Scientific Uncertainty and the Politics of Whaling

In this intriguing study, Michael Heazle examines how International Whaling Commission (IWC) policy dramatically shifted from furthering the interests of whaling nations to eventually banning all commercial whaling. Focusing on the internal workings of a single organization, Heazle explores the impact of political and economic imperatives on the production and interpretation of scientific research and advice.

Central to his work are the epistemological problems encountered in the production of “truth.” Science does not produce incontestable facts that can be expected to lead to consensus decisions; rather, the problematic nature of knowledge itself allows for various interpretations of data depending on the interests of those at the table. It is precisely the nature of scientific knowledge, Heazle argues, that has made uncertainty a tool in service of political objectives. When scientific advice to whaling nations could not with absolute certainty declare whaling practices a threat to stocks, those IWC members with substantial investments of political and economic capital used this uncertainty to reject a reduction in quotas. As perceptions of whaling changed - with the collapse of Antarctic whaling stocks, further diminishing economic returns, and public opinion turning against commercial whaling -- uncertainty switched sides. Nonwhaling members in the IWC, a majority by the late 1970s, claimed that because scientific data could not prove that commercial whaling was sustainable, hunting should stop. Uncertainty was used to protect the resource rather than the industry.

That science cannot be an impartial determinant in policy-making decisions does not render it useless. But Heazle’s analysis does suggest that without understanding the role of scientific uncertainty - and the political purposes for which it is used - international cooperation on wildlife management and broader issues will continue to become bogged down in arguments over whose science is correct.

1007702081
Scientific Uncertainty and the Politics of Whaling

In this intriguing study, Michael Heazle examines how International Whaling Commission (IWC) policy dramatically shifted from furthering the interests of whaling nations to eventually banning all commercial whaling. Focusing on the internal workings of a single organization, Heazle explores the impact of political and economic imperatives on the production and interpretation of scientific research and advice.

Central to his work are the epistemological problems encountered in the production of “truth.” Science does not produce incontestable facts that can be expected to lead to consensus decisions; rather, the problematic nature of knowledge itself allows for various interpretations of data depending on the interests of those at the table. It is precisely the nature of scientific knowledge, Heazle argues, that has made uncertainty a tool in service of political objectives. When scientific advice to whaling nations could not with absolute certainty declare whaling practices a threat to stocks, those IWC members with substantial investments of political and economic capital used this uncertainty to reject a reduction in quotas. As perceptions of whaling changed - with the collapse of Antarctic whaling stocks, further diminishing economic returns, and public opinion turning against commercial whaling -- uncertainty switched sides. Nonwhaling members in the IWC, a majority by the late 1970s, claimed that because scientific data could not prove that commercial whaling was sustainable, hunting should stop. Uncertainty was used to protect the resource rather than the industry.

That science cannot be an impartial determinant in policy-making decisions does not render it useless. But Heazle’s analysis does suggest that without understanding the role of scientific uncertainty - and the political purposes for which it is used - international cooperation on wildlife management and broader issues will continue to become bogged down in arguments over whose science is correct.

60.0 In Stock
Scientific Uncertainty and the Politics of Whaling

Scientific Uncertainty and the Politics of Whaling

by Michael Heazle
Scientific Uncertainty and the Politics of Whaling

Scientific Uncertainty and the Politics of Whaling

by Michael Heazle

eBook

$60.00 

Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
WANT A NOOK?  Explore Now

Related collections and offers


Overview

In this intriguing study, Michael Heazle examines how International Whaling Commission (IWC) policy dramatically shifted from furthering the interests of whaling nations to eventually banning all commercial whaling. Focusing on the internal workings of a single organization, Heazle explores the impact of political and economic imperatives on the production and interpretation of scientific research and advice.

Central to his work are the epistemological problems encountered in the production of “truth.” Science does not produce incontestable facts that can be expected to lead to consensus decisions; rather, the problematic nature of knowledge itself allows for various interpretations of data depending on the interests of those at the table. It is precisely the nature of scientific knowledge, Heazle argues, that has made uncertainty a tool in service of political objectives. When scientific advice to whaling nations could not with absolute certainty declare whaling practices a threat to stocks, those IWC members with substantial investments of political and economic capital used this uncertainty to reject a reduction in quotas. As perceptions of whaling changed - with the collapse of Antarctic whaling stocks, further diminishing economic returns, and public opinion turning against commercial whaling -- uncertainty switched sides. Nonwhaling members in the IWC, a majority by the late 1970s, claimed that because scientific data could not prove that commercial whaling was sustainable, hunting should stop. Uncertainty was used to protect the resource rather than the industry.

That science cannot be an impartial determinant in policy-making decisions does not render it useless. But Heazle’s analysis does suggest that without understanding the role of scientific uncertainty - and the political purposes for which it is used - international cooperation on wildlife management and broader issues will continue to become bogged down in arguments over whose science is correct.


Product Details

ISBN-13: 9780295802008
Publisher: University of Washington Press
Publication date: 11/20/2012
Sold by: Barnes & Noble
Format: eBook
Pages: 240
File size: 944 KB
Age Range: 18 Years

About the Author

Michael Heazle is a research fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments

List of Abbreviations

1. Introduction

2. The IWC 1949-59: An Exercise in Uncertainty Becoming Certainty

3. The Antarctic Collapse: Uncertainty Takes a (Brief) Holiday

4. The Worm Turns: The IWC's Reinterpretation of Uncertainty

5. Scientific Uncertainty and the Evolution of the Superwhale

6. Conclusion

Appendix

Notes

Bibliography

Index

What People are Saying About This

From the Publisher

"An excellent analysis of how scientific uncertainty and the precautionary principle have been used in a highly emotional and politically charged context. The problem of scientific uncertainty affects a great many issues, far beyond whaling or living resources in general, and the thesis Heazle advances will be of interest in these very different contexts."—William T. Burke, University of Washington

William T. Burke

An excellent analysis of how scientific uncertainty and the precautionary principle have been used in a highly emotional and politically charged context. The problem of scientific uncertainty affects a great many issues, far beyond whaling or living resources in general, and the thesis Heazle advances will be of interest in these very different contexts.

From the B&N Reads Blog

Customer Reviews