Professional Expertise, Scientific Knowledge, Citizens’ Insights and Non-Knowledge. When to Trust Experience-Based Knowledge Claims
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/pp.6482Abstract
This paper compares the status and qualities of different forms of expertise and distinguishes them from non-knowledge. It contrasts professional and scientific expertise with a less institutionalised and credentialed but increasingly prominent form: practical, experience-based “lay” or “citizen” expertise. Drawing on social studies of knowledge, expertise, science and the professions, the paper asks when expertise claims are reliable and how the value of experience-based claims can be assessed.
Expertise is conceptualized pragmatically as specialized knowledge that provides orientation to others. While different forms of expertise may be provided by different actors, conveyed through different means and relevant in different contexts, they respond to shared validity standards: authoritative claims must be non-ubiquitous, problem-relevant, and advanced by trustworthy, impartial speakers with specialized capabilities. However, these standards must be translated into context- and knowledge-specific indicators. Assessing experience-based expertise is particularly challenging because conventional markers of epistemic authority are absent. The paper discusses two responses that build on professionalising, processing and certifying lay expertise, thereby partially transforming its character.
Downloads
References
Alm Andreassen, T. (2018). From democratic consultation to user-employment: Shifting institutional embedding of citizen involvement in health and social care. Journal of Social Policy, 47(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279417000228
Alm Andreassen, T., Breit, E., & Legard, S. (2014). The making of “professional amateurs”: Professionalizing the voluntary work of service user representatives. Acta Sociologica, 57(4), 325–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699314552736
Alvsvåg, H. (2009). Kunnskapsbasert praksis er ikke nytt. Forskning, 03/09, 216–220.
Barnes, M. (1999). Users as citizens: Collective action and the local governance of welfare. Social Policy & Administration, 33(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9515.00132
Bartel, C. A., & Garud, R. (2003). Narrative knowledge in action: Adaptive abduction as a mechanism for knowledge creation and exchange in organizations. In M. Easterby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management (pp. 324–342). Blackwell.
Blume, S. (2017). In search of experiential knowledge. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 30(1), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2016.1210505
Borkman, T. (1976). Experiential knowledge: A new concept for the analysis of self-help groups. Social Service Review, 50(3), 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1086/643401
Bouwen, P. (2002). Corporate lobbying in the European Union: The logic of access. Journal of European Public Policy, 9(3), 365–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760210138796
Büter, A. (2010). Social objectivity and the problem of local epistemologies. Analyse & Kritik, 32(2), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1515/auk-2010-0202
Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32(2), 235–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312702032002003
Corburn, J. (2002). Bringing local knowledge into environmental decision making: Improving urban planning for communities at risk. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22(4), 420–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X03022004008
Douglas, H. (2009). Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Eriksen, A. (2022). The research literacy of professionals: Reconciling evidence-based practice and practical wisdom. Professions and Professionalism, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.7577/pp.4852
Eyal, G. (2019). The crisis of expertise. Polity Press.
Ex-In. (2025). Über uns [About us]. Experten durch Erfahrung in der Psychiatrie [Experts-by-experience in psychiatry] . https://ex-in.de/ueber-ex-in/
Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, experts, and the environment. Duke University Press.
Funtowicz, S., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-L
Grundmann, R. (2017). The problem of expertise in knowledge societies. Minerva, 55(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-016-9308-7
Gabriel, Y. (2004). The voice of experience and the voice of the expert—Can they speak to each other? In B. Hurwitz, T. Greenhalgh, & V. Skultans (Eds.), Narrative research in health and illness (pp. 168–186). Blackwell.
Goldman, A. I. (2001). Experts: Which ones should we trust? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 63(1), 85–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2001.tb00093.x
Gornitzka, Å., & Krick, E. (2018). The expertisation of stakeholder involvement in EU policy making. In M. Góra, M. Warat, & C. Holst (Eds.), Expertisation and democracy in Europe (pp. 51–70). Routledge.
Haas, P. M. (2004). When does power listen to truth? A constructivist approach to the policy process. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4), 569–592. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350176042000248034
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066
Harrits, G. S., & Larsen, L. T. (2016). Introduction to special issue: Professional-citizen relations. Professions & Professionalism, 6(3), 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.7577/pp.1810
Jasanoff, S. (1987). Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science. Social Studies of Science, 17(2), 195–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631287017002001
Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press.
Krick, E. (2018). The epistemic quality of expertise: Contextualized criteria for the multi-source, negotiated policy advice of stakeholder fora. Critical Policy Studies, 12(2), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2016.1258317
Krick, E. (2021). Expertise and participation: Institutional designs for policy development in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75329-0
Krick, E. (2022). Citizen experts in participatory governance. Current Sociology, 70(7), 994–1012. https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921211059225
Krick, E. (2025). Modes of involvement: Citizen participation in the Norwegian health and planning sector. Policy and Society. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puaf026
Krick, E., & Holst, C. (2019). The socio-political ties of expert bodies. European Politics and Society, 20(1), 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2018.1515866
Lentsch, J., & Weingart, P. (2011). Quality control in the advisory process. In J. Lentsch & P. Weingart (Eds.), The politics of scientific advice (pp. 353–374). Cambridge University Press.
Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge. Princeton University Press.
Martin, G. (2008). “Ordinary people only”: Knowledge, representativeness, and the publics of public participation in healthcare. Sociology of Health & Illness, 30(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01027.x
Meriluoto, T. (2017). Turning experience into expertise. Critical Policy Studies, 12(3), 294–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2017.1310051
Noorani, T. (2013). Service user involvement, authority and the “expert-by-experience” in mental health. Journal of Political Power, 6(1), 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2013.774979
Nowotny, H. (2001). Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge. Science and Public Policy, 30(3), 151–156. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780461
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. University of Chicago Press.
Straßheim, H. (2008). Kulturen der Expertise und politischen Wissensproduktion im Wandel [Changing cultures of expertise and political knowledge production]. In D. Gosewinkel & G. F. Schuppert (Eds.), Politische Kultur im Wandel von Staatlichkeit (pp. 281–301). Edition Sigma.
Strasser, B. J., Baudry, J., Mahr, D., Sanchez, G., & Tancoigne, É. (2019). “Citizen science”? Rethinking science and public participation. Science & Technology Studies, 32(2), 52–76. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.60425
Weingart, P. (2001). Norms in science. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 17, pp. 10720–10723). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/03154-5.
Williams, I., & Glasby, J. (2010). Making “what works” work. Policy and Society, 29(2), 95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2010.03.002
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Eva Krick
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Cited by
