Transdisciplinarity: A new mode of governing science?

Science and Public Policy

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 399-410

  Maasen, Sabine ^a   Lieven, Oliver ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

EID: 33749182377     PISSN: 03023427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/147154306781778803     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Abels, Gabriele 2003. Experts, Citizens, and Eurocrats: Towards a Policy Shift in the Governance of Biopolitics in the EU. Europe and Integration online Papers (EIoP) 6(19). Available at , last accessed 3 August 2006.
2. Amit, Vered 2000. The university as panopticon: moral claims and attacks on academic freedom. In Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy, ed. Marilyn Strathern, pp. 217-235.
3. Balsiger, Philipp W 2005. Transdisziplinarität. Munich: Wilhelm Fink.
4. Beck, Ulrich 1986. Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
5. Bellucci, Sergio et al 2002. Conclusions and recommendations. In Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives, eds. Simon Joss and Sergio Bellucci, pp. 276-287. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
6. Bimber, B 1996. The Politics of Expertise in Congress: The Rise and Fall of the Office of Technology Assessment. Albany: State University of New York Press.
7. Brand, Karl-Werner 2000. Nachhaltige Entwicklung und Transdisziplinarität: Besonderheiten, Probleme und Erfordernisse der Nachhaltigkeitsforschung. Berlin: Analytica.
8. Cooke, B and U Kothari eds. 2002. Participation: The New Tyranny. London: Zed Books.
9. Cruikshank, B 1999. The Will to Empower: Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
10. D'Andrade, Roy 1995. Objectivity and militancy: a debate, I: moral models in anthropology. Current Anthropology, 36(3), 399-408.
11. Dente, B, P Fareri and J Ligteringen 1998. The Waste and the Backyard: the Creation of Waste Facilities: Success Stories in Six European Countries. Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
12. Edwards, A 1999. Scientific expertise in policy-making: the intermediary role of the public sphere. Science and Public Policy, 26(3), 163-170.
13. Enhancing Democracy: A White Paper on Governance in the European Union. Available at , last accessed 3 August 2006.
14. Etzkowitz, H and L Leydesdorff 2000. The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and "Mode 2" to a triple-helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-124.
15. European Commission 2000. Science, Society and the Citizen in Europe. Working document.
16. Foucault, Michel 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
17. Foucault, Michel 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings. Brighton: Havester Wheatsheaf.
18. Foucault, Michel 2000. Die Gouvernementalität. In Gouvernementalität der Gegenwart: Studien zur Ökonomisierung des Sozialen, eds. Ulrich Bröckling, Susanne Krasmann and Thomas Lemke, pp. 41-67. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
19. Funtowitz, S O and J R Ravetz 1993. The emergence of post-normal science. In Science, Politics and Morality: Scientific Uncertainty and Decision Making, ad. R von Schomberg. Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
20. Gibbons, M, C Limoges, H Nowotny, S Schwartzman, P Scott and M Trow 1994. The New Production of Knowledge. London: Sage.
21. Halfacre, A C, A Matheny and W Rosenbaum 2000. Regulating contested local hazards: is constructive dialogue possible among participants in community risk management? Policy Studies Journal, 28(3), 648-667.
22. Hilgartner, Stephen 1990. The dominant view of popularization. Social Studies of Science, 20, 519-539.
23. Hirsch Hadorn, Gertrude 2000. What are the relevant differences in research questions between disciplinary and transdisciplinary research? Available at , last accessed 15 December 2005.
24. Japp, Klaus 1996. Soziologische Risikotheorie. Funktionale Differenzierung, Politisierung und Reflexion. Weinheim and Munich: Juventa.
25. Jasanoff, Sheila 2003. (No?) accounting for expertise. Science and Public Policy, 30(3), 157-162.
26. Knorr-Cetina, Karin 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
27. Lemke, T, S Krasmann and U Bröckling 2000: Gouvernementalität, Neoliberalismus und Selbsttechnologien: Eine Einleitung. In Gouvernementalität der Gegenwart: Studien zur Ökonomisierung des Sozialen, eds. U Bröckling, S Krasmann and T Lemke, pp. 7-40. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
28. Lessenich, Stephan 2003. Soziale Subjektivität: die neue Regierung der Gesellschaft. Mittelweg, 36(4), 80-93.
29. Luhmann, Niklas 1984. Soziale Systeme. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
30. Maasen, S and O Lieven submitted. Transdisziplinäre Forschung: Verbote eines 'New Deal' zwischen Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft? For Transdiziplinarität, eds. Paul Berger and Wolfgang Zierhofer. GAIA.
31. Maasen, S and M Kaiser 2007. Vertrauen ist gut. Verantwortung ist besser. Wissenschaft und Politik in der Vertrauenskrise: Weiter mit Verantwortung? In Gekauftes Gewissen: die Rolle der Bioethik in Institutionen, eds. C Rehmann-Sutter, J L Scully, R Porz and M Zimmermann-Aklin.
32. Maasen, S and P Weingart 2005. What's new in scientific advice to politics? In Democratization of Expertise? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-Making. Sociology of the Sciences, 24, eds. S Maasen and P Weingart, pp. 1-16.
33. Nowotny, Helga 2003. Democratizing expertise and socially robust knowledge. Science and Public Policy, 30(3), 151-156.
34. Nowotny, H, P Scott and M Gibbons eds. 2001. Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. London: Polity Press.
35. O'Malley, Pat 1996. Risk and responsibility. In Foucault and Political Reason, eds. A Barry, T Osborne and N Rose, pp. 189-207. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36. Power, Michael 1997. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Rammert, W 2002. Technik als verteilte Aktion. Wie technisches Wirken als Agentur in hybriden Aktionszusammenhängen gedeutet warden kann. Technical University Technology Studies Working Papers. TUTS-WP-3-2002. , last accessed 3 August 2006.
38. Rose, N and P Miller 1992. Political power beyond the state. British Journal of Sociology, 43(2), 173-205.
39. Sclove, Richard E 1994. Citizen-based technology assessment? An update on consensus conferences in Europe. Available at , last accessed 7 August 2005.
40. Shore, C and S Wright 1999. Audit culture and anthropology: Neo-liberalism in British higher education. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 5(4), 557-575.
41. Skorupinski, B and K Ott 2002. Partizipative Technikfolgen-abschätzung als ethisches Erfordernis. Warum das Urteil der Bürger/innen unvsrzichtbar ist, ed. by TA-SWISS. Available at , last accessed 3 August 2006.
42. Stehr, Nico 1994. Knowledge Societies. London: Sage.
43. Strathern, Marilyn ed. 2000. Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy. EASA Series. London: Routledge.
44. Sutter, Barbara 2005. Von Laien und guten Bürgern: Partizipation als politische Technologie. In Wozu Experten? Wissenschaft und Politik: Sozialwissenschaftliche Diagnosen einer Beziehung im Umbruch, eds. Alexander Bogner and Helge Torgersen. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
45. Weber, Max 1993. Die protestantische Ethik und der "Geist" des Kapitalismus. (Textausgabe auf der Grundlage der ersten Fassung von 1904/ 05 mit einem Verzeichnis der wichtigsten Zusätze und Veränderungen aus der zweiten Fassung von 1920). Bodenheim: Athenäum Hain Hanstein.
46. Weingart, Peter 2001. Die Stunde der Wahrheit. Weilerswist: Velbrück.
47. Williams, Michael 2001. Kontextualismus, Externalismus und epistemische Massstäbe. In Erkenntnistheorie: Positionen zwischen Tradition und Gegenwart, ed. T Grundmann, pp. 165-187. Paderborn: Mentis-Verlag.