Environmental models are ubiquitous in assessing the environmental impacts of planned projects. Modelling is an inferential process and includes various mechanisms to address the uncertainty of the outcome. In this article, we acknowledge the continuum of uncertainty assessments and identify the legal mechanisms with which Finnish judicial review—characterised by broad scope of review and in-house expert judges—has encountered model uncertainty. Closely examining 10 waters-related cases heard by the Supreme Administrative Court of Finland, we explain the porous yet substantial boundary between science and law revealed by the cases. The cases demonstrate the elegance with which courts can strike a balance between the contingent precautionary principle, gradually decreasing scientific uncertainty, and the procedural constraints under which they operate. We conclude by analysing the traces towards reciprocality and adaptivity the cases reveal, encouraged by the iterative modelling mechanism and challenged by the constitutional restrictions on the scope of review.

中文翻译：

---

解决模型不确定性的科学和法律机制：谈判芬兰司法审查中的正确平衡？

环境模型在评估计划项目的环境影响时无处不在。建模是一个推理过程，包括解决结果不确定性的各种机制。在本文中，我们承认不确定性评估的连续性，并确定芬兰司法审查（以广泛的审查范围和内部专家法官为特征）遇到模型不确定性的法律机制。仔细研究芬兰最高行政法院审理的 10 起与水域有关的案件，我们解释了这些案件所揭示的科学与法律之间存在漏洞但实质上的界限。这些案例展示了法院可以在或有预防原则、逐渐减少科学不确定性、以及它们运作的程序限制。我们通过分析案例揭示的互惠性和适应性的痕迹得出结论，这些案例受到迭代建模机制的鼓励，并受到宪法对审查范围的限制的挑战。