1.  21
    A Social Licence for Science: Capturing the Public or Co-Constructing Research?Sujatha Raman & Alison Mohr - 2014 - Social Epistemology 28 (3-4):258-276.
    The “social licence to operate” has been invoked in science policy discussions including the 2007 Universal Ethical Code for scientists issued by the UK Government Office for Science. Drawing from sociological research on social licence and STS interventions in science policy, the authors explore the relevance of expectations of a social licence for scientific research and scientific contributions to public decision-making, and what might be involved in seeking to create one. The process of seeking a social licence is not the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2.  34
    Introduction: Engaging with nanotechnologies – engaging differently? [REVIEW]Tee Rogers-Hayden, Alison Mohr & Nick Pidgeon - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (2):123-130.
    The idea of conducting upstream public engagement over emerging technologies has been gaining popularity in Europe and North America, with nanotechnologies seen as a test case for this. For many of its advocates, upstream engagement is about a re-conceptualisation of the science–society relationship in which a variety of ‘publics’ are brought together with stakeholders and scientists early in the Research and Development process to co-develop technological trajectories. However, the concept, aims and processes of upstream engagement remain ill-defined, are often misunderstood, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  3.  20
    Publics in the Making: Mediating Different Methods of Engagement and the Publics These Construct: Commentary on: “Technologies of Democracy: Experiments and Demonstrations”. [REVIEW]Alison Mohr - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):667-672.
    The potential for public engagement to democratise science has come under increasing scrutiny amid concerns that conflicting motivations have led to confusion about what engagement means to those who mediate science and publics. This raises important yet relatively unexplored questions regarding how publics are constituted by different forms of engagement used by intermediary scholars and other actors. It is possible to identify at least two possible ‘rationalities of mediation’ that mobilise different versions of the public and the roles they are (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   2 citations