You need JavaScript to view this

Societal rationality; towards an understanding of decision making processes in society

Abstract

In a search for new ways to structure decision making on complex and controversial issues it is necessary to build an understanding of why traditional decision making processes break down. One reason is connected to the issues themselves. They represent steps into the unknown and decisions should therefore be made with prudence. A second reason is connected to a track record according to which new technologies are seen as generating more problems than solutions. A third and more fundamental reason is connected to the decision making processes themselves and a need to find better ways to approach difficult questions in the society. One way to approach societal decision making processes is to investigate their hidden rationality in an attempt to understand causes of observed difficulties. The paper is based mainly on observations from the nuclear industry, but it builds also on controversies experienced in attempts to agree on global efforts towards sustainable approaches to development. It builds on an earlier paper, which discussed the basis of rationality both on an individual and a societal level. Research in societal decision making has to rely on a true multi-disciplinary approach. It is nor enough to understand the technical and scientific models by  More>>
Authors:
Wahlstroem, Bjoern [1] 
  1. Technical Research Centre of Finland, Espoo (Finland)
Publication Date:
Jul 01, 2001
Product Type:
Conference
Report Number:
NEI-SE-436
Resource Relation:
Conference: VALDOR 2001. Values in Decisions on Risk. 2. VALDOR symposium addressing transparency in risk assessment and decision making, Stockholm (Sweden), 10-14 Jun 2001; Other Information: 5 refs; PBD: 2001; Related Information: In: VALDOR. Values in decisions on risk. Proceedings, by Andersson, Kjell (ed.) [Karinta-Konsult, Taeby (Sweden)], 535 pages.
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; DECISION MAKING; HAZARDS; PLANNING; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS
OSTI ID:
20412451
Research Organizations:
Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate, Stockholm (Sweden); Swedish Radiation Protection Inst., Stockholm (Sweden); Environment Agency (United Kingdom); UK Nirex Ltd., Harwell (United Kingdom); Commission of the European Communities, Brussels (Belgium). Directorate-General for the Environment
Country of Origin:
Sweden
Language:
English
Other Identifying Numbers:
TRN: SE0300368086339
Availability:
Available from INIS in electronic form; Also available from: Karinta Konsult, Box 6048, SE-187 06 Taeby, Sweden
Submitting Site:
SWDN
Size:
page(s) 369-381
Announcement Date:
Dec 20, 2003

Citation Formats

Wahlstroem, Bjoern. Societal rationality; towards an understanding of decision making processes in society. Sweden: N. p., 2001. Web.
Wahlstroem, Bjoern. Societal rationality; towards an understanding of decision making processes in society. Sweden.
Wahlstroem, Bjoern. 2001. "Societal rationality; towards an understanding of decision making processes in society." Sweden.
@misc{etde_20412451,
title = {Societal rationality; towards an understanding of decision making processes in society}
author = {Wahlstroem, Bjoern}
abstractNote = {In a search for new ways to structure decision making on complex and controversial issues it is necessary to build an understanding of why traditional decision making processes break down. One reason is connected to the issues themselves. They represent steps into the unknown and decisions should therefore be made with prudence. A second reason is connected to a track record according to which new technologies are seen as generating more problems than solutions. A third and more fundamental reason is connected to the decision making processes themselves and a need to find better ways to approach difficult questions in the society. One way to approach societal decision making processes is to investigate their hidden rationality in an attempt to understand causes of observed difficulties. The paper is based mainly on observations from the nuclear industry, but it builds also on controversies experienced in attempts to agree on global efforts towards sustainable approaches to development. It builds on an earlier paper, which discussed the basis of rationality both on an individual and a societal level. Research in societal decision making has to rely on a true multi-disciplinary approach. It is nor enough to understand the technical and scientific models by which outcomes are predicted, but it is also necessary to understand how people make sense of their environment and how they co-operate. Rationality is in this connection one of the key concepts, with an understanding that people always are rational in their own frame of action. The challenge in this connection is to understand how this subjective rationality is formed. Societal rationality has to do with the allocation of resources. There are decisions in which several conflicting views have to be considered. Spending time and resources ex ante may support a consensus ex post, but unfortunately there is no panacea for approaching difficult decisions. Decisions with an uncertain future have to be more robust than decisions with a more predictable future. At the same time investments ex ante in the decision making process are more likely to become wasted if all preconditions change. The rapid development of our time suggests an evolutionary approach to urgent problems. Decision making processes on hazardous technologies sometimes seem expensive and time consuming. Final outcomes are also unpredictable and they may not be socially acceptable after all. It may be so, but the expenses of selecting a route, which later has to be reversed due to societal disagreements, can also be expensive. Investments in the decision making process should therefore be seen as an insurance against bad decisions. This is however not to say that that important decisions should be voice voted, because there has to be a stability in basic principles applied. Decision making processes have to rely on an honesty of decision makers, stakeholders and experts. It seems possible that making general principles explicit could facilitate consensus building in decision making processes. Basically this would mean lifting up generic dilemmas to make the reasoning transparent and traceable. Decision making processes have very much to do with how people understand and make sense of the. world they live in. That means that stakeholders have to be open in explaining their motives, values and beliefs. Unverifiable beliefs have in this process to be taken with their face value as a standing point for further argumentation in a search for a common platform to agree on. This is not likely to be easy, but the alternative is an increasing disagreement on difficult issues.}
place = {Sweden}
year = {2001}
month = {Jul}
}