“Opening Up” and “Closing Down”

Science Technology and Human Values - Tập 33 Số 2 - Trang 262-294 - 2008
Andy Stirling1
1University of Sussex

Tóm tắt

Discursive deference in the governance of science and technology is rebalancing from expert analysis toward participatory deliberation. Linear, scientistic conceptions of innovation are giving ground to more plural, socially situated understandings. Yet, growing recognition of social agency in technology choice is countered by persistently deterministic notions of technological progress. This article addresses this increasingly stark disjuncture. Distinguishing between “appraisal” and “commitment” in technology choice, it highlights contrasting implications of normative, instrumental, and substantive imperatives in appraisal. Focusing on the role of power, it identifies key commonalities transcending the analysis/participation dichotomy. Each is equally susceptible to instrumental framing for variously weak and strong forms of justification. To address the disjuncture, it is concluded that greater appreciation is required—in both analytic and participatory appraisal—to facilitating the opening up (rather than the closing down) of governance commitments on science and technology.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Adams, R., 2002, Guardian

Aoki, M. 1996. An evolutionary parable of the gains from international organizational diversity. In The mosaic of economic growth , edited by R. Landau, T. Taylor, and G. Wright , 247-80. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press .

10.2307/2234208

Baldwin, T., 2004, Times

Barry, A., 2001, Political machines: Governing a technological society

BBC., 1985, Edge of darkness, April 11—September 12, 1985

———. 2006. BBC news: The nuclear debate, July 2006.

———. 2007. BBC news: Blair defiant over nuclear plans, February 15, 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6366725.stm (accessed December 20, 2007).

Beckett, M., 2002, Announcement of the establishing of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

Bijker, W.B., 1995, Of bicycles, Bakelite and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council., UK National Consensus Conference on Plant Biotechnology

Blair, T., 2003, Written answers to questions

2005, Announcement of the government energy review in speech at the Confederation of British Industry

2006, Speech concerning a new Anglo-French agreement on the sharing of nuclear expertise

Bohmann, J., 1996, Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy

10.1515/9781503615427

Broers, A., BBC Reith Lectures 2005

Brown, G., 2004, Speech delivered by the UK Chancellor to UK government conference on advancing enterprise

10.1080/1369857021000016623

10.1002/nml.12404

10.1177/0963662507077510

Chambers, R., 1983, Rural development: Putting the last

10.1007/978-94-011-5330-0

Collingridge, D., 1980, The social control of technology

1982, Critical decision making: A new theory of social choice

1983, Technology in the policy process: Controlling nuclear power

Commission of the European Communities., 2000, Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle (COM(2000)1)

Council for Science and Technology., 2000, Technology matters: Report on the exploitation of science and technology by UK business

Crouch, C., 2004, Post-democracy

David, P., 1985, American Economic Review, 75, 332

Davies, G., 2003, Deliberative mapping: Appraising options for addressing `the kidney gap

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)., 2003, GM nation: Findings of a public debate

2004, Evidence and innovation: Defra's needs from the sciences over the next 10 years

Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)., 2003, Energy white paper: Our energy future— creating a low carbon economy

2006, The energy challenge: Report of the UK Government Energy Review

de W. Waller,D.R., 2006, Analysis of responses to the energy review consultation (DTI Pub. 06-1565)

Dodgson, J., the DTLR. 2001. Multi-criteria analysis: A manual

10.1017/9781139173810

2002, Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations

Dryzek, J., Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association

Econexus, the Five Year Freeze, Friends of the Earth, GeneWatch UK, Greenpeace, the Soil Association, and Michael Antoniou. 2003. Comments on GM Science Review. Derby: Genewatch.

10.4135/9781412990127.n25

Engineering and Physical Science Research Council., 2006, Keeping the nuclear option open

Environmental Audit Committee., 2005, Keeping the lights on: Nuclear, renewables, and climate change (Sixth Report, Session 2005-6, HC 584)

European Environment Agency., 2001, Late lesson from early warnings: The precautionary principle 1898-2000

European Science and Technology Observatory., 1999, On science and precaution in the management of technological risk (EUR19056 EN)

Feenberg, A., 2002, Transforming technology: A critical theory revisited. Oxford, UK, 10.1093/oso/9780195146158.001.0001

Fiorino, D., 1989, Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 14, 501

Fischer, F., 1990, Technocracy and the politics of expertise

Flyvbjerg, B., 1998, Rationality and power: Democracy in practice

Foucault, M., 1980, Power/knowledge: Selected interviews & other writings 1972-1977

