Minerva 47 (2):119-146 (2009)

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.
Keywords Sociotechnical imaginary  Nuclear power  Science and technology policy  Comparative policy  US  South Korea
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11024-009-9124-4
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,316
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Rethinking Expertise.H. M. Collins & Robert Evans - 2007 - University of Chicago Press.
Modern Social Imaginaries.Charles Taylor - 2003 - Duke University Press.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Geoengineering as Collective Experimentation.Jack Stilgoe - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (3):851-869.
Responsible Innovation in Industry: The Role of a Firm’s Multi-Stakeholder Network.J. Ceicyte, M. Petraite, Vincent Blok & E. Yaghmaei - 2021 - In Bio#futures, Foreseeing and Exploring the Bioeconomy. Dordrecht, Nederland: pp. 581-603.

View all 49 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Need and Safety: The Nuclear Power Debate.Paul B. Thompson - 1984 - Environmental Ethics 6 (1):57-69.
A Philosophical Study on the Crisis of Democracy in Korea.Seong-woo Kim - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 50:369-375.
Questioning Nuclear Waste Substitution: A Case Study.Alan Marshall - 2007 - Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (1):83-98.
Prime Time Lectures.John McGuire - 2001 - The Philosophers' Magazine (15):13-14.


Added to PP index

Total views
399 ( #25,460 of 2,519,309 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
14 ( #55,539 of 2,519,309 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes