Crisis and Catastrophe in Science and Law: Mapping the Terrain

Abstract

This paper, written to set the intellectual stage for a conference on the subject, attempts to conceptualize and frame the subject of catastrophe. Part I elaborates definitions and paradigmatic features: magnitude, pervasiveness, uncertainty, preventability, irreversibility, and crisis. Part II develops some additional variables or distinctions relating to catastrophe: public recognition, community of concern, identifiable vs. statistical victims, telegenicity, winners and losers, and buffering institutions. Part III presents four frameworks used to explain catastrophe. After a brief discussion of the religious framework, I discuss science, law, and politics at greater length. For each, I analyze its distinctive values, incentives and techniques, and biases and orientations. Part IV analyzes three different frameworks for regulating catastrophe: legal-governmental institutions (planning, research, regulation, tort law, and social insurance), markets, and social norms. The final Part discusses the inter-penetration of science into law, and of law into science, using examples drawn from different fields.