Public Participation in Science and Technology: Performing and Obscuring a Political–Conceptual Category Mistake
Tóm tắt
In this paper, I attempt to explain how existing work in the science and technology studies (STS) sub-field of public engagement with, or participation in, public issues involving science and technology, has performed a serious category mistake in allowing itself to be called ‘public participation in science’ research. This requires us to reflect more systematically upon how our assumed objects, here the public issues we think we are dealing with, come to be ‘objectified’ in the forms which they do. Using the three sister papers, I make some conceptual distinctions which carry important political implications and corresponding analytical implications for STS. I suggest that the typical reduction of participation questions to ones of ‘what qualification do publics have for engagement in expert practices?’ is a mistaken distraction from more important questions which not only much analytical work, but also dominant practice, continues to ignore. This reductionist tendency even in social science and STS may tend to intensify, the more the issues reach across global networks and arenas. Finally, I suggest that STS work on public participation needs to enrich itself with some relevant political theory and philosophy, which would throw due historical perspective on the deeper forces shaping scientific understandings and normative representational performances of its ‘democratic’ publics.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Agrawal, A. (2005). Environmentality: Technologies of government and the making of subjects. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.
Arendt, H. (2005). The promise of politics. New York: Schocken Books.
Barns, I. (1995). Manufacturing consensus? Reflections on the UK national consensus conference on plant biotechnology. Science as Culture, 5(2), 200–216.
Benhabib, S. (Ed.) (1996). Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political. Princeton NJ, and Chichester: Princeton University Press.
Bohman, J. (2003). Reflexive public deliberation: Democracy and the limits of pluralism. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 29(1), 85–105.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Butler, J. (1999). Performativity’s social magic. In R. Shusterman (Ed.), pp. 113–128.
Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2003). King canute meets the beach boys: Responses to the third wave. Social Studies of Science, 33(3), 435–452, June.
Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (Eds.) (2002). Participation: The new tyranny?, London: Zed Books.
de Castro, E. (2004). Exchanging perspectives: The transformation of objects into subjects in Amerindian ontologies. Common Knowledge, 10(3), 463–484.
Felt, U., & Wynne, B. (2007). Science and governance: Taking European knowledge society seriously. European Union, Expert Group Report, EUR 22700. Brussels: European Commission D-G Research.
Franklin, S. (1995). Science as culture, cultures of science. Annual Reviews of Anthropology, 24, 163–184.
Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or recognition? A political-philosophical exchange. New York and London: Verso.
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(Supp1), 66–75.
GM Nation? The findings of the public debate (2003). London: Department of Trade and Industry. http://www.gmnation.org.uk.
Goven, J. (2003). Deploying the consensus conference in New Zealand: Democracy and de-problematization. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 423–440.
Goven, J. (2006). Dialogue, governance and biotechnology: Acknowledging the context of the conversation. Integrated Assessment Journal, 6(2), 99–116.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why deliberative democracy?, Princeton NJ, and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Horlick-Jones, T. et al. (2007). The GM debate: Risk, politics and public engagement. Abingdon, Oxon UK, and New York: Routledge.
Irwin, A. (2006). The politics of talk: Coming to terms with the ‘new’ scientific governance. Social Studies of Science, 36(6), 299–320.
Irwin, A., & Wynne, B. (Eds.) (1996). Misunderstanding science: Public reconstructions of science and technology. Cambridge UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Joss, S. (1998). The Danish consensus conference as a model of participatory technology assessment. Science and Public Policy, 25(1), 2–22.
Kerr, A. (2004). Genomics and society: A sociology of disease. London and New York: Routledge.
Kuletz, V. (1998). The tainted desert: Environmental and social ruin in the American West. New York and London: Routledge.
Kusch, M. (2007). Towards a political philosophy of risk. In T. Lewens (Ed.), Risk: Philosophical Perspectives (pp. 131–155).
Laclau, E. (2005). On populist reason. London and New York: Verso.
Landes, J. (1996). The performance of citizenship: Democracy, gender and difference in the French revolution. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), pp.295–314.
Lewens, T. (Ed.) (2007). Risk: Philosophical perspectives. London: Routledge.
Leach, M. Scoones, I., & Wynne, B. (Eds.) (2005). Science and citizens: Globalisation and the challenges of engagement. London: Zed Books.
Marris, C., Wynne, B., Weldon, S., & Simmons, P. (2001). Public attitudes to agricultural biotechnologies in Europe, PABE, final project report, EU FP6. Brussels: D-G Research, FAIR programme.
Means, A. (2002). Narrative argumentation: Arguing with natives. Constellations, 9(2), 221–245.
Pimbert, M., & Wakeford, T. (2002). Prajateerpu: A citizens jury/scenario workshop on food and farming futures for Andhra Pradesh. Economic and Political Weekly (India), 32(27), 2778–2787, (Review of Science Studies: 6–12 July).
Scott, J. (1985). Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Shusterman, R. (Ed.) (1999). Bourdieu: A critical reader. Oxford, and Malden MA: Blackwell.
Szerszynski, B., & MacGregor, S. (2006). Environmental Citizenship and the Administration of Life, draft paper, Lancaster University Centre for Science Environment Technology and Culture, CSEC, Dept. of Sociology.
Taylor, C., & Gutmann, A. (1994). Multiculturalism: Examining the politics of recognition. Princeton, NJ, and Chichester: Princeton University Press.
Toulmin, S. (1992). Cosmopolis: The hidden agenda of modernity. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
UK House of Lords. (2000). Science and society. UK House of Lords, Select Committee on Science and Technology, London.
Welsh, I., Plows, A., & Evans, R. (2007). Human rights and genomics: Science, genomics and social movements at the 2005 London social forum. New Genetics and Society, 25(2), 123–135.
Wynne, B. (2001). Expert discourses of risk and ethics on GMOs: Creating public alienation. Science as Culture, 10, 445–481.
Wynne, B. (2006). Public engagement as means of restoring trust in science? Hitting the notes, but missing the music. Community Genetics, 10, 211–220.
Wynne, B. (2008). Update: A quarter-century retrospect. In B. Wynne (Ed.), Rationality and Ritual: The windscale inquiry and nuclear decisions in Britain. London: Earthscan (republication of original 1982 version, with update chapter, British Society for History of Science).
Young, I. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), pp. 120–136.