Table 4 The need for and the general scope of quality assurance criteria

The need for quality assurance criteria

Criteria are needed to:

 • Provide a structured, rational, ethical, standardised, replicable and defensible approach to contextualisation;

 • Preserve the hallmarks of good science production that include autonomy, detachment, self-restraint, rigour, objectivity, excellence, integrity, and reliability;

 • Avoid conflicts of interest;

 • Produce plural and conditional products that explicitly communicate the “deep intractabilities” of uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance, instead of a single, definitive, unconditional product (Stirling 2010);

 • Recognise and value the importance of risk-mitigation effects (i.e. outputs and outcomes);

 • Help end-users to make better informed risk mitigation decisions and better use of risk-mitigation arrangements; and

• Facilitate fair and accurate independent review.

The general character of quality assurance criteria

Quality assurance criteria should be:

 • Agreed between scientists and distinct stakeholder communities;

 • Articulated, internalised and continually tested;

 • Objective;

 • People-focussed; and

 • Related the competencies needed by scientists for continuous ‘adaptation’ rather than continuous ‘improvement’ during all phases of knowledge production.

Weinberg 1972; Bartley 1971; Gibbons et al. 1994; US/NRC 1996; Shackley and Wynne 1996; Grabill and Simmons 1998; Nowotny 2003; Van Nuffelen 2004; Hemlin and Rasmussen 2006; Renn 2008; Hessels and Lente 2008; Wachinger and Renn 2010; Stirling 2010; OECD 2015; Preuner et al. 2017; Scolobig et al. 2017; Papale 2017.