Breaking the expertise barrier: Understanding activist strategies in science and technology policy domains

Science and Public Policy

Volumn 37, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 355-367

  Parthasarathy, Shobita ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BUREAUCRACY; POLICY MAKING; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; SPECIALIZATION; STRATEGIC APPROACH; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

EID: 77954597882     PISSN: 03023427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/030234210X501180     Document Type: Article

References (105)

1. American Anti-Vivisection Society, International Center for Technology Assessment, and Alternatives Research and Development Foundation 2007. In Re U.S. Patent No. US-6,924,413-B2, Inter-partes Re-examination, 23 March.
2. American Patent Law Association 1980. Brief on Behalf of the People's Business Commission, Amicus Curiae, In the Supreme Court of the United States, Sidney A Diamond vs. Ananda M Chakrabarty.
3. Andejeski, Yvonne, Isabelle T Bisceglio, Kay Dickersin, Jean E Johnson, Sabina I Robinson, Helene S Smith, Frances M Visco and Irene M Rich 2002. Quantitative impact of including consumers in the scientific review of breast cancer research proposals. Journal of Women's Health and Gender-Based Medicine, 11(4), 379-388.
4. Anderson, Ida-Elisabeth and Birgit Jaeger 1999. Scenario workshops and consensus conferences: towards more democratic decision-making. Science and Public Policy, 26(5), 331-340.
5. Bauer, Martin ed. 1997. Resistance to New Technology: Nuclear Power, Information Technology, and Biotechnology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Baumgartner, Frank R and Bryan D Jones 1991. Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems. Journal of Politics, 53(4), 1044-1074.
7. Baumgartner, Frank R and Bryan D Jones 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8. BCERC, Breast Cancer and the Environment Research Centers 2009. BCERC. Available at last accessed 5 February 2010.
9. Brenner, Barbara 1996. Whose cancer institute is it anyway? Breast Cancer Action Newsletter, #38, October/November.
10. Brenner, Barbara 2000. Sister Support: Women Create a Breast Cancer Movement. Breast Cancer: Society Shapes an Epidemic. New York: St Martin's Press.
11. Brown, Mark 2009. Science in Democracy: Expertise, Institutions, and Representation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Brown, Phil and Lois Gibbs 2007. Toxic Exposures: Contested Illnesses and the Environmental Health Movement. New York: Columbia University Press.
13. Brown, Phil, Stephen Zavestoski, Sabrina McCormick, Meadow Linder, Joshua Mandelbaum and Theo Luebke 2000. A gulf of difference: disputes over Gulf War-related illnesses. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42, 235-257.
14. Brown, Phil, Stephen Zavestoski, Sabrina McCormick, B Mayer, R Morello-Frosch and R G Altman 2004. Embodied health movements: new approaches to social movements in health. Sociology of Health and Illness, 26(1), 50-80.
15. Brown, Phil, Sabrina McCormick, Brian Mayer, Stephen Zavestoski, Rachel Morello-Frosch, Rebecca Gasior Altman and Laura Senier. 2006. 'A lab of our own': environmental causation of breast cancer and challenges to the dominant epidemiological paradigm. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 31, 499-536.
16. Cardozo Law School Symposium 2006. Patenting People.
17. Caron-Flinterman, J Francisca, Jacqueline E W Broerse and Joske F G Bunders 2005. The experiential knowledge of patients: a new resource for biomedical research? Social Science and Medicine, 60(11), 2575-2584.
18. Corburn, Jason 2005. Street Science: Community Knowledge and Environmental Health Justice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Crouch, D to Coyne, P 1999. Final Rejection, Patent Application No. 08/993,564.
20. Diamond V. Chakrabarty 1980. 447 U.S. 303.
21. Dickersin, Kay, Lundy Braun, Margaret Mean, Robert Millikan, Anna Wu, Jennifer Pietenpol, Susan Troyan, Benjamin Anderson and Frances Visco 2001. Development and implementation of a science training course for breast cancer activists: Project LEAD. Health Expectations, 4(4), 213-220.
22. Dowie, Mark 2004. Gods and monsters. Mother Jones. January/ February.
23. Dresser, Rebecca 1999. Public advocacy and allocation of federal funds for biomedical research. Milbank Quarterly, 77(2), 257-274.
24. Durant, John 1999. Participatory technology assessment and the democratic model of public understanding of science. Science and Public Policy, 26(5), October, 313-319.
25. Dutfield, G 2004. Intellectual Property, Biogenetic Resources, and Traditional Knowledge. London: Earthscan Books.
26. Epstein, S 1996. Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
27. Erikson, Jane 1995. Breast cancer activists seek voice in research decisions. Science, 269, 1508-1509.
