Managing technical reputation: Regulatory agencies and evidential work in risk assessment
| Published date | 01 June 2022 |
| Author | David Demortain,Olivier Borraz |
| Date | 01 June 2022 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12734 |
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Managing technical reputation: Regulatory
agencies and evidential work in risk assessment
David Demortain
1
| Olivier Borraz
2
1
Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire Sciences
Innovations Sociétés (LISIS), CNRS, ESIEE
Paris, INRAE, Univ Gustave Eiffel, Marne la
Vallée, France
2
CNRS, Centre de Sociologie des
Organisations (CSO-CNRS/Sciences Po),
Paris, France
Correspondence
David Demortain, Laboratoire
Interdisciplinaire Sciences Innovations
Sociétés, Université Gustave Eiffel, 5
Boulevard Descartes, 77454 Marne-la-Vallée
cedex, France.
Email: david.demortain@inrae.fr
Funding information
Institut Francilien Recherche Innovations
Sociétés
Abstract
How can regulatory agencies withatechnicalorscientificmis-
sion forge and defend their reputation, when the definition of
expertise is subject to countervailing influences and percep-
tions among a wide array of audiences? In this paper, we
tackle this broad question, focusing on a particular episode of
the European controversy over the regulatory control of expo-
sure to bisphenol A, during which the European Food Safety
Authority altered the method by which it produced an assess-
ment of the risk of BPA, responding to the regulatory contro-
versy surrounding this substance. Building on the literature on
organizational reputation and science and technology studies,
we shed light on the work that regulatory agencies undertake
to gain credibility in particular configurations of audiences. This
perspective on the management of audiences and knowledge
standards is central for the explanation of the decisions, poli-
cies, and strategies of science-based agencies, and the way in
which a technical reputation takes form in controversy-prone
areas of regulation.
1|INTRODUCTION
How can regulatory agencies with a technical mission forge and defend their reputation, when the content of their
work and what counts as expertise more generally, is subject to so many countervailing influences and perceptions
among a wide array of audiences? How far can regulatory agencies work with and shape knowledge, in order to fulfill
the various norms that their audiences apply to regulatory science?
In this paper, we tackle this broad question by focusing on a short episode of the European controversy over
the regulatory control of exposure to bisphenol A (BPA). In 2014, in front of surprised audiences, the European Food
Safety Agency (EFSA) took a slight but meaningful turn from previous recommendations in which it had always con-
sidered BPA to pose no major risk to health, and decided to lower the acceptable dose for the substance. To justify
Received: 26 June 2020 Revised: 3 March 2021 Accepted: 7 March 2021
DOI: 10.1111/padm.12734
394 © 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Public Admin. 2022;100:394–407.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/padm
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
