Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Discussion structures as tools for public deliberation.E. Popa, Vincent Blok & R. Wesselink - 2020 - Public Understanding of Science 1 (29):76-93.
    We propose the use of discussion structures as tools for analyzing policy debates in a way that enables the increased participation of lay stakeholders. Discussion structures are argumentation-theoretical tools that can be employed to tackle three barriers that separate lay stakeholders from policy debates: difficulty, magnitude, and complexity. We exemplify the use of these tools on a debate in research policy on the question of responsibility. By making use of discussion structures, we focus on the argumentative moves performed by the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • New Democratic Sciences, Ethics, and Proper Publics.Sara Giordano - 2018 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 43 (3):401-430.
    In this article, I examine the rhetoric of democratic science within the field of synthetic biology. The still emerging field of synthetic biology claims to be a new kind of science based on the promises of affordable medicines, environmental bioremediation, and democratic, do-it-yourself science practices. I argue that the formation of a more democratic, DIY portion of this field represents an intervention into ethics debates by becoming “the proper informed public.” Through an analysis of twelve DIY and community-based synthetic biology (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Assessing Quality of Stakeholder Engagement: From Bureaucracy to Democracy.Brian Wynne, Deborah H. Oughton, Astrid Liland & Yevgeniya Tomkiv - 2017 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 37 (3):167-178.
    The idea of public or stakeholder engagement in governance of science and technology is widely accepted in many policy and academic research settings. However, this enthusiasm for stakeholder engagement has not necessarily resulted in changes of attitudes toward the role of stakeholders in the dialogue nor to the value of public knowledge, practical experience, and other inputs (like salient questions) vis-à-vis expert knowledge. The formal systems of evaluation of the stakeholder engagement activities are often focused on showing that the method (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Bioeconomy as Political Project: A Polanyian Analysis.Vincenzo Pavone & Joanna Goven - 2015 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 40 (3):302-337.
    The bioeconomy is becoming increasingly prominent in policy and scholarly literature, but critical examination of the concept is lacking. We argue that the bioeconomy should be understood as a political project, not simply or primarily as a technoscientific or economic one. We use a conceptual framework derived from the work of Karl Polanyi to elucidate the politically performative nature of the bioeconomy through an analysis of an influential Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development initiative, The Bioeconomy to 2030. We argue (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Bidirectional Shaping and Spaces of Convergence: Interactions between Biology and Computing from the First DNA Sequencers to Global Genome Databases. [REVIEW]Miguel García-Sancho & Peter A. Chow-White - 2012 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 37 (1):124-164.
    This article proposes a new bi-directional way of understanding the convergence of biology and computing. It argues for a reciprocal interaction in which biology and computing have shaped and are currently reshaping each other. In so doing, we qualify both the view of a natural marriage and of a digital shaping of biology, which are common in the literature written by scientists, STS, and communication scholars. The DNA database is at the center of this interaction. We argue that DNA databases (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Different Understandings of Life as an Opportunity to Enrich the Debate About Synthetic Biology.Nikola Biller-Andorno, Daniel Gregorowius & Anna Deplazes-Zemp - 2015 - NanoEthics 9 (2):179-188.
    Comments and reports on synthetic biology often focus on the idea that this field may lead to synthetic life or life forms. Such claims attract general attention because “life” is a basic concept that is understood, interpreted and explained in multiple ways. While these different understandings of life may influence the ethical assessment of synthetic biology by experts and the public, this field might, in turn, influence how academics or the public view life. We suggest in this paper that synthetic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Crowdfunding Conservation Science: Tracing the Participatory Dynamics of Native Parrot Genome Sequencing.Hallam Stevens & Courtney Addison - 2022 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 47 (3):568-596.
    Who gets to practice and participate in science? Research teams in Puerto Rico and New Zealand have each sequenced the genomes of parrot populations native to these locales: the iguaca and kākāpō, respectively. In both cases, crowdfunding and social media were instrumental in garnering public interest and funding. These forms of Internet-mediated participation impacted how conservation science was practiced in these cases and shaped emergent social roles and relations. As citizens “follow,” fund, and “like” the labor of conservation, they create (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Engaging whom and for what ends? Australian stakeholders' constructions of public engagement in relation to nanotechnologies.Alan Petersen & Diana Bowman - 2012 - Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 12 (2):67-79.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Paradise Lost? ‘‘Science’’ and ‘‘the Public’’ after Asilomar.Monika Kurath & Priska Gisler - 2011 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 36 (2):213-243.
    Scientists continually face public concerns over the potential risks of biotechnology. This article reflects on the 1970s when leading molecular biologists established a moratorium, and initiated the second international Asilomar conference, on recombinant DNA molecules. Since then, this event has been widely perceived as an important historical moment when scientific actors took into account public concerns. Yet, by focusing on the history of the Public Understanding of Science discourse, we gain new insight into how ‘‘science’’ and the ‘‘public’’ have in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Protesting Mobile Phone Masts: Risk, Neoliberalism, and Governmentality.Frances Drake - 2011 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 36 (4):522-548.
    Studies of protests against mobile phone masts typically concentrate on the potential health risks associated with mobile phones and their masts. Beck’s Risk Society has been particularly influential in informing this debate. This focus on health, however, has merely served to limit the discussion to those concerns legitimated by science conveniently ignoring other disputed issues. In contrast, this article contends that it is necessary to use a wider notion of risk to understand fully how the current political emphasis on active (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations