Difference between revisions of "Societal context of assessments"

From Testiwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(18 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<accesscontrol>Members of projects,,Workshop2008,,beneris,,Erac,,Heimtsa,,Hiwate,,Intarese</accesscontrol>
+
[[Category:Open assessment]]
 +
{{encyclopedia|moderator=Mikko Pohjola
 +
| reference = {{publication
 +
| authors        = Mikko V. Pohjola
 +
| page          = Societal context of assessments
 +
| explanation    =
 +
| publishingyear = 2010
 +
| urn            =
 +
| elsewhere      =
 +
}}
 +
}}
  
It is important to consider and understand the '''role of risk assessment in its societal context''' and to identify the relations of risk assessment with its surrounding reality. The following diagram shows a roughly simplified description of the role and relations of risk assessment in the overall process of societal decision making from the risk assessor's point of view. The diagram is described briefly below.
+
The basic idea in all practice of scientific assessment, be it risk, impact, integrated, health impact, integrated environmental health impact, or whatever assessment, is to use the means and methods of science to support societal decision making. Assessments aim to prevent random decision making, as in [[flipism]], but also decisions based on incomplete, biased or false information, as well as decisions founded on societally unacceptable values, especially when these decisions address matters of significant societal importance. They are thus processes of collecting and synthesizing knowledge and values from plural sources as solutions to societal problems.
  
 +
In principle, the whole endeavor of assessment could be considered as an interface between science and society, as an institutionalization of using the best available knowledge to guide societal actions, although the current assessment practice usually turns out as something quite different. Assessments are often perceived as scientific, or at least science-based, activity but unlike science according to the traditional ideal, assessments do not only search for the truth, but also serve practical, instrumental purposes. E.g. for the purpose of assessment method development, it is important to understand that assessments are intentional activities of producing artifacts with instrumental functions. Assessments could be considered as simultaneously serving two masters; the scientific quest for truth and the practical needs of the society. Balancing between the forces of two masters makes the practice of assessment even more challenging. Assessments can also be triggered by needs arising from different aspects. There can be problem-driven assessments where the assessment questions are formulated according to practical societal needs. There can also be exploratory assessments that rather generate and evaluate questions that could be answered with an assessment (model).
  
<center>
+
'''Asessments in environment and health
[[Image:RA-SH chain.PNG|650px]]
 
</center>
 
  
 +
Here assessments are considered in relation to the field of environmental health, for example as integrated environmental health impact assessments (IEHIA). The concept of assessment adopted here is however generalizable to virtually any field of science-based support of societal decision making. Environmental health assessment (EHA) is an endeavor of analyzing relations between environmental phenomena and human health for the purpose of informing societal decision making on issues relevant to environment and health. It takes place on the interface between science and society, attempting to bridge the practical needs of society with the knowledge creating processes of science. As both environment and health are very broad concepts, intertwined with many aspects of human society, EHA is by its nature a multi-disciplinary field of practice that addresses issues of interest to many different organizations and individuals with different societal roles and perspectives. Naturally this includes all the scientific experts appointed to make the assessment task and the policy makers having an obligation to deal with the particular issue at hand, but also representatives of industry and commerce, NGO's and the general public e.g. as consumers or citizens. EHA can thus be perceived as a science-based activity that takes place on the interface between science and society, bridges scientific knowledge and practice with the practical needs of e.g. policy, business and everyday life, thereby providing enlightenment and increased awareness within the society at large.
  
The risk assessment process (horizontal oval) produces a a risk assessment product (vertical oval) as its output with the intention of feeding it as an input to the decision-making process. The decision-making process then produces a decision, presumably using the risk assessment product as an input alongside other inputs. The decision is then executed leading to specific consequences within the society. The white boxes on the background depict the primary areas of interest and influence of risk assessors (RA), decision-makers (DM) and stakeholders (SH). The ''other factors'' nodes refer to all the other influences to the processes along the chain that are primarily out of reach of the influence of the risk assessors and thus may either support or compromise the effectiveness of the risk assessment outputs. The arrows in this diagram describe causal relations.
+
The term assessment is often used interchangeably to refer to either the process of making an assessment (assessment process) or the output of that process (assessment product). This confusion is not only a terminological one, but it appears that the actual concepts of producing information, as e.g. in an assessment process, and the information produced, as e.g. an assessment product, are often confused. Another essential aspect related to assessments as societal endeavors of generating solutions to practical problems that is far too often neglected is the use of assessment products. The general assessment framework describing the relationships between assessment process, assessment product and use of assessment product is illustrated in the figure below.
  
The diagram above can be considered as distinguishing the groups of actors along the chain and their roles in a relatively traditional way. The risk assessors (RA) could also be replaced  with a more general group called ''the contributors to risk assessment'' and the distinction between the decision-maker and stakeholder groups can be considered as artificial. The new approaches to risk assessment blur the lines between the roles of these different groups making more or less everyone a stakeholder and also a potential contributor to risk assessment. These views are considered in more detail in [[Mass collaboration | mass collaboration]] and [[Organizing stakeholder involvement]]. However, the above diagram represents the currently existing reality and the common perceptions of risk assessment and societal decision making relatively well.
+
[[Image:Assessment push and pull.PNG|center|General assessment framework]]
  
The assessment product is the center of attention when considering risk assessment. It is the manifestation of the assessment process that produces it. Ultimately it is, however, the process of using the risk assessment product and the intended or expected consequences of that, which set the requirements for what the assessment product should be like and how it is to be produced. In other words: the intended use purpose defines the assessment product, which then defines the process of producing it.
+
Assessments can be considered as an institutionalization of intentional activities of informing societally relevant decisions. Assessment is a means (informing) to an end (decision), not an end in itself. To put in another way, without proper use of the assessment product, the whole process of assessment is completely futile. Thus, [[Assessment|assessments]] should always be done for a purpose. When the purpose is identified and kept clear in mind and preferably explicated and made public, it helps to guide the process in producing a desired kind of assessment product. The general purpose is to improve societal decision making by providing good descriptions of chosen parts of reality for use in decision making, but the specific purpose statement for a particular assessment must be far more detailed. Proper identification of the purpose of assessment crucially affects the assessment process, the content and essence of the final product, and consequently the outcome of using the product in decision making (see figure below).
  
Since, normally the risk assessors, or more generally the contributors to risk assessment, can only have direct influence to the assessment product and the process of producing it, but it is anyhow the use process that set the requirements for them, risk assessments can not be carried out in isolation from the societal decision-making. Instead, risk assessment should be seen as interpretation of scientific information for the use of the society. Risk assessment is thus an activity that takes place in the interface between science and society.
+
[[Image:RA-SH chain.PNG|center|The chain from assessment to societal consequences]]
  
In order to be able to address this issue properly it is reasonable to consider the sphere of risk assessments to cover three different individual, but inter-related parts:
+
The whole endeavor of assessment should be driven by the knowledge need of the society and it should be deeply integrated in the overall process of decision making upon societally important matters. There are several more specific assessment frameworks that bound the objects of assessment to certain particular topics, and accordingly the methods of assessment to meet the specific needs of these topics, e.g. chemical risk assessment (RA, risks of chemicals), environmental impact assessment (EIA, impacts to the environment) and integrated environmental health impact assessment (IEHIA, impacts of environmental phenomena to human health). The general assessment framework, however, addresses the role of assessment in between science and society, or using science to serve the needs of society. The idea of assessment practice is not relevant only within a specific context, but also more broadly as a general societal activity, in particular in operationalising large structural changes to existing systems. This is crucial for example when considering the needs to adapt societal structures and practices in the face of the global climate change. In order to make this possible, the whole endeavor of assessment must be considered as a process of systematic social learning and facilitation of social innovations.
*risk assessment process
 
*risk assessment product
 
*use process(es), ''relating roughly to everything from decision-making process onwards''
 
  
[[General assessment processes | Assessment process]] is about ''collecting'' scientific information and values from various different kinds of sources and ''synthesizing'' them into the form of a risk assessment product. [[Universal products | An assessment product]] is a ''description'' of a particular piece ''of reality'' produced according to the needs it is intended to address. These needs are derived from the use process and ''translated'' into the [[Purpose and properties of good assessments | purpose]] and scope and other structural requirements for the assessment product.
+
== References ==
  
== Classification of potential users of assessment outputs ==
+
<References/>
  
'''Users and use purposes of the method'''
+
== See also ==
  
A spectrum of different potential users of the new risk assessment method can be described e.g. as:
+
* [[General assessment framework]]
*A Scientists, risk assessors in administration, or consultants working for administration on the European level.
+
* [[Purpose]]
*B Scientists, risk assessors in administration, or consultants working for administration on the national level.
+
* [[Assessments - science-based decision support]]
*C Risk assessors in administration or consultants working for administration on the community level.
+
* [[Operationalising large structural changes to existing systems]]
*D Authorities involved in managing risks but not actually qualified in making risk assessments (any level).
+
* [[Influencing environmental decisions of authorities, and responding to that]]
*E Political decision-makers (any level).
+
* [[Innovation and research]]
*F Representatives of the industry or business.
+
* [[Flipism]]
*G Representatives of NGOs.
+
[[Category:THL publications 2009]]
*H Citizens directly affected by the risk assessment outcomes.
+
[[Category:THL publications 2010]]
*I Anyone interested.
 
 
 
 
 
A spectrum of different kinds of use purposes by different users of the method can be described e.g. as in the table. Also tentative priorities have been given for the toolbox to facilitate different uses for different users (XXX = high importance, XX = moderate importance, X = potential importance, empty cell = no identified need or low importance).
 
 
 
{| {{prettytable}}
 
|
 
|'''A'''
 
|'''B'''
 
|'''C'''
 
|'''D'''
 
|'''E'''
 
|'''F'''
 
|'''G'''
 
|'''H'''
 
|'''I'''
 
|----
 
|1 Managing an assessment
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|X
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|----
 
|2 Contributing to an assessment as a risk assessor
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|X
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|----
 
|3 Contributing to an assessment as a stakeholder
 
|X
 
|X
 
|X
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|----
 
|4 Contributing to an assessment as a decision maker
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|----
 
|5 Observing assessment-specific information
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|----
 
|6 Observing general environmental health related information
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|XXX
 
|XX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|----
 
|7 Observing general risk assessment related information
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|X
 
|X
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|X
 
|X
 
|----
 
|8 Producing general environmental health related information
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|X
 
|X
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|----
 
|9 Producing general risk assessment related information
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|XXX
 
|X
 
|X
 
|XX
 
|XX
 
|X
 
|X
 
|----
 
|}
 

Latest revision as of 06:40, 30 January 2011



The basic idea in all practice of scientific assessment, be it risk, impact, integrated, health impact, integrated environmental health impact, or whatever assessment, is to use the means and methods of science to support societal decision making. Assessments aim to prevent random decision making, as in flipism, but also decisions based on incomplete, biased or false information, as well as decisions founded on societally unacceptable values, especially when these decisions address matters of significant societal importance. They are thus processes of collecting and synthesizing knowledge and values from plural sources as solutions to societal problems.

In principle, the whole endeavor of assessment could be considered as an interface between science and society, as an institutionalization of using the best available knowledge to guide societal actions, although the current assessment practice usually turns out as something quite different. Assessments are often perceived as scientific, or at least science-based, activity but unlike science according to the traditional ideal, assessments do not only search for the truth, but also serve practical, instrumental purposes. E.g. for the purpose of assessment method development, it is important to understand that assessments are intentional activities of producing artifacts with instrumental functions. Assessments could be considered as simultaneously serving two masters; the scientific quest for truth and the practical needs of the society. Balancing between the forces of two masters makes the practice of assessment even more challenging. Assessments can also be triggered by needs arising from different aspects. There can be problem-driven assessments where the assessment questions are formulated according to practical societal needs. There can also be exploratory assessments that rather generate and evaluate questions that could be answered with an assessment (model).

Asessments in environment and health

Here assessments are considered in relation to the field of environmental health, for example as integrated environmental health impact assessments (IEHIA). The concept of assessment adopted here is however generalizable to virtually any field of science-based support of societal decision making. Environmental health assessment (EHA) is an endeavor of analyzing relations between environmental phenomena and human health for the purpose of informing societal decision making on issues relevant to environment and health. It takes place on the interface between science and society, attempting to bridge the practical needs of society with the knowledge creating processes of science. As both environment and health are very broad concepts, intertwined with many aspects of human society, EHA is by its nature a multi-disciplinary field of practice that addresses issues of interest to many different organizations and individuals with different societal roles and perspectives. Naturally this includes all the scientific experts appointed to make the assessment task and the policy makers having an obligation to deal with the particular issue at hand, but also representatives of industry and commerce, NGO's and the general public e.g. as consumers or citizens. EHA can thus be perceived as a science-based activity that takes place on the interface between science and society, bridges scientific knowledge and practice with the practical needs of e.g. policy, business and everyday life, thereby providing enlightenment and increased awareness within the society at large.

The term assessment is often used interchangeably to refer to either the process of making an assessment (assessment process) or the output of that process (assessment product). This confusion is not only a terminological one, but it appears that the actual concepts of producing information, as e.g. in an assessment process, and the information produced, as e.g. an assessment product, are often confused. Another essential aspect related to assessments as societal endeavors of generating solutions to practical problems that is far too often neglected is the use of assessment products. The general assessment framework describing the relationships between assessment process, assessment product and use of assessment product is illustrated in the figure below.

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination

Assessments can be considered as an institutionalization of intentional activities of informing societally relevant decisions. Assessment is a means (informing) to an end (decision), not an end in itself. To put in another way, without proper use of the assessment product, the whole process of assessment is completely futile. Thus, assessments should always be done for a purpose. When the purpose is identified and kept clear in mind and preferably explicated and made public, it helps to guide the process in producing a desired kind of assessment product. The general purpose is to improve societal decision making by providing good descriptions of chosen parts of reality for use in decision making, but the specific purpose statement for a particular assessment must be far more detailed. Proper identification of the purpose of assessment crucially affects the assessment process, the content and essence of the final product, and consequently the outcome of using the product in decision making (see figure below).

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination

The whole endeavor of assessment should be driven by the knowledge need of the society and it should be deeply integrated in the overall process of decision making upon societally important matters. There are several more specific assessment frameworks that bound the objects of assessment to certain particular topics, and accordingly the methods of assessment to meet the specific needs of these topics, e.g. chemical risk assessment (RA, risks of chemicals), environmental impact assessment (EIA, impacts to the environment) and integrated environmental health impact assessment (IEHIA, impacts of environmental phenomena to human health). The general assessment framework, however, addresses the role of assessment in between science and society, or using science to serve the needs of society. The idea of assessment practice is not relevant only within a specific context, but also more broadly as a general societal activity, in particular in operationalising large structural changes to existing systems. This is crucial for example when considering the needs to adapt societal structures and practices in the face of the global climate change. In order to make this possible, the whole endeavor of assessment must be considered as a process of systematic social learning and facilitation of social innovations.

References


See also