Scientific Argumentation and Social Compromises: The Difficulty of Codifying Occupational Diseases in France - IRISSO (Institut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire en Sciences Sociales)
Article Dans Une Revue French Politics Année : 2004

Scientific Argumentation and Social Compromises: The Difficulty of Codifying Occupational Diseases in France

Résumé

Policy choices are often regarded as compromises between public authorities and interest groups, even when the use of experts is required because of their technical nature. In this article, it is shown that expertise cannot be considered as a ‘passive’ resource in the hands of interest groups, but as a relatively autonomous field with specific rules that impacts policy outcomes. Thus, the convergence of positions between some experts and some interest groups needs investigation and explanation. This contention is illustrated through the analysis of the codification of occupational diseases in France. This process involves a deep medical expertise and has sparked a very intense controversy between labour unions and employers’ organizations.
Fichier principal
Vignette du fichier
2004_Déplaude_French Politics.pdf (922.02 Ko) Télécharger le fichier
Origine Fichiers produits par l'(les) auteur(s)
licence

Dates et versions

hal-01800520 , version 1 (29-09-2024)

Licence

Identifiants

Citer

Marc-Olivier Déplaude. Scientific Argumentation and Social Compromises: The Difficulty of Codifying Occupational Diseases in France. French Politics, 2004, 2 (3), pp.272 - 297. ⟨10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200064⟩. ⟨hal-01800520⟩
108 Consultations
2 Téléchargements

Altmetric

Partager

More