Public Deliberation and Governance: Engaging with Science and Technology in Contemporary Europe [Book Review]
Minerva 44 (2):167-184 (2006)
Abstract
Whilst public engagement in decisions concerning science and technology is widely extolled, research shows that the application of deliberative democratic theory remains – at least in Europe – highly constrained. Science and technology policy requires closer attention to the wider context of governance and the compatibility of public deliberation with established modes of policy-makingMy notes
Similar books and articles
Editorial Overview: Public Science and Technology Scholars: Engaging Whom?Erik Fisher - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):607-620.
Avoiding empty rhetoric: Engaging publics in debates about nanotechnologies.Renee Kyle & Susan Dodds - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):81-96.
Public deliberation to develop ethical norms and inform policy for biobanks: Lessons learnt and challenges remaining.Kieran C. O’Doherty & Michael M. Burgess - 2013 - Research Ethics 9 (2):55-77.
Beginning Science Policy Research in Europe: The Studiengruppe für Systemforschung, 1957–1973. [REVIEW]Helmut Krauch - 2006 - Minerva 44 (2):131-142.
On nanotechnology and ambivalence: The politics of enthusiasm. [REVIEW]Matthew Kearnes & Brian Wynne - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (2):131-142.
YUTPA as a design tool for public participation.Maurice Berix - 2012 - AI and Society 27 (1):165-172.
Lab Work Goes Social, and Vice Versa: Strategising Public Engagement Processes: Commentary on: “What Happens in the Lab Does Not Stay in the Lab: Applying Midstream Modulation to Enhance Critical Reflection in the Laboratory”.Brian Wynne - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):791-800.
The Broad Challenge of Public Engagement in Science.Rinie Est - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):639-648.
The Broad Challenge of Public Engagement in Science: Commentary on: “Constitutional Moments in Governing Science and Technology”.Rinie van Est - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):639-648.
Mediating Science and Society in the EU and UK: From Information-Transmission to Deliberative Democracy?Anwar Tlili & Emily Dawson - 2010 - Minerva 48 (4):429-461.
Nanotechnology: a new regime for the public in science?Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent - 2012 - Scientiae Studia 10 (SPE):85-94.
Erratum to: The ethics of 'public understanding of ethics'—why and how bioethics expertise should include public and patients' voices.Silke Schicktanz, Mark Schweda & Brian Wynne - 2012 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (2):251-251.
Experiments in Science Policy: An Autobiographical Note.Jack Stilgoe - 2012 - Minerva 50 (2):197-204.
Introduction: Engaging with nanotechnologies – engaging differently? [REVIEW]Tee Rogers-Hayden, Alison Mohr & Nick Pidgeon - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (2):123-130.
Analytics
Added to PP
2013-12-01
Downloads
26 (#449,328)
6 months
1 (#451,398)
2013-12-01
Downloads
26 (#449,328)
6 months
1 (#451,398)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Becoming partners, retaining autonomy: ethical considerations on the development of precision medicine.Alessandro Blasimme & Effy Vayena - 2016 - BMC Medical Ethics 17 (1):67.
The Paradox of Participation Experiments.Alexander Bogner - 2012 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 37 (5):506-527.
On nanotechnology and ambivalence: The politics of enthusiasm. [REVIEW]Matthew Kearnes & Brian Wynne - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (2):131-142.
References found in this work
Consuming, Engaging and Confronting Science: The Emerging Dimensions of Scientific Citizenship.Margareta Bertilsson & Mark Elam - 2003 - European Journal of Social Theory 6 (2):233-251.
