Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:07:11.080Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flexible Interpretations of “Acid Rain” and the Construction of Scientific Uncertainty in Political Settings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Stephen C. Zehr
Stephen C. Zehr*
Affiliation:
University of Southern Indiana, USA
Get access

Abstract

Much research in social studies of science addresses scientists' interpretative flexibility in the construction of scientific knowledge. This flexibility is readily visible among different scientists' competing knowledge-claims as well as in their accounts across different social settings. This article illustrates this process and discusses some of its implications through a case study of descriptions of acid rain in published scientific papers and Congressional testimony. As acid rain was flexibly reconstructed in Congressional testimony, its meanings and implications for control legislation became more contested. Some descriptions of acid rain that were intended to usefully clarify the phenomenon actually contributed to an impression of scientific uncertainty, and thereby further polarized debate.

Type
Acid Rain
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , August 1994 , pp. 205 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdullah, S.B. and Lancaster, F.W. (1991). “The Contribution of Scientists to the Popular Literature, Their Role as Expert Witnesses, and Their Influence on Their Peers: A Case Study in the Field of Acid Rain.” Scientometrics 20:55–64.Google Scholar
Beder, S. (1991). “Controversy and Closure: Sydney's Beaches in Crisis.” Social Studies of Science 21:223–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brocksen, R. (1980). Testimony before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, May 28.Google Scholar
Brown, M.S. and Lyon, K.A. (1992). “Holes in the Ozone Layer: A Global Environmental Controversy.” In Nelkin, D.(ed.), Controversy: Politics of Technical Decisions. 3rd edition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Brown, W.M. (1983). Testimony before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, United States House of Representatives, December 1.Google Scholar
Campbell, B.L. (1985). “Uncertainty as Symbolic Action in Disputes Among Experts.” Social Studies of Science 15:429–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collingridge, D. and Reeve, C. (1986). Science Speaks to Power. New York: St. Martin's.Google Scholar
Collins, H.M. (1981). “Son of the Seven Sexes: The Social Destruction of a Physical Phenomenon.” In Collins, H.M.(ed.), Knowledge and Controversy. Special issue of Social Studies of Science 11:33–62.Google Scholar
Collins, H.M. (1985). Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Cowling, E. (1980). Testimony before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, May 28.Google Scholar
Cowling, E.B. and Linthurst, R.A. (1981). “The Acid Precipitation Phenomenon and Its Ecological Consequences.” BioScience 31:649–54.Google Scholar
Engelhardt, H.T. Jr. and Caplan, A.L., eds. (1987). Scientific Controversies: Case Studies in the Resolution and Closure of Disputes in Science and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, J.N., Likens, G.E., and Edgerton, E.S. (1976). “Acid Precipitation in the Northeastern United States: pH and Acidity.” Science 194:722–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, J.N. and Likens, G.E. (1981). “Acid Precipitation: The Importance of Nitric Acid.” Atmospheric Environment 15:1081–85.Google Scholar
Gieryn, T.F. (1983). “Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists.” American Sociological Review 48:781–95.Google Scholar
Gieryn, T.F., Bevins, G.M., and Zehr, S.C. (1985). “Professionalization of American Scientists: Public Science in the Creation/Evolution Trials.” American Sociological Review 50:392–409.Google Scholar
Gilbert, G.N. and Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's Box. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gould, R. (1982). Testimony before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate, May 25.Google Scholar
Gorham, E. (1994). “Neutralizing Acid Rain.” Nature 367:321.Google Scholar
Guston, D. (1993). The Social Contract for Science: Congress, the National Institutes of Health, and the Boundary Between Politics and Science. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Hall, R.J. and Likens, G.E. (1981). “Chemical Flux in an Acid-Stressed Stream.” Nature 292:329–31.Google Scholar
Hendrey, G.R. (1980). Testimony before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, May 28.Google Scholar