28. Ezrahi, Y 1990. The Descent of Icarus: Science and the Transformation of Contemporary Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Feldman, M S, A M Khademian, H Ingram and A S Schneider 2006. Ways of knowing and inclusive management practices. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 89-99.
30. Ferretti, Maria Paola and Vincenzo Pavone. 2009. What do civil society organizations expect from participation in science? Lessons from Germany and Spain on the issue of GMOs. Science and Public Policy, 36(4), May, 287-299.
31. Fischer, Frank 1999. Technological deliberation in a democratic society: the case for participatory inquiry. Science and Public Policy, 26(5), October, 294-309.
32. Fowler, C 2000. The Plant Patent Act of 1930: a sociological history of its creation. Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 82, 621.
33. Frickel, Scott and Kelly Moore. 2006. The New Political Sociology of Science: Institutions, Networks, and Power. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
34. Frickel, Scott, Sahra Gibbon, Jeff Howard, Joanna Kempner, Gwen Ottinger and David Hess Forthcoming. Undone science: charting social movement and civil society challenges to research agenda setting. Science, Technology, and Human Values.
35. Gallagher, Kathleen 2007. Stem cell patent fight gets personal: challenge is 'demeaning,' foundation head declares. Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 2 September.
36. Genentech 1979. Brief on Behalf of Genentech, Inc. Amicus Curiae. In the Supreme Court of the United States, Sidney A Diamond vs. Ananda M Chakrabarty. No. 79-136.
37. Gold, E. Richard and Timothy Caulfield 2002. The moral tollbooth: a method that makes use of the patent system to address ethical concerns in biotechnology. Lancet, 239(9325), 2268-2270.
38. Gottweis, Herbert 1998. Governing Molecules: the Discursive Politics of Genetic Engineering in Europe and the United States. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Guston, David 1999. Between Politics and Science: Assuring the Productivity and Integrity of Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. Guston, David and Daniel Sarewitz 2002. Real-term technology assessment. Technology in Society, 24, 93-109.
41. Hajer, Maarten A 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. New York: Oxford University Press.
42. Halffman, Willem 2005. Science-policy boundaries: national styles? Science and Public Policy, 32(6), July, 457-467.
43. Hess, D 2007. Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry: Activism, Innovation, and the Environment in an Era of Globalization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44. Hilgartner, Stephen 2000. Science on Stage: Expert Advice as Public Drama. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
45. Hilgartner, Stephen 2009. Intellectual property and the politics of emerging technology: inventors, citizens, and powers to shape the future. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 84(1), 197-224.
46. Hoppe, Robert 1999. Policy analysis, science, and politics: from 'speaking truth to power' to 'making sense together'. Science and Public Policy, 26(3), June, 201-210.
47. Hoppe, Robert 2009. Scientific advice and public policy: expert advisers' and policymakers' discourses on boundary work. Poièsis and Praxis, 6, 235-263.
48. Ingram, Mrill and Helen Ingram 2005. Creating credible edibles: the organic agriculture movement and the emergence of U.S. federal organic standards. In Routing the Opposition: Social Movements, Public Policy, and Democracy, eds David S Meyer and Valerie Jenness. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
49. Irwin, Alan 1995. Citizen Science: a Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. New York: Routledge.
50. Jaffe, Adam B and Josh Lerner 2004. Innovation and its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do about It. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
51. Jasanoff, Sheila 1990a. American exceptionalism and the political acknowledgement of risk. Daedalus, 119(4), 61-81.
52. Jasanoff, Sheila 1990b. The Fifth Branch: Science Advisors as Policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53. Jasanoff, Sheila 2007. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54. Jasper, James and Jane Poulson 1995. Recruiting strangers and friends: moral shocks and social networks in animal rights and anti-nuclear protests. Social Problems, 42(4), 493-512.
55. Jenkins-Smith, Hank C and Paul A Sabatier 1994. Evaluating the advocacy coalition framework. Journal of Public Policy, 14(2), 175-203.
56. Johnson, Tracy L and Elizabeth Fee 1994. Women's participation in clinical research from protectionism to access. In Women and Health Research: Ethical and Legal Issues of Including Women in Clinical Studies, eds Anna C Mastroianni, Ruth Faden and Daniel Federman, pp. 1-10. Institute of Medicine, Committee on Legal and Ethical Issues of Relating to the Inclusion of Women in Clinical Studies. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
