Contenu du sommaire : L'administrateur et l'expert

L'administrateur et l'expert

• Problématique générale et enjeux. - Marie-Françoise Bechtel
• L'expertise, de la recherche d'une action rationnelle à la démocratisation des connaissances et des choix. - Pierre Lascoumes
  Changes in the Practice of Expertise : from the Search for a Rational Course of Action to the Democratization of Knowledge and Choices. Historical analysis shows that the practice of expertise has evolved from the idea of constructing certainty to that of examining uncertainty. In the beginning, expertise basically meant that an individual was specialized in an area of knowledge and that in virtue of this specialization was able to make clear-cut decisions on issues concerning that specific field. Since that time, the practice of expertise has taken on new forms (counter-expertise, collective expertise), and we now have a multifaceted type of expertise capable of articulating various types of knowledge and bringing together actors from various fields. Its purpose is not only to estimate risk, but to point out lingering uncertainties and to open the way for decisions which are not final and which can lead to further investigation and revisable measures.
• Quel statut pour l'expert ? - Rafaël Encinas de Munagorri
  The Status of the Expert. In the French administration, unlike its parallel in America, expertise exists in a culture where decision-making is centralized, confidential, and non-negotiated. This is evidenced in the status of the expert, who is both dependent on the administration and independent in carrying out his mission. Nonetheless, establishing a legal status for the expert would make it possible to define with greater precision his rights and obligations, his role in decision-making and above all his responsibilities, with a clear distinction between his and those of the administration.
• L'office parlementaire d'évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques : le politique et l'expertise scientifique. - Claude Birraux
  Office of Parliament for the Evaluation of Scientific and Technological Choices (OPECST) : Scientific Expertise and Politics. The aim of OPECST, created in 1983, was to give Parliament the means of evaluating government decisions in the areas of science and technology. OPECST is an original structure made up of an equal number of representatives from both parliamentary houses and which works only on a commission basis. An independent body functioning on consensus and exercising true powers of clarification, mediation, and influence, its recommendations are increasingly taken into account in scientific and technological decision-making processes, making it the natural interface between the scientific and political worlds.

• Expertise et gestion des risques sanitaires

  • L'évaluation britannique du risque de transmission de la maladie de la vache folle aux humains. - Eve Seguin
    Risk Assessment of the BSE transmission to Humans in the United Kingdom. This paper offers a detailed analysis of the events that surrounded the establishment and work of the Southwood Committee set up by the British government to assess the risk of BSE transmission to humans. The Southwood report published in February 1989 claimed that the risk was remote and this scientific assessment provided the foundation for governmental policy until the March 1996 announcement that BSE had transmitted to humans. This analysis focused on scientific discourse brings to light phenomena that are not addressed in most studies of the links between science and politics in contemporary societies.
  • Leçons tirées du maintien de l'embargo sur le boeuf britannique en 1999. - Olivier Godard
  • Témoignages
  • Risques, expertise, décision publique : un retour sur le sens des mots. - Jean-François Girard
  • La réception de l'expertise par le ministère de l'agriculture : la prise de décision... - Catherine Geslain-Laneelle

• Expertise et choix d'équipement

  • Intégrer savoirs et opérations : la stratégie de la Banque mondiale. - François Lacasse
    Integrating Knowledge and Operations : World Bank Strategy. Given the context in which it carries out its operations, the World Bank needs a great many experts with varied knowledge and experience. This means that a considerable amount of effort goes into both acquiring expertise and putting it to the best use. Due to the broad range of fields involved, it was necessary to set up a structure aimed at better integrating knowledge and operations. The results obtained, however, remain uneven : although they have been positive in fields such as the production and mobilization of knowledge and know-how, the same cannot be said for more traditional areas.
  • Témoignages
  • L'exemple de la SNCF. - Jacques Fournier
  • Le cas des technologies de l'information et de la communication (TIC). - Jacques Sauret
  • La sécurité routière. - Isabelle Massin

• Expertise et politiques de l'énergie

  • Propos introductifs. - Pierre Boisson
  • Risques nucléaires, crise et expertise : quel rôle pour l'administrateur ? - Claude Gilbert
    Nuclear Risk, Crises, and Expertise : What Role for the Administrator ? The analysis of nuclear risk, one of the most important risks in France, allows us to pinpoint the possible role of the administrator in various situations. The latter has no political power (which devolves on elected representatives), nor does he possess the knowledge of the scientist, or expert in the field. With neither power nor scientific knowledge, he is expected to do what he has been trained to do: “administer” people, things, knowledge, space and time, even when the combination of risk and crisis constitutes a threat to any and all order. The role of the administrator is thus to contribute to the organization and management of crisis and uncertainty.
  • Expertise et gestion des risques en matière nucléaire. - Jacques Lochard
    `titreb
    From Formal Expertise to Co-expertise : Experience in the field of Protection against Radiation `/titreb As a result of the growing difficulties confronting the heads of public and private high-risk activities, expertise practices have changed radically over the past years in the areas of risk assessment and management. In answer to the erosion of the credibility and legitimacy of traditional “scientific” expertise, new forms of expertise based on citizen participation have emerged, particularly in fields involving public trust. The author's aim is to analyse the main changes in the field of radiological protection, on the basis of his 25 years of experience in the field. In conclusion, the author discusses the independence of expert assessment, an issue central to the present debate on the organization and practice of expertise in the field of high-risk activities.
  • Conclusions - Dominique Wolton