Safety and Environmental Technology Group
Laboratory of Chemical Engineering
ETH Zürich
ETH Hönggerberg, HCI G 127
CH-8093 Zürich, Switzerland
Phone: +41 (44) 632 30 62
Fax: +41 (44) 632 11 89
e-mail: scheringer(-at-)chem.ethz.ch
Abstract: We investigate the kinds of questions asked by environmental scientists. To this end, we describe the orientation of scientific research by posing four questions: What is the lack of knowledge to be addressed by the research? What is the purpose of the results? What are the subjects the research is dealing with? What are the methods chosen for the investigation? We propose that problem-oriented environmental science should strive to find answers to these questions that are different from those offered by “classical” natural sciences. As a focus of our study, we select four fields where the answers to the orienting questions are relevant: (1) reflexivity and “reflexive science” (Ulrich Beck), (2) dealing with uncertainty and missing knowledge, (3) competing internal scientific goals and external orientations such as sustainability, (4) the relationship between environmental sciences and politics. As a case study, we investigate the historical development of ecological chemistry. This development can be divided into three phases: an initial phase, an independent phase, and a re-orientation phase. Different internal and external orientations governed the scientific research in these three phases. This example provides insight into the problem of competing internal and external orientations; as a possible solution, we propose a scientific orientation open to societal concerns (to be continued in a follow-up paper).
Reference: Scheringer, M., Böschen, S., and J. Jaeger (2001) Wozu Umweltforschung? – Über das Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Forschungstraditionen und umweltpolitischen Leitbildern. Teil I: Das Beispiel "Ökologische Chemie" (in German), GAIA 10 (2), 125–135 (pdf).
Abstract: In the treatment of environmental problems, there is often a discrepancy between the needs of planners and dicision makers and the results provided by scientific research. This discrepancy is related to the different aims, priorities, and codes of practice of scientists, on the one hand, and decision- and policy-makers, on the other hand. To explore how this discrepancy could be reduced to some extent, we first introduce the distinction between knowledge-oriented and decision-oriented reduction of complexity. The challenge today's environmental research is faced with is that, to some extent, decision-oriented reduction of complexity should be incorporated in the selection and solution of scientific problems. This can be achieved by orientation towards societal guiding principles such as sustainability or the precautionary principle. Following this approach, we then introduce the guiding principle of “reflexive environmental research” and point out how it differs from the guiding principles of “classical scientific research”. Key elements of reflexive environmental research are: reflection of guiding ideas external to science (e.g. sustainability); addressing explicitly the uncertainty and openness of scientific results and forecasts; transdisciplinarity; the aim of contributing to the solution of complex and controversial real-world problems; adherence to relevant scientific standards. Finally, we discuss the way reflexive environmental research can contribute to scientific consulting in decision-making processes in both business and politics.
Reference: Böschen, S., Scheringer, M., and J. Jaeger (2001) Wozu Umweltforschung? – Über das Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Forschungstraditionen und umweltpolitischen Leitbildern. Teil II: Zum Leitbild "Reflexive Umweltforschung" (in German), GAIA 10 (3), 203–212 (pdf).
Safety and Environmental Technology Group
Institute for Chemical and Bioengineering Department of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences ETH Zürich
top of page Update: