당파적 양극화와 과학의 정치화
Partisan Polarization and Politicization of Science
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
최근의 정치방역 대 과학방역 논쟁은 정책 결정에서 과학과 과학자의 역할 및 과학적 증거에 기반을 둔 전문가 중심 거버넌스에 관한 대중의 관심을 증가시켰다. 그러나 우리나라 원전의 안전성 및 일본 후쿠시마 원전의 오염 처리수의 유해성에 대한 인식이 당파성에 따라 극명하게 차이를 보인 것은 과학의 정치화 상황에서 과학과 과학자의 정책 역할에 한계가 있음을 시사한다. 이러한 배경에서 본 연구는 설문조사 자료를 활용해 정책 결정에서 과학과 과학자의 역할에 대한 태도에 초점을 두고 당파성에 따른 차이를 분석하였다. 분석 결과는 정치와 과학의 경계를 구분하면서도 정치인들은 과학적 증거를 고려해 정책을 결정하고, 과학자들은 과학적 진실을 소통해야 한다는 여론이 지배적이며 이러한 견해가 당파성에 따라 다르지 않음을 보여준다. 정당 갈등의 중심에 있는 정쟁화 된 사안의 경우 시민의 의견 형성은 당파적 신호에 따라 달라질 수 있지만 과학적 증거 기반 정책 결정이나 과학자의 과학적 진실 공개에 대한 지지가 높다는 것은 당파적 양극화 속에서도 과학적 증거에 기반을 둔 전문가 중심 거버넌스의 전망이 어둡지 않음을 함축한다. 특히 과학 지식의 수준이 높을수록 그리고 과학자 집단의 질에 대한 평가가 긍정적일수록 정책 결정에서 과학과 과학자의 역할에 대한 지지가 높았는데, 이는 과학적 소통을 통해 과학과 과학자에 대한 일반대중의 이해를 높이는 것이 과학적 증거에 기반을 둔 전문가 중심 거버넌스의 구축에 도움을 줄 수 있음을 시사한다.
Abstract
Recent debate about government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic has increased public interest in the role of science and scientists in policymaking and expert-centered governance based on scientific evidence. However. stark partisan differences in perceptions of the safety of South Korea’s nuclear power plants and hazards of treated waste water from Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant suggest that the policy role of science and scientists in politicization of science is limited. In this context, using web-based survey data, this study analyzed partisan differences in attitudes toward the role of science and scientists in policymaking. Results of analysis showed a strong public consensus that politicians should consider scientific evidence in making policy decisions and scientists should communicate scientific truth. These views did not vary across partisan lines. While public opinion formation might be subject to partisan cues on politicized issues at the center of partisan conflict, greater support for scientific evidence-based policymaking and scientists’ speaking of scientific truth suggests that prospects for evidence-based, expert-driven governance are not bleak, even in the face of partisan polarization. In particular, the higher the level of scientific knowledge and the more positive the perceived quality of the scientific community, the higher the support for the role of science and scientists in policymaking. This suggests that increasing public understanding of science and scientists through scientific communication can help build evidence-based, expert-driven governance.
참고문헌 (33)
- 박종민, "정부 신뢰의 양극화와 민주적 거버넌스의 제도적 개혁", 2023년 한국정책분석평가학회 하계학술대회 발표 논문 (2023)
- 박종민, "한국의 코로나19 팬데믹 : 일반인의 시각" (2024), 박영사
- 윤견수, "한국의 코로나19 팬데믹: 일반인의 시각" (2024), 박영사
- Baekgaard, Martin, "Interpreting performance information: Motivated reasoning or unbiased comprehension", Public Administration Review, 76(1), pp.73~82 (2016)
- Bayes, Robin, "Moral Convictions and Threats to Science", The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 700, pp.86~96 (2022)
- Blank, Joshua M., "Does Partisanship Shape Attitudes toward Science and Public Policy? The Case for Ideology and Religion", The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658, pp.18~35 (2015)
- Bolsen, Toby, "Countering the Politicization of Science", Journal of Communication, 65, pp.745~769 (2015)
- Bustamante, Thomas, "Routledge Handbook of Law and the COVID-19 Pandemic", pp.225~236 (2022), Routledge
- Chaiken, Shelly, "Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology", pp.246~266 (2012), Sage
- Chen, Serena, "Motivated Heuristic and Systematic Processing", Psychological Inquiry, 10(1), pp.44~49 (1999)
- Dietz, Thomas, "Bringing values and deliberation to science communication", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 110(3), pp.14081~14087 (2013)
- Druckman, James N, "Threats to Science: Politicization, Misinformation, and Inequalities", The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 700, pp.8~24 (2022)
- Druckman, James N., "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affect Public Opinion Formation", American Political Science Review, 107(1), pp.57~79 (2013)
- Garber, Mark A., "Routledge Handbook of Law and the COVID-19 Pandemic", pp.72~83 (2022), Routledge
- Gauchat, Gordon, "Politicization of Science in the Public Sphere: A Study of Public Trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010", American Sociological Review, 77(2), pp.167~187 (2012)
- Hammond, Kenneth R., "Science, Values and Human Judgment", Science, 194, pp.389~396 (1976)
- Hetherington, Marc J., "Why Washington Won’t Work: Polarization, Political Trust and the Governing Crisis" (2015), University of Chicago Press
- James, Oliver, "Motivated reasoning about public performance: An experimental study of how citizens judge the affordable care act", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(1), pp.197~209 (2017)
- Jasanoff, Sheila S, "Contested Boundaries in Policy-Relevant Science", Social Studies of Science, 17(2), pp.195~230 (1987)
- Kraft, Patrick W., "Why People ‘Don’t Trust the Evidence’: Motivated Reasoning and Scientific Beliefs", The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658, pp.121~133 (2015)
- Kunda, Ziva, "The Case of Motivated Reasoning", Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), pp.480~498 (1990)
- Lupia, Arthur, "Communicating science in politicized environments", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences(PNAS), 110(3), pp.14048~14054 (2023)
- McIntyre, Lee C, "Post-Truth" (2018), MIT Press
- Merton, Robert K., "The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigation" (1973), University of Chicago Press
- Mulkay, Michael, "Norms and Ideology in Science", Social Science Information, 15(4, pp.5) (1976), 637~656
- Nisbet, Erik C., "The Partisan Brain: How Dissonant Science Messages Lead Conservatives and Liberals to (Dis)Trust Science", The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658, pp.36~66 (2015)
- Oreskes, Naomi, "의혹을 팝니다: 담배 산업에서 지구 온난화까지 기업의 용병이 된 과학자들" (2012)
- Pielke, Roger A., Jr., "The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics" (2007), Cambridge University Press
- Schmid-Petri, Hannah, "Effects of politicization on the practice of science", Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science, 188, pp.45~63 (2022)
- Shuay, Elizabeth, "The Politics of Science: Political Values and the Production, Communication, and Perception of Scientific Knowledge", The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658, pp.6~15 (2015)
- Slothuus, Rune, "Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Issue Framing Effects", Journal of Politics, 72(3), pp.630~645 (2010)
- Taber, Charles S., "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs", American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), pp.755~769 (2006)
- Weimer, Maria, "Regulating Risks in the European Union: The Co-production of Expert and Executive Power" (2017), Hart Publishing