从“后常规科学”看环境风险治理的技治主义误区被引量：7

On the Plight of Technocracy in Environmental Risk Management from Post-normal Science Perspective

下载PDF

导出

摘要传统的环境风险治理,主要采取的是基于"常规科学"方法的技治主义模式,旨在以"技术统治论"寻求关于风险的确定性、真理性的科学结论。当前,科学已经进入"后常规"时代,环境风险的不确定性和复杂性程度极大提高,原有的"常规科学"方法已经在某种程度上失去其合理性,技治主义治理模式的弊端和局限性日益显现。应充分认识"后常规科学"的特点,适当调整权威式、中心式的精英决策过程,超越技治主义误区,建构多元开放型的科学家-政府-公众联合治理模式,才能真正提高环境风险治理的实效。 The traditional way to deal with environmental risks is technocracy with the basic method of normal science. With the increasing uncertainty and complexity of environmental risks under the back- ground of big science, the technocracy has been unable to respond effectively to environmental challenges. However, the current environmental risk management still sticks to normal science ,and tech- nocracy has been the governance model, causing the increasingly apparent drawbacks and limitations. Therefore, from the post-normal science perspective, we should go beyond the technocracy and establish a system of cooperation among scientists, government and the public in order to improve the effectiveness of environmental risk management.

作者薛桂波

机构地区南京林业大学江苏环境与发展研究中心

出处《吉首大学学报（社会科学版）》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第1期42-47,共6页 Journal of Jishou University(Social Sciences)

基金教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目(11YJC720050) 江苏省社会科学基金项目(13ZXB008) 江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助项目(11SJB05)

关键词后常规科学环境风险治理技治主义 post-normal science ~ environmental risk management ~ technocracy

分类号 D630 [政治法律—中外政治制度]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献16

1[美]托马斯·库恩金吾伦胡新和译.科学革命的结构[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.158,159,10.
2[意]S.O.福特沃兹,[英]J.R.拉维茨.后常规科学的兴起(上)[J].国外社会科学,1995(10).
3[意]S.O.福特沃兹,[英]J.R.拉维茨.后常规科学的兴起(下)[J].国外社会科学,1995(12).
4杨书卷.进入“后常规时代”的科学[J].科技导报,2010,28(6):9-9. 被引量：5
5[瑞士]萨拜因·马森,[德]彼德·魏因加.专业知识的民主化?探求科学咨询的新模式[M].姜江,等,译.上海:上海交通大学出版社,2010.
6刘永谋.论技治主义:以凡勃伦为例[J].哲学研究,2012(3):91-97. 被引量：56
7本-戴维,郝刘祥,陈朝勇.不同政治意识形态背景下的科学精神和变化中的科学观[J].科学文化评论,2004(4):70-93. 被引量：4
8[美]小罗杰·皮尔克.诚实的代理人:科学在政策与政治中的意义[M].李正风,缪航,译.上海:上海交通大学出版社,2010.
9[美]卡尔·博格斯.知识分子与现代性的危机[M].李俊,蔡海榕,译.南京:江苏人民出版社,2006.
10DURANT J. Participatory technology assessment and the democratic model of the public understanding of science [J]. Science and Public Policy,1999(5).

二级参考文献79

1[1]Ben-David, J. (1980). The Ethos of Science: The Last Half-Century. in J. R. Philips and T. J.Conlon(ed.), Science and Polity. Canberra: Australian Academy of Science.
2[2]Ben-David, J. (1984 (1971)). The Scientist′s Role in Society. 2d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3[3]Ben-David, J. (1986). Academic Market, Ideology and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge:Physiology in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Germany. in Siegwart Lindberg, James S. Coleman,and Stefan Nowak(ed.), Approaches to Social Theory. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
4[4]Ben-David, J. and Collins, R. (1966). A Comparative Study of Academic Freedom and Student Politics. Comparative Education Review. 10 (2): 220-49.
5[5]Bernal, J. D. (1939). The Social Function of Science. London: Routledge.
6[6]Beyerchen, A. D. (1977). Scientists under Hitler: Politics and the Physics Community in the Third Reich. New Haven: Yale University Press.
7[7]Bush, V. (1945). Science the Endless Frontier: A Report to the President. Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office.
8[8]Carson, R. (1962). The Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
9[9]Forman, P. (1971). Weimar Culture, Causality and Quantum Theory, 1918-1927: Adaptation by German Physicists and Mathematicians to a Hostile Intellectual Environment. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences. 3:1-115.
10[10]Gay, P. (1968). Weimar Culture: The Outsider as Insider. New York: Harper and Row.