Contaminant Denialism in Water Governance

Noting that contaminant denialism is an increasing problem in environmental governance globally, this study describes public communication strategies that inappropriately minimize the problem of contaminants in respect of sewage discharges in and around water‐bodies in Cape Town, South Africa. The article describes four kinds of contaminant denialism encountered in official public communications: data foreclosure; misinformation; the weaponization of science, and the use of point data instead of flow models. Interpreting these with reference to the sociology of science known as agnogenesis, the study of the production of public ignorance, the study demonstrates that contaminant denialism is exacerbated in contexts where scientific findings are expected to support marketing of tourism or excellence in a political administration. This is further exacerbated where there is reluctance to recognize that public infrastructure designed prior to the increased influx of toxic, non‐biodegradable compounds that bioaccumulate in the open environment, generates new hazards; a political culture has difficulty acknowledging human waste; point‐based data is regarded as definitive empirical fact without regard to the hydrological reality of water flows, and science provision derives from a privatized and market‐driven service sector. The study concludes with proposals to minimize contaminant denialism in the public sector, inter alia removing institutionalized conflicts of interest; using predictive modeling; re‐assessment of inherited infrastructure design in light of the challenges presented by new toxins, and subjecting for‐profit scientific consultancies and official public science communications to regular peer review and/or audits by statutory scientific bodies that are independent of regional governance.

The study identifies strategies that have been used by authorities in one city to dismiss or downplay contamination issues, including secrecy, withholding data, and attacking the credibility of independent scientists. The study of a decade-long battle over scientific data demonstrates the importance of accountability in how environmental data is collected, managed and communicated to the public, emphasizing the need for predictive flow models rather than past-tense point-data studies in open water management. It also calls for leadership that can confront and address their inherited legacies of outdated infrastructure in an era of new toxins. The research underscores the importance of ensuring a culture of science that values independent questions, in scientific communications. This is particularly important in an era of for-profit data provision, where there is a risk of misinformation linked to corporate science procurement and the use of brand management communication strategies in matters of governance. Addressing misinformation that sounds like science but may not stand up to scientific scrutiny is critical for the credibility of the institution of science; for public access to information, and for environmental justice.