{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016525749423520367, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.364303178484108, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Consensus or Dissensus in the Legislative Approach to Complex Policy Problems? Animal Biotechnology as an Example

In this paper, the characteristics of the adequate legislative approach to complex policy problems will be discussed. The main target is to analyse the strong orientation towards consensus as a foundation for decision-making. Complex policy problems may be characterized by a complex structure with several different (moral) viewpoints, perspectives, and with uncertainties about possibilities, developments, and consequences at the very moment and in the future. These policy problems are not easily tackled. To analyse the structure of these complex policy problems and to illustrate the issues involved, case studies on animal biotechnology in three different countries will be used as examples. If the complexity of policy problems is not adequately understood, these problems may lead to intractable conflicts. In the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Denmark the policy problem of animal biotechnology is characterized by rapid developments and a strong moral impact. Both entail a varying number of perspectives and viewpoints, and a lack of knowledge about future applications, risks, consequences, and impacts. There is a great deal of disagreement about the values, scientific methods, empirical facts, and definitions concerning animal technology, and about what to expect from the possibilities of this technology. Consequently, regulation of animal biotechnology is not easy. In the three countries of the case studies, the policy problem is tackled by a legislative approach with an orientation towards consensus which has raised problems in all three cases. The thesis of this paper is that an adequate legislative approach to complex policy problems is not served by a strong focus on consensus.The aim of this paper is not to argue for a general rejection of consensus as a basis for regulation, but to critically discuss the orientation towards consensus as a political aim for some kinds of policy problems. The adequacy of this strong focus on consensus in legislative approaches to complex policy problems is questioned. Instead, accepting dissensus as part of the political process can tackle issues concerning complex policy problems such as animal biotechnology. To analyse the focus on consensus, models of deliberative democracy will be discussed in this paper. Consensus and the search for consensus as a method to structure deliberation are important sources for legitimacy of decisions and the use of certain instruments in most models of deliberative democracy.