Fransella, F., 2004, A manual for repertory grid technique, 2

10.1007/978-1-349-16161-4

1986, The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration

Gieryn, T. 1995. Boundaries of science. In Handbook of science and technology studies, edited by S. Jasanoff , G. Makle, J. Petersen, and T. Pinch, 393-443. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

GM Science Review Panel (SRP)., 2003, GM science review: First report

2004, GM science review: Second report

Goffman, E., 1974, Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience

Goldman, A., 2001, Social epistemology

10.1080/00343409750132315

Griffin, G., 2002, Reputation management

Grove-White, R., 2006, ' Community Genetics, 9, 170

Grove-White, R., 1997, Uncertain world. Genetically modified organisms, food and public attitudes in Britain. Lancaster, UK: Centre for the Study of Environmental Change

Grove-White, R., 2000, Wising up: The public and new technologies. Lancaster, UK: Centre for the Study of Environmental Change

Habermas, J., 1968, Toward a rational society: Student protest, science and politics

1975, Legitimation crisis

1984, The philosophical discourse of modernity

10.1093/019829333X.001.0001

10.1111/1467-9515.00086

Health and Safety Executive., 2006, Discussion document on review of strategy for regulating new nuclear power station design

HM Treasury., 2004, Science & innovation investment framework 2004-2014

Holt, Mulroy, 2003, Reputation management

Hood, C. 2002. Managing risk and managing blame: A political science approach. In Risk, democratic citizenship and public policy , edited by A. Weale, 73-84. Oxford , UK: Oxford University/British Academy Press.

Horlick-Jones, T. 1996. The problem of blame. In Accident and design: Contemporary debates in risk management, edited by C. Hood and D. Jones , 34-47. London : UCL Press.

Horlick-Jones, T., 2004, A deliberative future? An independent evaluation of the GM nation? Public debate about the possible commercialisation of transgenic crops in Britain

Hughes, T., 1983, Networks of power: Electrification in Western society 1880-1930, 10.56021/9780801828737

Irwin, A., 1995, Citizen science: A study of people, expertise and sustainable development

2001, Public Understanding of Science, 10, 10

Jasanoff, S., 1990, The fifth branch: Science advisers as policymakers

2005, Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States

10.1080/14636770500190864

Joss, S., 1995, Public participation in science: The role of consensus conferences in Europe

King, D., 2005, Guardian

Kooiman, J. 1993. Governance and governability: Using complexity, dynamics and diversity. In Modern governance, edited by J. Kooiman, 35-48. London: Sage.

10.1177/02632760122051661

Leach, M., I. Scoones, and B. Wynne. 2005. Introduction. In Science, citizenship and globalisation, edited by M. Leach, I. Scoones, and B. Wynne, 3-14. London: Zed.

Leib, E., 2005, Deliberative democracy in America: A proposal for a popular branch of government

10.1016/S0160-791X(98)00003-7

10.1007/978-1-349-02248-9

Margolis, H., 1996, Dealing with risk

Mayer, S., 2004, GM nation? Engaging people in real debate?

McDowell, W., 2006, Towards a sustainable hydrogen economy: A multi-criteria mapping of the UKSHEC hydrogen futures—full report

10.4135/9781412985512

Misa, T., 2003, Modernity and technology

Misztal, B., 1996, Trust in modern societies

10.1016/0048-7333(94)01006-4

Morris, J., 2000, Rethinking risk and the precautionary principle

Munro, R., 1996, Accountability: Power, ethos and the technologies of managing

National Research Council., 1996, Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society

10.1080/00071310220133331

Nowotny, H., 2006, Rethinking interdisciplinarity: The potential of transdisciplinarity

Nowotny, H., 2001, Rethinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty

Nuclear Industry Association., 2006, Nuclear new build: The legal challenge

Nuclear Spin. 2006. Web-access database. http://www.nuclearspin.org/index.php/Main_Page (accessed August 22, 2006).

