Order:
  1.  15
    Where Now for Post-Normal Science?: A Critical Review of its Development, Definitions, and Uses.Irene Lorenzoni, Mavis Jones & John Turnpenny - 2011 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 36 (3):287-306.
    ‘‘Post-normal science’’ has received much attention in recent years, but like many iconic concepts, it has attracted differing conceptualizations, applications, and implications, ranging from being a ‘‘cure-all’’ for democratic deficit to the key to achieving more sustainable futures. This editorial article introduces a Special Issue that takes stock of research on PNS and critically explores how such research may develop. Through reviewing the history and evolution of PNS, the authors seek to clarify the extant definitions, conceptualizations, and uses of PNS. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  2.  9
    Locating Scientific Citizenship: The Institutional Contexts and Cultures of Public Engagement.Nick Pidgeon, Mavis Jones, Irene Lorenzoni & Karen Bickerstaff - 2010 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 35 (4):474-500.
    In this article, we explore the institutional negotiation of public engagement in matters of science and technology. We take the example of the Science in Society dialogue program initiated by the UK’s Royal Society, but set this case within the wider experience of the public engagement activities of a range of charities, corporations, governmental departments, and scientific institutions. The novelty of the analysis lies in the linking of an account of the dialogue event and its outcomes to the values, practices, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3.  18
    Policy legitimation, expert advice, and objectivity: 'Opening' the UK governance framework for human genetics.Mavis Jones - 2004 - Social Epistemology 18 (2 & 3):247 – 270.
    In response to political pressures arising from controversial science policy decisions, the United Kingdom (UK) government conducted a review of its biotechnology governance framework in 1999, identifying best practices of open government and creating strategic bodies to adopt them. Drawing from empirical data on the context and nature of the open government framework, this paper argues that the framework may be interpreted as elasticizing objectivity. Value-neutral scientific objectivity is essentially 'stretched' into a pluralist objectivity that purports to represent a spectrum (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation