how robust Is “ socIally robust Knowledge ” ?

131 T he aCaDeMiC Debate on the DeMoCratization of expertise has reached the level of public politics. The U.S. National Research Council, in its study Understanding Risk (Stern and Fineberg 1996), has suggested “collaborative analysis” as a method adding deliberation to risk analysis and risk evaluation, thus opening advisory processes to broader participation. The British House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, reacting to the devastating loss of credibility of expertise after the BSE (mad cow disease) crisis, published the report Science and Society (2000). Finally, and perhaps most prominently, the European Union, in a white paper on democratic governance (2001) produced in connection with a working group on “Democratizing Expertise,” announced guidelines “on the collection and use of expert advice in the Commission to provide for the accountability, plurality and integrity of the expertise used” (5). It is justified to speak of a discourse that extends from academic discussions on the challenges of postnormal science and a new mode of knowledge production to public debates and declarations on public engagement with science and technology. A host of concepts reflect the change in perception that is taking place. Some of these have diffused into the public realm, 6