The Right Tool for the Job? Modeling, Spatial Relationships, and Styles of Scientific Practice in the UK Foot and Mouth Crisis
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4475433 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Karen Bickerstaff (0000-0002-7618-1384, University of East Anglia), Peter Simmons (0000-0003-1078-3101, University of East Anglia) |
| Year | 2004 |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 393-412 |
| Publication date | 2004-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Environment and Planning D Society and Space (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0263-7758 • E-ISSN: 1472-3433 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1068/d344t |
| OpenAlex | W2133170635 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 36 |
| References cited | 25 |
In this paper we explore the expert controversy over the management of a major rural risk issue, the foot and mouth disease (FMD) outbreak that affected the United Kingdom in 2001, and in particular the role of predictive epidemiological modeling in the decisionmaking process. We pose the questions of why this technique was identified as the right tool for the job by government and why, at the same time, its use was so fiercely contested by other experts in animal health. To set our analysis in context we outline briefly the causes, characteristics, and consequences of FMD together with its history in the United Kingdom. We then provide an account of the 2001 FMD outbreak and the policies that were employed to control the epidemic. In the main discussion we integrate the geographical concept of spatial practices with the concept, drawn from the sociology of scientific knowledge, of styles of scientific practice and apply this to the analysis of the knowledge practices and arguments of the scientific groups that advised on controlling the epidemic. We analyse the key differences between expert groups and their policy recommendations in terms of their different styles of scientific spatial practice. In the rhetorical boundary work of the opposing scientific groups we see these differences in 'style' being invoked to delineate the boundaries of 'sound science' and thereby legitimate their respective policy prescriptions. We conclude by discussing the relationship between styles of scientific spatial practice and recent trends in government policy style and its implications for future risk policy
Context (archaeology · Epistemology · Geography · Government (linguistics · Political science · Public relations · Rhetorical question · Scientific evidence · Social science · Sociology · Sociology of scientific knowledge · Style (visual arts · Work (physics · Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology · Engineering · Global trade, sustainability, and social impact · Zoonotic diseases and public health
Of Badgers, Bovines and Bacteria
Linking Knowledge and Action for Sustainable Development
Mapping the geography of disease
Virtual Engineering
Toward Analog Geographies
ANT, multiplicity and policy
Culling, Catastrophe and Collectivity
Reflections on the UK's approach to the 2009 swine flu pandemic
Approaches to evaluating model quality across different regime types in environmental and public health governance
The Zika case
Living with disease? Biosecurity and avian influenza in ostriches
Uses and abuses of farmers’ emotional well-being
Post-rural mental health
Stomaching change
The model crisis, or how to have critical promiscuity in the time of Covid-19
Beyond Policy Networks
The ecological paradox
Navigating veterinary borderlands
Securing the pig farmgate? Biosecurity, affects and pathological atmospheres
Situating local experience of risk
Fleshing out expertise
Mapping divergent concepts of sustainability
Biosecurity and the topologies of infected life
Vermin, Victims and Disease
Media, Metaphors and Modelling
Learning through Computer Model Improvisations
Contexts and Culling
Mapping careful epidemiology
Biosecurity, Expertise and the Institutional Void
Disaster in Agriculture
Coalition Culls and Zoonotic Ontologies
Landfarming
The Spaces of Biosecurity
Biosecurity after the Event
Biosecurity
A pandemic of metrics
Spatial Formations
Places on the Margin
Sheepfarming after Chernobyl
Learning to manage global environmental risks
Contested Boundaries in Policy-Relevant Science
Constructing `Do-able' Problems in Cancer Research
Constructing Social Problems
Style' for historians and philosophers
Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science
Dissent in science
| Unique citing works | 36 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,8 |
| Citation span | 2006 - 2026 (21) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 36 |