Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Strengths of Public Dialogue on Scienceā€related Issues.Roland Jackson, Fiona Barbagallo & Helen Haste - 2005 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 8 (3):349-358.
    This essay describes the value and validity of public dialogue on science?related issues. We define what is meant by ?dialogue?, the context within which dialogue takes place in relation to science, and the purposes of dialogue. We introduce a model to describe and analyse the practice of dialogue, at different stages in the development of science, its applications and their consequences. Finally, we place the practice of dialogue on science?related issues in relation to the wider political process and draw out (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Nanotechnology, Governance, and Public Deliberation: What Role for the Social Sciences?Phil Macnaghten, , Matthew B. Kearnes & Brian Wynne - 2005 - Science Communication 27 (2):268-291.
    In this article we argue that nanotechnology represents an extraordinary opportunity to build in a robust role for the social sciences in a technology that remains at an early, and hence undetermined, stage of development. We examine policy dynamics in both the United States and United Kingdom aimed at both opening up, and closing down, the role of the social sciences in nanotechnologies. We then set out a prospective agenda for the social sciences and its potential in the future shaping (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   57 citations  
  • The GMO-Nanotech (Dis)Analogy?W. D. Kay & Ronald Sandler - 2006 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 26 (1):57-62.
    The genetically-modified-organism (GMO) experience has been prominent in motivating science, industry, and regulatory communities to address the social and ethical dimensions of nanotechnology. However, there are some significant problems with the GMO-nanotech analogy. First, it overstates the likelihood of a GMO-like backlash against nanotechnology. Second, it invites misconceptions about the reasons for public engagement and social and ethical issues research as well as their appropriate roles in nanotech research, development, application, commercialization, and regulatory processes. After an explication of the standard (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations