Politics, Philosophy and Economics 13 (4):343-368 (2014)

Authors
Melissa S. Lane
Princeton University
Abstract
Communication by scientists with policy makers and attentive publics raises ethical issues. Scientists need to decide how to communicate knowledge effectively in a way that nonscientists can understand and use, while remaining honest scientists and presenting estimates of the uncertainty of their inferences. They need to understand their own ethical choices in using scientific information to communicate to audiences. These issues were salient in the Fourth Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change with respect to possible sea level rise from disintegration of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets. Due to uncertainty, the reported values of projected sea level rise were incomplete, potentially leading some relevant audiences to underestimate future risk. Such judgments should be made in a principled rather than an ad hoc manner. Five principles for scientific communication under such conditions are important: honesty, precision, audience relevance, process transparency, and specification of uncertainty about conclusions. Some of these principles are of intrinsic importance while others are merely instrumental and subject to trade-offs among them. Scientists engaged in assessments under uncertainty should understand these principles and which trade-offs are acceptable
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1177/1470594X14538570
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,700
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics.Onora O'Neill - 2002 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A Taxonomy of Transparency in Science.Kevin C. Elliott - forthcoming - Canadian Journal of Philosophy:1-14.
Scientists as Experts: A Distinct Role?Torbjørn Gundersen - 2018 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 69:52-59.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Uncertain Science ... Uncertain World.H. N. Pollack - 2003 - Cambridge University Press.
BSE in the UK: Why the Risk Communication Strategy Failed. [REVIEW]Karsten Klint Jensen - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (4-5):405-423.
The Possibility of a Mathematical Sociology of Scientific Communication.Loet Leydesdorff - 1996 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 27 (2):243-265.
Attention and the Art of Scientific Publishing.Arjo Klamer & Hendrik P. Van Dalen - 2002 - Journal of Economic Methodology 9 (3):289-315.
Uncertainty Arguments in Environmental Issues.Paul B. Thompson - 1986 - Environmental Ethics 8 (1):59-75.
Scientific Uncertainty: A User's Guide.Seamus Bradley - 2012 - Grantham Institute on Climate Change Discussion Paper.
Decision Making Under Great Uncertainty.Sven Ove Hansson - 1996 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 26 (3):369-386.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2014-06-28

Total views
113 ( #90,998 of 2,432,327 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #115,107 of 2,432,327 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes