Policy, Expertise, and Trust in Action

ended

Many policy decisions in contemporary knowledge-based forms of governance are driven by advice, evidence and data provided by experts from diverse arenas. In democratic societies, trust in the provenance and justification of policy measures are essential for their implementation. The rise of populist politics with its anti-elitist mantra has brought the trustworthiness of experts and their areas of expertise into question. PEriTiA brings together philosophers, social and natural scientists, policy experts, ethicists, psychologists, media specialists and civil society organisations to conduct a comprehensive multi-disciplinary investigation of trust in and the trustworthiness of policy related expert opinion. The investigation is carried out in three - theoretical, empirical and ameliorative – phases with the goal of illuminating a topic that has been the subject of much political commentary and media debate in recent years. The key hypothesis explored conceptually and tested empirically is that affective and normative factors play a central role in decisions to trust, even in cases where judgements of trustworthiness may seem to be grounded in epistemic considerations, such as professional reputation, reliability and objectivity. The most ambitious feature of the current project is the application of its theoretical and empirical findings to active attempts at establishing trust, where warranted, between the general public and actors with a central role in the decision-making processes of governance. Our ultimate aim is to provide tools and discover indicators which can be used in measuring and establishing the trustworthiness of the agents involved in social and political decision making. The use of climate change and climate science as a test case in exploring the social, ethical and psychological indicators of trustworthiness is expected to help to construct trust-enhancing narratives regarding the role of science in governance.