Scientisation or Socialisation? Public Knowledge Orders in Comparison

Current research shows that the modes of political expertise and knowledge production across countries are subject to multiple transformations (Fischer 2009; Weingart/Lentsch 2009). On the one hand, one can observe a scientization of public policy and an increasing relevance of statistics, evidence-based policy and simulations. Instruments like monitoring or benchmarking transform different observations and make them comparable by calculative practices. On the other hand, science is being increasingly politicized by counter expertise and civil society pressure. Experts find themselves confronted with scepticism and public interference. Both tendencies can be observed, the scientization of society and the socialization of science. By analyzing the causes and consequences of these transformations the concept of “knowledge orders” or “public epistemologies” has recently gained significance (Jasanoff 2005; Weingart 2001; Strassheim 2010). By turning to this perspective, we move away from a priori assumptions about the effectiveness or functionality of science policy interaction. Instead, the question is posed how certain modes of expertise and public knowledge production become to be perceived as reliable and how in a given society such knowledge claims are used as a basis for justifying public policy practices. Knowledge orders are defined as boundary-crossing arrangements by which a given society tests and justifies different and often contested knowledge claims for collective choices and mutual adjustments. Based on more or less institutionalized procedures and practices they coordinate the production and circulation of publicly relevant knowledge, regulate its legitimacy and validity, organize the credibility of experts in their relation to policy practitioners and thereby establish epistemic conventions and hierarchies of different forms of knowledge. They are shaped by knowledge politics and the “regulated struggle” (Bourdieu) for epistemic power. Comparative studies have shown that countries like the US, Germany or Great Britain vary significantly in terms of expert styles, public accountability, cultures of objectivity, practices of participation and science-policy interaction. The paper follows two main strands of argument. Firstly, the concept of knowledge orders will be outlined in its relation to different practices of policy. Secondly, findings on convergences and divergences between knowledge orders in Great Britain, Germany, and the US will be pointed out. Focusing on major reforms in employment policy and consumer protection, mechanisms of change will be identified. It is assumed that boundary-crossing expert networks have the potential of discursively delegitimizing the cultural and institutional premises of political knowledge production and of stimulating the institutionalization of alternative and often competing regimes (Halffman/Hoppe 2005). The paper presents preliminary results from a research project carried out at the Social Science Research Center Berlin in cooperation with the Humboldt University Berlin (funded by Volkswagen Foundation). References Fischer, Frank (2009): Democracy & Expertise. Reorienting Policy Inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Halffman, Willem/Hoppe, Rob, 2005: Science/policy boundaries: a changing division of labour in Dutch expert policy advice, in: Maasen, Sabine/Weingart, Peter (Hrsg.), Democratization of Expertise? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-Making, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, 135-151. Jasanoff, Sheila (2005): Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press. Strassheim, Holger (2010): "Innovation and Valuation: The Governance of Public Epistemologies". Paper for the "First Berlin Forum on Innovation in Governance" (organized by Jan-Peter Voss/Arno Simmons), Technical University Berlin, 2010 Weingart, Peter, 2001: Die Stunde der Wahrheit? Zum Verhältnis der Wissenschaft zu Politik, Wirtschaft und Medien in der Wissensgesellschaft, Weilerswist. Weingart, Peter/Lentsch, Justus (Hg.) (2009): Scientific Advice to Policy Making: International Comparison. Opladen/Farmington Hills: Barbara Budrich.