David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Critical Review 6 (2-3):255-264 (1992)
Experts often tout highly subjective methods of policy analysis as scientific and value?free. In The Myth of Scientific Public Policy, Robert Formaini exposes the uncertainties in two of these methods, cost?benefit analysis and risk assessment. Because of these deficiencies, he concludes that ethics and political philosophy, not science, are the proper foundation for public policy. While Formaini is right to emphasize the value?ladenness of cost?benefit analysis and risk assessment, his rejection of scientific methods of policy analysis is questionable. His criticisms, especially in his study of the swine?ßu case, seem to establish that experts have misused such methods, not that the methods themselves are seriously ßawed. Also, his rejection of cost?benefit analysis and risk assessment would be more realistic if he offered a well?developed alternative to these two methods. One such alternative, for example, is ethically weighted cost?benefit analysis
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kenneth Anderson, The Assumptions Behind the Assumptions in the War on Terror: Risk Assessment as an Example of Foundational Disagreement in Counterterrorism Policy.
K. S. Shrader-Frechette (1982). Economics, Risk-Cost-Benefit Analysis, and the Linearity Assumption. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:217 - 232.
Ty Raterman (2012). Regulation, Compensation, and the Loss of Life: What Cost-Benefit Analysis Really Requires. Ethics, Policy and Environment 15 (1):97 - 118.
Carl F. Cranor (1988). Some Public Policy Problems with the Science of Carcinogen Risk Assessment. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:467 - 488.
Peter Railton (1982). Costs and Benefits of Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Response to Bantz and MacLean. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:261 - 271.
Gualtiero Piccinini (2003). Epistemic Divergence and the Publicity of Scientific Methods. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34 (3):597-612.
Donald C. Hubin (1994). The Moral Justification of Benefit/Cost Analysis. Economics and Philosophy 10 (02):169-.
Colleen Murphy & Paolo Gardoni (2007). Determining Public Policy and Resource Allocation Priorities for Mitigating Natural Hazards: A Capabilities-Based Approach. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (4):489-504.
Simon Glynn (1996). Ethical Issues in Environmental Decision Making and the Limitations of Cost/Benefit Analysis (CBA). Ethics and the Environment 1 (1):27 - 39.
Mairi Levitt (2003). Public Consultation in Bioethics. What's the Point of Asking the Public When They Have Neither Scientific nor Ethical Expertise? Health Care Analysis 11 (1):15-25.
Matthew D. Adler & Eric A. Posner (eds.) (2001). Cost-Benefit Analysis: Legal, Economic, and Philosophical Perspectives. University of Chicago Press.
Barry Bozeman & Daniel Sarewitz (2011). Public Value Mapping and Science Policy Evaluation. Minerva 49 (1):1-23.
Matthew J. Brown (forthcoming). The Democratic Control of the Scientific Control of Democracy. In Dennis Dieks & Vassilios Karakostas (eds.), Recent Progress in Philosophy of Science: Perspectives and Foundational Problems. Springer.
Shepley W. Orr (2007). Values, Preferences, and the Citizen-Consumer Distinction in Cost-Benefit Analysis. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (1):107-130.
Stephen F. Haller & James Gerrie (2007). The Role of Science in Public Policy: Higher Reason, or Reason for Hire? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (2):139-165.
Added to index2011-07-29
Total downloads55 ( #23,337 of 1,008,456 )
Recent downloads (6 months)32 ( #2,688 of 1,008,456 )
How can I increase my downloads?