In the field of policy-making, technical knowledge is generally regarded as objective, true, and sufficient. It is typically positioned in contrast to local knowledge, which is considered subjective and irrelevant to policy-making. This paper follows a growing scholarly trend of re-examining the relationship between technical and local knowledge, in order to show that technical knowledge may be disputable, uncertain, and based on problematic presuppositions, while local knowledge often employs objective and systematic methods. The dichotomy between local and technical knowledge is thereby questioned, with the proposal that there exist multiple types of knowledge that are of relevance to policy-making. In addition, the paper shows that the boundary between individuals who hold different types of knowledge is blurry, and that, in fact, policy-making stakeholders simultaneously employ several types of knowledge. The empirical data for this study comes from a stakeholder participation process in Health Impact Assessment, which focused on land uses in the vicinity of a national hazardous industry and waste site.
- Interpretive policy analysis
- Stakeholder participation