A Cultural Approach to Politicization of Science: How the Forestry Coalition Challenged the Scientific Consensus in the Finnish News Media Debate on Increased Logging

Politicization of science is often described as the process of political actors overemphasizing scientific uncertainty to cast doubt on a scientific consensus. We argue that in addition to exploiting the inherent uncertainty of science, actors resort to so-called technical and national arguments to politicize science. Applying the pragmatic sociology of Boltanski and Thevenot and the method of discourse network analysis to Finnish news media debate on forest policy (2015-2020), we analyze the different modes of valuation used by the so-called forestry coalition to defend increased logging and politicize the broad scientific consensus on its harmful environmental impacts. Technical arguments appeal to the common principles of technical efficiency, productivity and expertise, while national arguments invoke shared, cultural ideas of Finnish forestry. We conclude that pragmatic sociology carries considerable potential to improve our understanding of the broader cultural factors that lay the foundation for successful politicization of science.

Automated summary

Politicization of science involves political actors exaggerating scientific uncertainty and using technical and national arguments to cast doubt on scientific consensus. By analyzing the Finnish news media debate on forest policy from 2015 to 2020, we found that the forestry coalition used various modes of valuation, such as technical efficiency and national cultural ideas, to defend increased logging and politicize the scientific consensus on its environmental impacts. Pragmatic sociology has the potential to deepen our understanding of the cultural factors behind successful politicization of science.