O'Brien, M., 2000, Making better environmental decisions: An alternative to risk assessment

Office of Nuclear Energy., 2006, Improving the nuclear engineering and science curricula

Ogilvie, J., 2002, Creating better futures: Scenario planning as a tool for a better tomorrow, 10.1093/oso/9780195146110.001.0001

O'Neill, O., 2002, A question of trust: The 2002 BBC Reith lectures

O'Riordan, T., 2000, Reinterpreting the precautionary principle

Owen, H., 1997, Open space technology: A user's guide, 2

10.1068/a3330

Owens, S., 2002, Land and limits: Interpreting sustainability in the planning process

10.1080/00071310020023037

10.3197/096327103129341298

10.1080/09640560120033713

Pimbert, M., 2002, Prajateerpu: A citizens jury/scenario workshop on food and farming futures for Andhra Pradesh, India

10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198296034.001.0001

10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.09.003

Rawls, J., 1993, Political liberalism

1997, University of Chicago Law Review, 64, 767

10.1007/978-94-011-0131-8

Rescher, N., 1993, Pluralism: Against the demand for consensus

10.1177/016224390002500101

10.1007/BF00139972

Saltelli, A., 2001, Sensitivity analysis for importance assessment

Schwartz, M., 1990, Divided we stand: Redefining politics, technology and social choice

Sclove, D., 1995, Democracy and technology

Scoones, I., 2001, Prajateerpu e-forum on participatory processes for policy change

10.1515/9781400822379

Smith A., 2007, Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 8, 1

10.1016/j.respol.2005.07.005

10.1016/0301-4215(94)90159-7

———. 1997. Multicriteria mapping: Mitigating the problems of environmental valuation? In Valuing nature: Economics, ethics and environment , edited by J. Foster, 186-210. London : Routledge.

1998, On the economics and analysis of diversity. SPRU Electronic Working Paper No. 2

10.1080/136698798377204

———. 2003. Risk, uncertainty and precaution: Some instrumental implications from the social sciences. In Negotiating change , edited by F. Berkhout, M. Leach, and I. Scoones , 33-76. London : Elgar.

———. 2005. Opening up or closing down: Analysis, participation and power in the social appraisal of technology. In Science and citizens: Globalization and the challenge of engagement, edited by M. Leach, I. Scoones , and B. Wynne, 218-31. London : Zed.

2006, Land Use Policy, 23, 85

———. 2006b. Precaution, foresight and sustainability: Reflection and reflexivity in the governance of science and technology. In Sustainability and reflexive governance, edited by J.P. Voß and R. Kemp, 335-72. Cheltenham : Edward Elgar.

10.1098/rsif.2007.0213

10.1002/sd.347

A. Jordan, Science, precaution and participation: Towards more `reflexive governance' for sustainability

Stirling, A., 2006, Obesity Review, 8, 17

10.1068/c8s

Strategy Unit of the Prime Minister (SU)., 2002, The energy review

10.4324/9780203449721

Sustainable Development Commission., 2006, Submission to the DTI nuclear review

Taverne, D., 2005, The march of unreason: Science, democracy and the new fundamentalism

U.K. Centre for Economy, Environment and Development., 1999, Final report of consensus conference on radioactive waste management

United Nations Development Programme., 2000, Statement by M. Malloch Brown, head of the United Nations Development Programme

Van Zwanenberg, P., 2004, BSE: Risk, science and governance

Vig, N., 2000, Parliaments and technology: The development of technology assessment in Europe

10.4337/9781847200266

Wakeford, T., 2001, PLA Notes, 40, 7

2002, Social Research Update, 37, 1

10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00108-6

Wallace, H., 2001, PLA Notes, 40, 61

10.1016/0195-9255(95)00043-E

Weldon, S., 2001, UK national report: Assessing Debate and Participative Technology Assessment (ADAPTA) (Project No. BIO-CT98-0318)

Werner, R., 2004, Designing strategy: Scenario analysis and the art of making business strategy

10.1016/0048-7333(96)00885-2

Wilsdon, J., 2004, See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream

Winner, L., 1977, Autonomous technology: Technics out of control as a theme in political thought

Woodward, W., 2007, Guardian

10.1007/978-3-642-83197-3_11

10.1016/0959-3780(92)90017-2

———. 1995. Technology assessment and reflexive social learning: Observations from the risk field. In Managing technology in society, edited by A. Rip, T. Misa, and J. Schot , 19-36. London : Pinter.

———. 1996. May the sheep safely graze? In Risk environment and modernity: Toward a new ecology, edited by S. Lash, B. Szerszynski , and B. Wynne, 44-83. London : Sage.

———. 1997. Methodology and institutions: Value as seen from the risk field. In Valuing nature: Economics, ethics and environment , edited by J. Foster, 135-52. London : Routledge.

10.1080/09505430120093586

10.1177/0011392102050003010

10.1177/030631201031001008

10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.09.002