Inventing Prediction for Regulation

IF 1.9 4区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Henri Boullier, D. Demortain, M. Zeeman
{"title":"Inventing Prediction for Regulation","authors":"Henri Boullier, D. Demortain, M. Zeeman","doi":"10.23987/sts.65062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In policies targeting environmental and health hazards, an effort is frequently made to anticipate and avert more or less probable adverse events. In this context, computerized models are frequently portrayed as superior knowledge tools, for their capacity to extrapolate from existing data and predict hazards. This paper looks at the historical development and use of such models in regulation, with the specific example of structure-activity relationships (SARs) in the regulation of new industrial chemicals at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It asks how evidential culture(s) in a regulatory organization change, in particular how new methods and forms of knowledge find their place alongside others to forge regulatory decisions. The development and application of, first, a qualitative approach to structure-activity relationships, and then of quantitative models, show that the EPA had the necessary autonomy to imagine and adjust a method emerging in the research environment to respond to regulatory needs. This can be understood from a coproductionist perspective, if adjusted to take into account the bureaucratic knowledge that mediates the imagining and application of prediction in regulatory practice.","PeriodicalId":45119,"journal":{"name":"Science and Technology Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Technology Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.65062","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

In policies targeting environmental and health hazards, an effort is frequently made to anticipate and avert more or less probable adverse events. In this context, computerized models are frequently portrayed as superior knowledge tools, for their capacity to extrapolate from existing data and predict hazards. This paper looks at the historical development and use of such models in regulation, with the specific example of structure-activity relationships (SARs) in the regulation of new industrial chemicals at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It asks how evidential culture(s) in a regulatory organization change, in particular how new methods and forms of knowledge find their place alongside others to forge regulatory decisions. The development and application of, first, a qualitative approach to structure-activity relationships, and then of quantitative models, show that the EPA had the necessary autonomy to imagine and adjust a method emerging in the research environment to respond to regulatory needs. This can be understood from a coproductionist perspective, if adjusted to take into account the bureaucratic knowledge that mediates the imagining and application of prediction in regulatory practice.
发明预测调节
在针对环境和健康危害的政策中,经常努力预测和避免或多或少可能发生的不利事件。在这方面,计算机化模型经常被描述为优越的知识工具,因为它们有能力从现有数据中推断并预测危险。本文着眼于此类模型在监管中的历史发展和使用,并以美国环境保护署(EPA)监管新工业化学品中的结构-活性关系(SARs)为例。它询问监管组织中的证据文化如何变化,特别是新方法和知识形式如何与其他方法和知识形式一起找到它们的位置,以形成监管决策。首先是结构-活性关系的定性方法的发展和应用,然后是定量模型的发展和应用,表明EPA拥有必要的自主权,可以想象和调整研究环境中出现的方法,以响应监管需求。这可以从合作生产主义的角度来理解,如果调整到考虑到在监管实践中调解预测的想象和应用的官僚知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Science and Technology Studies
Science and Technology Studies HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
审稿时长
53 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信