Frewer, Petts, Renn) ubiquitous calls
for evaluation generally invoke some permutation
of following
representativeness inclusivity and
representative mix of interests independence
process should be conducted in independent,
unbiased way resources sufficient time,
expertise, information to allow agency structured
dialogue active steps to ensure effective and
unbiased debate transparency accessibility,
feedback, clarity on outputs, role of sponsors
task definition clear and achievable aims and
objectives. participants clear about their
role in the task.
influence the output from the engagement
should have a genuine impact on policy.
Evaluation discourses reflect, reinforce and
conceal instrumental imperatives
26
From Broadening Appraisal to Opening Up Choice
space of technologicalpossibilities
time
27
From Broadening Appraisal to Opening Up Choice
Beyond participation / analysis dichotomies
Public Engagement
Sound Science
Broad and participatory
Narrow and exclusive
BUT Multicriteria appraisal can be wide
and inclusive
Citizens Panels can be selective and constrained
space of technologicalpossibilities
time
28
From Broadening Appraisal to Opening Up Choice
Beyond participation / analysis dichotomies
Public Engagement
Sound Science
Broad and participatory
Narrow and exclusive
BUT Multicriteria appraisal can be wide
and inclusive
Citizens Panels can be selective and constrained
Complex and opaque
Straightforward, transparent
BUT Scenario backcasting can be
accessible, intuitive
Deliberative process / focus groups can be
elaborate and highly mediated
Conceals uncertainty
Reveals uncertainty
BUT Minority views / sensitivity analysis
can illuminate uncertainty
Citizens Jury evidence / verdicts conceal
uncertainty
Sensitive to framing
Transcends Framing
Consensus conference focuses on discrete findings
BUT Mapping approaches can explore
different framings
29
From Broadening Appraisal to Opening Up Choice
Distinction applies both to analytic and
participatory approaches to technology
appraisal
Not just about broadening of inputs to
technology appraisal like precautionary
addressing of uncertainty, ambiguity and
ignorance (issues, disciplines, perspectives,
options, uncertainties in assessment) Instead,
about the outputs of appraisal to wider
governance reflexively addressing how divergent
framings yield contrasting pictures (humility,
accountability, pluralism and diversity in
technology choice)
Arguably often more salient than conventional
distinctions specialist / non-specialist quantita
tive / qualitative analysis / deliberation but
strangely neglected
30
Closing Down and Opening Up
opening up
closing down
focus on defining the right questions
eliciting appropriate knowledge finding
most likely outcomes
contingencies and sensitivities contending
knowledges

dissenting views
emphasise aggregation, consensus reducing
complexity objectivity / legitimacy
diversity and pluralism exploring complexity
transparency / accountability
result in identify best option unitary
prescriptive advice
mapping range of options plural and
conditional advice
eg risk, cost-benefit, decision
analysis prescriptive ethics, social
expertise consensus conference, jury
verdicts,
scenarios, sensitivity analysis ABM,
multi-criteria mapping Q-method,
dissonance panels
strategic behaviour on part of
participants
vulnerable strategic behaviour by
practitioners or sponsors
31
Synergies science participation for
sustainability
False dichotomy rational sound science /
emotive precaution / participation All analysis
is framed by problems, priorities, values and
interests
Misleading language pro- / anti- rhetorics
obscure multiplicity of directions Undermines
rigour on uncertainty and accountability over
sustainability
Precaution broadening out methods, framings,
perspectives in appraisal Rigour over
uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance on
implications of directions
Participation not in itself a panacea for
opening up democratic choice Vulnerable (like
analysis) to instrumental pressures for
justification
Opening up as complement to closing down in
appraisal of sustainability Reflexivity over
contending values and interests in framing of
sustainability
Practical approaches many ways to open up
analysis deliberation alike Mapping methods,
participatory modeling, plural and conditional
advice
Rare chance to address both scientific rigour and
democratic accountability
32
(No Transcript)
33
Dealing with incomplete knowledge
many contrasting aspects of incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic
knowledge about likelihoods
problematic
34
Dealing with incomplete knowledge
many contrasting aspects of incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic
RISK
engineering failure short-term price covariance
knowledge about likelihoods
problematic
35
Dealing with incomplete knowledge
many contrasting aspects of incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic
RISK
engineering failure short-term price covariance
knowledge about likelihoods
unfamiliar toxins / hazards human factor
problematic
UNCERTAINTY
36
Dealing with incomplete knowledge
many contrasting aspects of incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic
AMBIGUITY
RISK
interests / priorities / framings divergent
notions of harm trust, fairness, ethics
engineering failure short-term price covariance
knowledge about likelihoods
unfamiliar toxins / hazards human factor
problematic
UNCERTAINTY
37
Dealing with incomplete knowledge
many contrasting aspects of incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
problematic
unproblematic
unproblematic
RISK
AMBIGUITY
engineering failure short-term price covariance
interests / priorities / framings divergent
notions of harm trust, fairness, ethics
knowledge about likelihoods
unknowns, surprise, novelty new vectors / forms
of harm
unfamiliar toxins / hazards human factor
IGNORANCE
problematic
UNCERTAINTY
38
Dealing with incomplete knowledge
Powerful pressures to close down towards risk
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic
RISK
AMBIGUITY
decision rules aggregative analysis
deliberative process political closure
knowledge about likelihoods

evidence-basing agenda-setting horizon
scanning transdisciplinarity
reductive modeling stochastic reasoning rules of
thumb insurance
liability law harm definitions indicators /
metrics institutional remits
IGNORANCE
problematic
UNCERTAINTY
39
Dealing with incomplete knowledge

knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic
RISK
AMBIGUITY
scenarios / backcasting interactive
modeling mapping / Q-methods participatory
deliberation
reductive aggregative models
knowledge about likelihoods
uncertainty heuristics interval
analysis sensitivity testing
monitor, surveil, research institutional
learning adaptive management
IGNORANCE
problematic
UNCERTAINTY
ALL INVOLVE INTERACTIVE MAPPING OF DIFFERENT
UNDERSTANDINGS
40
Broadening Out Appraisal (cf EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic
effects life cycles, compliance
real world effects CFCs, DES
closed systems MTBE, PCBs
humility on science sensitivities proxies
mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
omission of persistence in organochlorines, MTBE,
CFCs
active research prioritise open
monitoring surveillance targeted experiment
neglected TBT, BSE no
monitoring asbestos, benzene, PCBs
deliberate argument levels of proof, burden of
evidence, onus of persuasion Swann
committee on antimicrobials, 1967 later ignored
alternative options pros, cons,
justifications for range of options
substitutes ALARA, BAT, BPM ionising
radiation, fisheries, acid rain
cross-disciplinary learning
collect all relevant knowledge, beyond the
usual suspects
MTBE / engineers BSE / vets (clinical /
toxicology / epidem.)
engage public independence through
pluralism and robustness on values
benzene, DES, asbestos, acid rain, fisheries