Faculty of Humanities Curtin University Sustainable Policy Unit Citizens contesting science: a case study of public participation in the management of a contaminated site in Western Australia Kelly Elizabeth Duckworth A thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Curtin University February 2016 Declaration To the best of my knowledge and belief this thesis contains no material previously published by any other person except where due acknowledgment has been made. This thesis contains no material that has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university. Signature: Date: February 2016 ABSTRACT This thesis addresses the problem of involving citizens in regulatory debates rich in the discourse of science. Through a detailed case study of the ANI-Bradken site redevelopment project, the public participatory practices within Western Australian environmental regulatory processes are scrutinised. From the perspective of a community group (the South Fremantle/Hamilton Hill Residents’ Association Inc.) contesting the redevelopment, the thesis examines the barriers to effective public participation using a theoretical framework developed within the sociology of scientific knowledge. The case study of the thesis documents the community group’s attempts to debate critical safety issues associated with a contaminated site redevelopment project near Fremantle, Western Australia (WA). The study draws attention to the influential role of scientific knowledge in environmental management and, specifically, in the management of contaminated sites. It also clarifies how, and why, regulatory authorities utilise scientific knowledge to influence the public participatory processes. The thesis argues that the regulatory application of scientific knowledge influences public participatory processes through two mechanisms. First, in the location of expertise, whereby lay knowledge is devalued when measured against professional expertise. Second, in the translation of research science to regulatory science, whereby uncertainties of knowledge are downplayed to facilitate decision- making, thus negating public debate. The study also examines the role of statutory arrangements in informing the nature of public engagement in the management of contaminated sites. Although Australian regulatory mechanisms endorse public participation in decision-making for contaminated land redevelopment projects, in the WA application statutory mechanisms for inclusion are commonly absent or dysfunctional. The study traces the community group’s reactions to the WA regulatory system in response to redevelopment plans for the ANI- Bradken site. It was observed that in the absence of functional statutory-backed arrangements for citizens to contest scientific i knowledge claims, even where public debate was scientifically framed and expert mediated, the role and nature of public participation was significantly curbed. The thesis concludes by making explicit the challenges inherent in citizen involvement in science-based decision-making and by presenting targets to improve public participation in environmental regulatory processes in WA. These targets for improvement should include provisions for statutory enforcement of precautionary safeguards, legislative changes to the provisions for public participation, alongside the creation of a space where alternative knowledge claims can be assessed for their legitimacy. However, the most critical change must be to the social positioning of science - allowing for knowledge dichotomies to be defeated, and for knowledge itself to be laid open to public scrutiny and to public contestation, to validate any claims to objectivity. ii This thesis is dedicated to the memory of My father James Duckworth 1926-1998 South Fremantle community member and campaigner Loreta McMaster (née Scenna) 1966-2006 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................................... I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ VII ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................... VIII CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... - 2 - 1.1 BACKGROUND: NATURE AND CONTEXT OF THE PROBLEM ........................................................ - 2 - 1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................. - 3 - 1.3 SCOPE ....................................................................................................................................... - 4 - 1.4 SIGNIFICANCE........................................................................................................................... - 5 - 1.5 THE CASE STUDY: OVERVIEW ................................................................................................... - 5 - 1.6 NOTES ON SOME TERMS USED ................................................................................................... - 7 - 1.7 THESIS STRUCTURE AND OVERVIEW OF CHAPTERS ................................................................. - 12 - CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODS...................................................................................... - 15 - 2.1 METHOD ................................................................................................................................. - 15 - 2.2 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODS ......................................................................... - 17 - 2.3 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS, BIAS, AND POSITIONING .............................................................. - 18 - CHAPTER 3: A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION UNDER REGULATORY SCIENCE .......................................................... - 22 - 3.1 THE IDEALS OF RESEARCH SCIENCE ........................................................................................ - 24 - 3.1.1 Seeing is believing: empiricist and positivist accounts of objectivity ............................ - 24 - 3.1.2 Popper and Kuhn: falsificationism and normal science ................................................ - 25 - 3.1.3 Partial perspective and the biology of sensory perception ............................................ - 27 - 3.1.4 What are the most reliable methods for science? .......................................................... - 29 - 3.2 THE EXPERT DRIVEN MODEL OF SCIENCE AND ITS PUBLIC POSITIONING .................................. - 30 - 3.2.1 Defining expertise .......................................................................................................... - 30 - 3.2.2 Problematising expertise ............................................................................................... - 32 - 3.3 THE STANDING OF REGULATORY SCIENCE .............................................................................. - 34 - 3.3.1 The regulatory and research science divide: the problem of uncertainty ...................... - 34 - 3.3.2 Risk assessment as an extension of regulatory science .................................................. - 38 - 3.3.3 The application of precautionary context-based risk models under regulatory science - 40 - 3.3.4 Is the peer review system adequate for science decision-making? ................................ - 42 - 3.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN SCIENTIFIC DECISION-MAKING ...................................................... - 45 - 3.4.1 The positioning of lay knowledge and public participation in scientific debate ............ - 47 - 3.4.2 The cultural nature of risk in regulatory science ........................................................... - 50 - 3.4.3 The impacts on public participation from the expert-lay divide and the ‘deficit model’ for public understanding of science ............................................................................................. - 53 - 3.4.4 The significance of critical positioning to public participation ..................................... - 55 - 3.5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................... - 58 - CHAPTER 4: THE REGULATION OF CONTAMINATED SITES ....................................... - 62 - 4.1 INTERNATIONAL APPROACHES INFORMING THE REGULATION OF CONTAMINATED SITES IN AUSTRALIA .................................................................................................................................. - 63 - 4.1.1 The US approach ........................................................................................................... - 63 - 4.1.2 The UK approach .......................................................................................................... - 66 - 4.1.3 The Australian application ............................................................................................ - 69 - 4.2 THE OVERARCHING STRATEGIES USED IN THE ASSESSMENT OF RISK AT CONTAMINATED SITES IN AUSTRALIA .................................................................................................................................. - 71 - 4.2.1 Using science to define safety and risk .......................................................................... - 72 - 4.2.2 Context-based assessments ...........................................................................................