<i>“Bogeymen,” “Murderers,” and “Loonies”</i> : Emotions in Dutch Debates on 5G and Health

Scientific advice is often solicited in governance, yet it is increasingly challenged in the public domain. Public participation is often suggested to mediate opposing knowledge claims, but it has not resolved crises of expertise and democracy. While Science and Technology Studies (STS) has increasingly focused on emotions in controversies, participation literature remains silent about their role. This study of the Dutch debate on 5G and health, explores how emotions shape/are shaped by participatory processes in technoscientific controversies. For years, Dutch citizens, policymakers, scientists, and industry representatives have been embroiled in a knowledge conflict over the health effects of telecom innovations. The analysis of 36 interviews with stakeholders reveals how interactions between stakeholders focused on establishing epistemic accuracy of information on 5G and health, while telecom innovations continued unimpeded. This led to frustration between stakeholders and feelings of not being taken seriously. We argue that instead of measuring the success of participation based on the accuracy of knowledge exchanged, it is important to look at mutual epistemic recognition between participants in relation to the immutability of relevant policies. When participation continues, while actors are made “immobile”—unable to change perspectives and/or alter policy course—mutual trust and understanding erodes, undermining participation processes in the long-term.