...
首页> 外文期刊>Earth-Science Reviews: The International Geological Journal Bridging the Gap between Research Articles and Textbooks >Fault lines at the interface of science and policy: Interpretative responses to the trial of scientists in L'Aquila
【24h】

Fault lines at the interface of science and policy: Interpretative responses to the trial of scientists in L'Aquila

机译:科学与政策交界处的断层线:对拉奎拉科学家审判的解释性回应

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The 2009 L'Aquila earthquake gave rise to legal action for involuntary manslaughter against the scientists who just days before had participated in an official meeting called to assess risks in view of recent seismic activity in the region. From the beginning, the case became the subject of tremendous controversy. Strong passions have been aroused and a wide range of opinions have been expressed, sometimes grounded on very limited or even incorrect information. Based on a review of documentary materials, I summarize the legal case and distinguish four main lines of interpretation in response to it: anti-science; failure of science communication; confusion of roles; and conflation of science and politics. I critically discuss and assess each of these interpretative responses, taking up normative questions and issues about the interface of science and policy that reach beyond L'Aquila. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:2009年的拉奎拉地震引发了针对非故意杀人罪的法律诉讼,就在几天前参加了一次正式会议的科学家们被召集来评估该地区的近期地震活动,以评估风险。从一开始,此案就引起了巨大争议。引起了强烈的热情,并表达了广泛的意见,有时是基于非常有限甚至错误的信息。在对文献资料进行回顾的基础上,我总结了该法律案件,并针对该案件区分了四个主要解释途径:反科学;反科学;反科学;反科学。科学交流失败;角色混乱;和科学与政治的融合。我认真地讨论和评估了这些解释性回答中的每一个,讨论了涉及拉奎拉(L'Aquila)以外的有关科学与政策之间关系的规范性问题。 (C)2014 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号