科學事實建構與環評民主化：五件環評專家會議的啟示

The Construction of Scientific Facts and the Democratization of EIA: The Implications from Experts’ Meetings in Five EIA Cases

專家會議是近年來環評中引用的一項新制度，目的是希望在公眾討論前能釐清科學真相並產出公眾信服的科學結論。儘管官方認為此項制度有助於建構各界信服的科學事實，但本文分析了潮寮、霄裡溪、國光石化、永揚與核一廠乾式貯存場等案例後，發現專家之間對於科學事實難以產生一致的結論，而必須依賴在地民眾的觀察與政治性的安排作為解決手段。科學議題的審查過程必然是政治過程，環評使用「專家會議」的審查方式將其「學術化」的企圖，最終並無法避免在科學中加入更多政治考量的現實。常民作為日常生活的長期觀察者，其所見所聞亦有在科學上可觀之處，因此環評風險論述應把注意力應轉向在地民眾，避免將民眾看成是科學技術的「接受者」，而是把民眾當成主體並使其與專家形成伙伴關係，唯有透過公民參與和結合在地知識，才能產出更符合社會理性的知識，重振民眾對於科學技術與環評制度的信任。

Experts’ meetings have been widely introduced into Taiwan’s EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) system with the goals of clarifying scientific truth and producing authoritative scientific common ground prior to public discussion. Despite the high credit it received from Taiwan’s EPA for enhancing EIA’s capacity in scientific profession, this article finds that this mechanism has not satisfactorily met its stated goals, after analyzing five cases (Chaoliao, Siaoli River, Guoguang Petrochemical, Yungyang) and the nuclear waste reposition site of the First Nuclear Plant in Taiwan. Without local knowledge being integrated into the discussions from the outset, the experts had difficulty clarifying the scientific facts in social context and, therefore, their conclusions had little merit, which eventually led to political expediency. We suggest that lay citizens, as long-term observers, have better risk perception and greater knowledge of environmental change, which give them a more authentic grasp of the science at the local level. Instead of treating lay citizens as receivers of scientific information, a partnership relation between lay citizens and experts should be established. Only by local participation and integration of local knowledge can the construction of scientific facts better fit into the category of social reasoning. In this way, the trust of citizens toward scientific technology and EIA review can find a more firm grounding.