Hornbeck, J.W. (1981). “Acid Rain: Facts and Fallacies.” Journal of Forestry 79:438–43.Google Scholar
Jacobson, J. (1981). Testimony before the Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agriculture Research and Environment of the Committee on Science and Technology, United States House of Representatives, Sept. 18.Google Scholar
Jacobson, J.S. (1984). “Effects of Acidic Aerosol, Fog, Mist and Rain on Crops and Trees.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B: Biological Sciences 305:327–38.Google Scholar
Jasanoff, S. (1990). The Fifth Branch. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, D.W. and Reuss, J.O. (1984). “Soil-mediated Effects of Atmospherically Deposited Sulphur and Nitrogen.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B: Biological Sciences 305:383–92.Google Scholar
Johnson, N. (1982). Testimony before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, May 27.Google Scholar
Klein, R. (1983). Testimony before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, October 14.Google Scholar
Lefohn, A.S. (1982). Letter submitted and added to the record of Hearings before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, June 8.Google Scholar
Lefohn, A.S. and Brocksen, R.W. (1984). “Acid Rain Effects Research: A Status Report.” Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association 34:1005–13.Google Scholar
Likens, G.E. and Bormann, F.H. (1974). “Acid Rain: A Serious Environmental Problem.” Science 184:1176–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loucks, O. (1982). Testimony before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, May 27.Google Scholar
Mazur, A. (1981). The Dynamics of Technical Controversy. Washington, DC: Communications Press.Google Scholar
Mohnen, V. (1981). Testimony before the Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agriculture Research and Environment of the Committee on Science and Technology, United States House of Representatives, Sept. 18.Google Scholar
Mohnen, V. (1982). Testimony before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate. May 25.Google Scholar
Nelkin, D. (1975). “The Political Impact of Technical Expertise.” Social Studies of Science 5:35–54.Google Scholar
North Carolina State University (1985). International Directory of Acid Deposition Researchers. St. Paul, MN: The Acid Rain Foundation.Google Scholar
Oppenheimer, M. (1982). Testimony before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, May 25.Google Scholar
Pinch, T.J. and Bijker, W.E. (1987). “The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other.” In Bijker, W.E., Hughes, T.P., and Pinch, T.J.(eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Raynal, D.J. (1981). Testimony before the Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agriculture Research and Environment of the Committee on Science and Technology, United States House of Representatives, September 18.Google Scholar
Raynal, D.J., Roman, J.R., and Eichenlaub, W.M. (1982). “Response of Tree Seedlings to Acid Precipitation — 1. Effect of Substrate Acidity on Seed Germination.” Environmental and Experimental Botany 22:377–83.Google Scholar
Regens, J.L. and Rycroft, R.W. (1988). The Acid Rain Controversy. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Scherbatskoy, T. and Klein, R.M. (1983). “Response of Spruce and Birch Foliage to Leaching by Acidic Mists.” Journal of Environmental Quality 12:189–95.Google Scholar
Schofield, C. (1981). Testimony before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, July 1.Google Scholar
Schwartz, M. and Thompson, M. (1990). Divided We Stand: Redefining Politics, Technology and Social Change. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Semonin, R.G. (1982). Testimony before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, August 19.Google Scholar
Starr, C. (1983). “The Electric Power Research Institute.” Science 219:1190–94.Google Scholar
Stensland, G.J. and Semonin, R.G. (1982). “Another Interpretation of the pH Trend in the United States.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 63:1277–84.Google Scholar
Stocking, S.H. and Holstein, L.W. (1993). “Constructing and Reconstructing Scientific Ignorance: Ignorance Claims in Science and Journalism.” Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 15:186–210.Google Scholar
Wynne, B. and Mayer, S. (1993). “How Science Fails the Environment.” New Scientist (June 5):33–35.Google Scholar
Yearley, S. (1991). The Green Case: A Sociology of Environmental Issues, Arguments and Politics. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar