Judicial Review of Uncertain Risks in Scientific Research

TL;DR

This paper explores how courts can evaluate uncertain risks in large-scale scientific experiments using qualitative reasoning, addressing challenges in traditional risk assessment methods.

Contribution

It introduces qualitative reasoning approaches to improve judicial evaluation of risks in complex scientific research.

Findings

Proposes new qualitative reasoning modes for risk assessment

Highlights limitations of traditional quantitative risk evaluation

Suggests frameworks for judicial decision-making in scientific risks

Abstract

It is difficult to neutrally evaluate the risks posed by large-scale leading-edge science experiments. Traditional risk assessment is problematic in this context for multiple reasons. Also, such experiments can be insulated from challenge by manipulating how questions of risk are framed. Yet courts can and must evaluate these risks. In this chapter, I suggest modes of qualitative reasoning to facilitate such evaluation.