排序方式： 共有7条查询结果，搜索用时 531 毫秒
1
1.
Building on recent theories ofscience in society, such as that provided bythe `Mode 2' framework, this paper argues thatgovernments should reconsider existingrelations among decision-makers, experts, andcitizens in the management of technology.Policy-makers need a set of `technologies ofhumility' for systematically assessing theunknown and the uncertain. Appropriate focalpoints for such modest assessments are framing,vulnerability, distribution, and learning. 相似文献
2.
3.
4.
Sheila Jasanoff 《Research Policy》1985,14(1):23-38
This article examines a decade of federal support for biotechnology in the Federal Republic of Germany in order to determine the impact of liberal corporatist patterns of decision-making on industrial policy. For this purpose, industrial policy is taken to include both public initiatives aimed at promoting the new technology and those designed to control its risks.Two distinct forms of corporatism are discernible in this case study. In the first, the principal actors are large businesses, the state, and to a lesser extent, the academic reserch community. These actors have been most influential in defining the scope and specific objectives of the federally funced R&D program in biotechnology. A more traditional form of corporatism, including organized labor, has been engaged in the debate on regulatory policies.In the case of biotechnology, these patterns of corporatism have created the consensus necessary for the adoption of a comprehensive R&D program, but have perpetuated certain barriers to technological innovation. In particular, the reliance on established peak organizations to formulate policy has discouraged structural changes that could have enhanced Germany's early competitiveness in biotechnology. Incrementalism has produced more favorable results in the context of regulatory policy, by permitting control strategies to develop in step with technological progress. 相似文献
5.
Dear P Jasanoff S 《Isis; an international review devoted to the history of science and its cultural influences》2010,101(4):759-774
The boundaries between the history of science and science and technology studies (STS) can be misleadingly drawn, to the detriment of both fields. This essay stresses their commonalities and potential for valuable synergy. The evolution of the two fields has been characterized by lively interchange and boundary crossing, with leading scholars functioning easily on both sides of the past/present divide. Disciplines, it is argued, are best regarded as training grounds for asking particular kinds of questions, using particular clusters of methods. Viewed in this way, history of science and STS are notable for their shared approaches to disciplining. The essay concludes with a concrete example--regulatory science--showing how a topic such as this can be productively studied with methods that contradict any alleged disciplinary divide between historical and contemporary studies of science. 相似文献
6.
STS research has devoted relatively little attention to the promotion and reception of science and technology by non-scientific
actors and institutions. One consequence is that the relationship of science and technology to political power has tended
to remain undertheorized. This article aims to fill that gap by introducing the concept of “sociotechnical imaginaries.” Through
a comparative examination of the development and regulation of nuclear power in the US and South Korea, the article demonstrates
the analytic potential of the imaginaries concept. Although nuclear power and nationhood have long been imagined together
in both countries, the nature of those imaginations has remained strikingly different. In the US, the state’s central move
was to present itself as a responsible regulator of a potentially runaway technology that demands effective “containment.”
In South Korea, the dominant imaginary was of “atoms for development” which the state not only imported but incorporated into
its scientific, technological and political practices. In turn, these disparate imaginaries have underwritten very different
responses to a variety of nuclear shocks and challenges, such as Three Mile Island (TMI), Chernobyl, and the spread of the
anti-nuclear movement.
Sheila Jasanoff is Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology Studies at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. Her research centers on the interactions of law, science, and politics in democratic societies. She is particularly concerned with the construction of public reason in various cultural contexts, and with the role of science and technology in globalization. Her most recent book is Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Sang-Hyun Kim is Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. He received Ph.D.’s in chemistry from Oxford and in history and sociology of science from Edinburgh. His research interests include the cultural politics of science and technology in twentieth-century Korea, the politics of expertise, the governance of science and technology, and the history and politics of environmental sciences. 相似文献
| Sang-Hyun KimEmail: |
Sheila Jasanoff is Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology Studies at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. Her research centers on the interactions of law, science, and politics in democratic societies. She is particularly concerned with the construction of public reason in various cultural contexts, and with the role of science and technology in globalization. Her most recent book is Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Sang-Hyun Kim is Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. He received Ph.D.’s in chemistry from Oxford and in history and sociology of science from Edinburgh. His research interests include the cultural politics of science and technology in twentieth-century Korea, the politics of expertise, the governance of science and technology, and the history and politics of environmental sciences. 相似文献
7.
Jasanoff S 《Social studies of science》2002,32(1):37-69
The advent of mass torts in US federal courts in the latter third of the 20th century accelerated a process of modernization in an institution that was unprepared for standardized approaches to dispute resolution. Faced with large-scale technological disasters, in particular, courts struggled to reform both their procedures and their fact-finding approaches in order to deal with multiple claimants in consolidated proceedings. Using silicone gel breast implant litigation as a case study, this paper argues that the attempt to marry judicial concerns for individual justice with administrative concerns for speed, efficiency and economy has produced anomalous results. The testimony of the clinician and the victim has become less relevant as judicial remedies take account of injuries done to classes of plaintiffs. Subjective claims about the body are subordinated to statistical correlations between exposure and grouped complaints. At the same time, the transfer of fact-finding authority from juries to judges under new evidentiary rules has privileged the judiciary's lay knowledge and experience over that of the jury. While these transformations may hasten the processing of cases, the paper questions whether the courts can legitimately take on board the issues of risk and social justice in contemporary industrial societies. 相似文献
1