Resumo

ZAPATA CLAVERIA, Miguel Alberto. Frontiers between science and politics in deliberative spaces. Inter disciplina [online]. 2022, vol.10, n.27, pp.251-270.  Epub 03-Out-2022. ISSN 2448-5705.  https://doi.org/10.22201/ceiich.24485705e.2022.27.82154.

This paper will analyze three deliberative proposals for the management of science and technology controversies: The Dutch government advisory committee as described by Bijker; the citizen surveys promoted by Fishkin, and Callon’s hybrid forums. The first will give us the opportunity to assess the advantages and disadvantages of a format based on dialogue among experts that addresses societal concerns but is closed to the public. The second will show the impact that the inclusion of citizens without expert knowledge in a deliberative space can have. Finally, the notion of hybrid forum will allow us to critique the boundary work and the attribution of identities on which the advisory committee and deliberative polls depend. The comparative analysis of these proposals will make visible some of the problems that deliberative theory must address when it is transferred to the realm of public controversies about science and will show that the separation between facts/values, science/politics and experts/lawyers constitutes a strategy that neither improves the epistemic quality of decisions nor necessarily increases public confidence in science.

Palavras-chave : controversies; deliberation; deliberative polls; hybrid forum; boundary work.