You are here:
Science Consensus: Pros and Cons of Conflating Science and Consensus
Citation:
Canfield, Timothy J., W. Goodfellow, AND P. Guiney. Science Consensus: Pros and Cons of Conflating Science and Consensus. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) – SETAC North America 42nd Annual Meeting, Portland, OR, November 14 - 18, 2021.
Impact/Purpose:
Public policy is developed after consideration of multiple sources of information. When public policy is focused on the environment, science is one of those pieces that is brought into the decision process. Often the science that is included and presented is couched in a way that indicates there is a consensus among scientists agreeing with the science information that is presented and used. Through frequent use of the word’s science and consensus in the same discussions, is has become common to connect the two terms and present the information as scientific consensus. But what does scientific consensus really mean and should the two terms be conflated. The purpose of this presentation is to set the stage for the session focused on using science and consensus and how the two terms are used together and separately. The talk will focus on defining what science and consensus are separately, how they are used in connection with one another and discuss the appropriateness of using science and consensus together for supporting decision making. This talk will conclude presenting some ideas and recommendations on how science and consensus should and shouldn’t be used when supporting decision making efforts in the public domain. This talk and the session it will be presented is designed to foster discussion among scientists across the international community on how science and consensus are currently being used in the public debate and if there should be adjustments on how they should be used going forward in the the public debate and decision making process.
Description:
Public policy is developed after consideration of multiple sources of information. When public policy is focused on the environment, science is one of those pieces that is brought into the decision process. Often the science that is included and presented is couched in a way that indicates there is a consensus among scientists agreeing with the science information that is presented and used. Through frequent use of the word’s science and consensus in the same discussions, it has become common to connect the two terms and present the information as scientific consensus. Public policy decision-makers and the public come to believe that science and consensus are not only connected but often are considered the same, going together hand and glove. This is not correct as Science is “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment”, while the definition of consensus is “general agreement, the judgment arrived at by most of those concerned, and/or group solidarity and sentiment and belief”. But should science and consensus be used together? If so, how should they be used together? This talk will look at ways that science consensus has been used as part of public policy decision-making. We will examine the pros and cons conflating science and consensus. We will also identify areas where science and consensus may be misused when brought together. Finally, we will provide suggested guidance for how science and consensus should and shouldn’t be in concert with one another.