“Technocracy,” democracy … and corruption and trust
- 828 Downloads
Mutual distrust between experts and ordinary citizens—manifest in the wake of the Brexit referendum, the rise of the Tea Party and the election of Donald Trump—is not new. But it takes on particular urgency in an age when ill-informed “populist” policies on issues such as climate change may cause irreparable damage. This article examines the viability of Gilley’s (Policy Sci 50:9–22, 2017) attempt to resolve the conflict between “technocracy” and democracy. Gilley’s solution relies on the objective qualities of a policy to assign it to its appropriate “sphere”: Highly technical problems are best addressed by experts, while those marked by technical uncertainty can be handled by democracy. This article argues that such a solution will not be stable under current political conditions. We must recognize that various forms of corruption of expertise have contributed to today’s populist reaction against experts. The challenge of reforming expertise and mitigating mistrust of experts is a “divergent” problem, which requires ongoing balancing, and does not admit of a once-and-for-all solution.
KeywordsTechnocracy Experts Populism Corruption
- American Economic Association. (2012). AEA disclosure policy. https://www.aeaweb.org/journals/policies/disclosure-policy.
- Caplan, B. (2006). The myth of the rational voter. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Davenport, C., & Lipton, E. (2017). How G.O.P. leaders came to view climate change as fake science. New York Times, 3 June.Google Scholar
- Ehrenreich, B. (2017). New kinds of work require new ideas—and new ways of organizing. New York Times, 23 February.Google Scholar
- Funk, C., & Kennedy, B. (2016). Public opinion about genetically modified foods and trust in scientists connected with these foods. Pew Research Center (1 December). http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/12/01/public-opinion-about-genetically-modified-foods-and-trust-in-scientists-connected-with-these-foods/.
- Gelbspan, R. (1997). The heat is on. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
- Hamilton, A., Jay, J., & Madison, J. (1937). The Federalist. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
- Harris, G., & Berenson, A. (2005). Ten voters on panel backing pain pills had industry ties. New York Times, 25 February.Google Scholar
- Ibsen, H. (1999). An enemy of the people. Mineola, NY: Dover.Google Scholar
- Kaiser, D., & Wasserman, L. (2016). The Rockefeller family fund versus Exxon. New York Review of Books, 8 December.Google Scholar
- Kant, I. (1991). Appendix to perpetual peace. In H. Reiss (Ed.), Kant: Political writings (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Krimsky, S., & Schwab, T. (2017). Conflicts of interest among committee members in the National Academies’ genetically engineered crop study. Public library of science, 28 February. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172317.
- Lipton, E., Confessore, N., & Williams, B. (2016). Think tank scholar or corporate consultant? It depends on the day. New York Times, 8 August.Google Scholar
- Monbiot, G. (2004). Goodbye, kind world. Guardian weekly, 20 August.Google Scholar
- Pew Research Center. (2015). Public and scientists’ views on science and society. Washington: Pew Research Center. http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2015/01/PI_ScienceandSociety_Report_012915.pdf.
- Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Schumacher, E. F. (1974). Small is beautiful. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
- Smith, A. (1937). The wealth of nations. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
- Tyrrell, G. N. M. (1952). Man the maker: A study of man’s mental evolution. New York: E.P. Dutton.Google Scholar
- U.S. House. (2009). Committee on Energy and Commerce. Preparing for climate change: Adaptation policies and programs: Hearing before the subcommittee on energy and environment. 111th Congress, 1st session, 25 March.Google Scholar
- Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Wilson, W. (1987). The study of administration. In J. Shafritz & J. Ott (Eds.), Classics of public administration (2nd ed.). Chicago: The Dorsey Press.Google Scholar