Questions & explanations
1. Why is it important to include more people than just experts in post-normal science decisions?
Because the decisions affect everyone, and experts may not know all the local details. For example, when deciding where to put a waste dump, nearby residents know the water flow and soil types better than a scientist from far away. Also, experts often disagree, so including many viewpoints can reveal hidden assumptions. Post-normal science calls this 'extended peer review.' It makes the process fairer and more trusted. When citizens feel heard, they are more likely to accept the result. Finally, including people with different values helps society decide what level of risk is acceptable. In a democracy, these choices should not be left only to scientists.
2. How can citizens or movements push to have undone science done?
Citizens can form groups to raise money for independent studies, a strategy called 'citizen science'. For example, neighbors worried about a factory's pollution can collect air samples themselves and ask a university to analyze them. Movements can also pressure politicians to direct public funds to neglected topics. Another way is to file lawsuits that require companies to release data. Hess calls this 'knowledge activism'. By making noise and building alliances with sympathetic scientists, movements can force the missing research into the open. Even if the results are not perfect, having any data can help people protect their health and communities.
3. How is regulatory science different from traditional research science?
Regulatory science is science done to help governments make rules, like testing if a new drug is safe. It follows strict procedures and must be open to public review. Traditional research science is driven by curiosity and aims to discover new knowledge. Regulatory science often has deadlines and answers specific questions: 'Is this chemical safe at 10 parts per million?' Traditional science can take years to publish one finding. Also, regulatory science must consider the worst-case, not just the average. Funtowicz and Ravetz note that regulatory science is a key area for post-normal science because it deals with high stakes and uncertainty.
4. Why is e-waste a problem and what can we do about it?
E-waste, or electronic waste, includes old computers, phones, and TVs. It is a problem because it contains toxic materials like lead, mercury, and cadmium. When dumped in landfills, these poisons can leak into the ground and water. Also, valuable metals like gold and copper go to waste. Many e-wastes are shipped to poor countries where unsafe recycling harms workers. To fix this, we can repair devices instead of throwing them away. Recycling centers can extract materials safely. Also, designing electronics that are easier to repair and upgrade will reduce waste. Consumers should buy only what they need and dispose of electronics properly.
5. Why does the table distinguish between contributory and interactional expertise?
Contributory expertise is the ability to actually contribute to a field, like a physicist doing experiments. Interactional expertise is the ability to talk about the field knowledgeably but not do the core work. Collins and Evans argue that this difference matters because interactional expertise allows people from outside to judge or collaborate with a field. For example, a science journalist can have interactional expertise about climate science. That helps the journalist explain the science to the public. The table shows that both types are real expertise, but only contributory expertise gives you the right to decide technical details.
6. How does ANT help us understand scientific controversies?
ANT helps by showing that scientific facts are not just discovered but are built by networks of people and things. In a controversy, different groups try to create stronger networks. For example, in the debate about climate change, scientists, computers, weather stations, and politicians form networks. Opponents also build networks with other data and arguments. ANT says we should follow all actors and see how they connect. The winning side is the one that mobilizes more reliable allies and black-boxes its facts. This view does not say all facts are equal, but it shows how social and material things together create what we know.
7. How does risk society challenge the idea that science always makes life safer?
In risk society, science itself creates many dangers, like nuclear waste or gene‑edited crops. Beck points out that the same science that gives us benefits also gives us new fears. For example, medical X‑rays help diagnose illness but also slightly raise cancer risk. People realize that science cannot guarantee safety; it only helps us measure risks. This reduces trust in experts because they often disagree about how dangerous something is. Moreover, the risks are so big that no amount of science can make them zero. So risk society shows that science is not a simple pathway to a safer world – it is a source of new problems.
8. What is undone science?
Undone science is research that could be done but is not, because of social or political reasons. The term was introduced by David Hess. It often involves topics that are not profitable for companies or that go against powerful interests. For example, studies on the health effects of a common pesticide might be left undone if the company that sells it does not want bad news. Another example is research on how to make homes more energy efficient in poor countries. Undone science shows that knowledge is not neutral; what gets studied depends on money and power. Social movements sometimes try to push for these missing studies.
9. How can the periodic table of expertises help us understand who should be trusted in a technical debate?
The table can show that a person claiming expertise may only have interactional expertise, not contributory. For instance, a politician who talks about vaccines may understand the words but not have the lab experience. The table also points out that everyone has ubiquitous expertise, so they can speak about everyday matters but not about rare technical issues. By using the table, we can ask: Does this person have the right type of expertise for this problem? It helps us avoid giving too much weight to people who only talk like experts. In a debate, we should trust those with contributory expertise in the relevant area.
10. What is the Empirical Programme of Relativism (EPOR)?
The Empirical Programme of Relativism, or EPOR, is a research method in SSK developed by Harry Collins. It studies how scientific controversies end by observing scientists in action. EPOR has three stages: first, show that interpretations of data are flexible (interpretative flexibility); second, show how that flexibility is closed to reach a single conclusion; third, connect that closure to wider social factors like politics or culture. EPOR does not say all views are equally valid, but that we should study how consensus is built. For example, it was used to study the debate about whether gravity waves were detected.
11. What social or political factors cause undone science?
One factor is corporate power: if a product can harm people, the company may block studies that reveal the harm. Another factor is government funding that goes to politically safe or military topics, not to community needs. For instance, research on how police violence affects health is often underfunded because it is controversial. Also, scientists may avoid unpopular topics to protect their careers. The result is that certain knowledge is 'undone' because no one with power wants it done. Hess shows that social movements can help by demanding research and creating their own data. Without pressure, the gaps remain.
12. What are some ways technology can help the environment?
Technology can help by providing clean energy sources like solar panels and wind turbines. These produce electricity without pollution. Energy-efficient appliances and LED lights use less power, reducing demand. Electric cars produce no exhaust, cutting air pollution in cities. Also, technology helps monitor the environment: satellites track deforestation and sensors measure water quality. Recycling technology can recover valuable materials from e-waste and other trash. Smart farming uses sensors to use water and fertilizer more efficiently. These innovations show that technology itself can be part of the solution.