57. Johnson, Tracy and Elizabeth Fee 2001. Women's Participation in Clinical Research: from Protectionism to Access. Women and Health Research: Ethical and Legal Issues of Including Women in Clinical Studies. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
58. Karanovic, J 2007. Sharing Publics: Democracy, Cooperation, and Free Software Advocacy in France. PhD Dissertation. New York University.
59. Keller, Ann Campbell 2009. Science in Environmental Policy: The Politics of Objective Advice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
60. Klawiter, Maren 2008. The Biopolitics of Breast Cancer: Changing Cultures of Disease and Activism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
61. Kleinman, Daniel and Abby Kinchy 2007. Against the neoliberal steamroller? The Biosafety Protocol and the social regulation of agricultural biotechnologies. Agriculture and Human Values, 24(2), 195-206.
62. Leach, Melissa 2005. MMR Mobilisation: Citizens and Science in a British Vaccine Controversy. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies Working Paper 247.
63. Leach, Melissa 2007. Vaccine Anxieties: Global Science, Child Health, and Society. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
64. Lentsch, Justus and Peter Weingart eds 2009. Scientific Advice to Policy Making: International Comparison. Farmington Hills, MI: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
65. Lerner, Barron 2003. The Breast Cancer Wars: Hope, Fear, and the Pursuit of a Cure in Twentieth-Century America. New York: Oxford University Press.
66. Levidow, Les, Susan Carr and David Wield 2005. European Union regulation of agri-biotechnology: precautionary links between science, expertise, and policy. Science and Public Policy, 32(4), August, 261-276.
67. Lewin, Tamar 1996. Move to patent cancer gene is called obstacle to research. New York Times, 21 May, A14.
68. Love, Susan 1990. Dr. Susan Love's Breast Book. New York: Addison-Wesley.
69. Maasen, Sabine and Peter Weingart 2005. Democratization of Expertise? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-Making. New York: Springer.
70. McAdam, Doug, John D McCarthy and Mayer Zald 1996. Introduction. In Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. New York: Cambridge University Press.
71. McAdam, Doug, Sidney Tarrow and Charles Tilly 2001. Dynamics of Contention. New York: Cambridge University Press.
72. McCormick, Sabrina 2007. Democratizing science movements. Social Studies of Science, 37(4), 609-623.
73. McCormick, Sabrina, Julia Brody, Phil Brown and Ruth Polk 2004. Public involvement in breast cancer research: an analysis and model for future research. International Journal of Health Services, 34(4), 625-646.
74. McKenzie, J 1998. A closer look. world news tonight with Peter Jennings. ABC News, 2 April.
75. Morgen, Sandra 2002. Into Our Own Hands: the Women's Health Movement in the United States, 1969-1990. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
76. NBCC, National Breast Cancer Coalition 1998. Project Lead: an Innovative Science Training Program for Breast Cancer Activists. Brochure. Washington, DC: National Breast Cancer Coalition Fund.
77. NBCC, National Breast Cancer Coalition 2004. Priority #3: Enactment of the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act. S. 757. Website: last accessed 18 October 2009.
78. Nelkin, D 1984. Controversy: the Politics of Technical Decisions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
79. Newman, S 1997. Chimeric Embryo and Animals Containing Human Cells. Patent Application. No. 08/993,564.
80. Newman, Stuart 2007. Personal interview with author, 24 July.
81. Ottinger, Gwen 2010. Buckets of resistance: standards and the effectiveness of citizen science. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 35(2), 244-270.
82. Parthasarathy, Shobita 2007. Building Genetic Medicine: Breast Cancer, Technology, and the Comparative Politics of Health Care. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
83. Pavitt, Keith 1999. Technology, Management, and Systems of Innovation. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishers.
84. People's Business Commission. 1979. Brief on Behalf of the People's Business Commission, Amicus Curiae. In the Supreme Court of the United States, Sidney A Diamond vs. Ananda M Chakrabarty. No. 79-136.
85. Porter, T 1996. Trust in Numbers. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
86. Pralle, Sarah 2006. Branching Out, Digging In: Environmental Advocacy and Agenda Setting. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
87. Public Patent Foundation 2006. PubPat Challenges Monsanto Patents Being Used to Bankrupt American Farmers: Patent Office Asked to Review and Revoke Agricultural Giant's Widely Asserted Patents. Available at last accessed 10 February 2010.
88. Public Patent Foundation 2009. PubPat > Home. Website: last accessed 18 October 2009.
89. Rayner, Steve 2003. Democracy in the age of assessment: reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision making. Science and Public Policy, 30(3), June, 163-170.
90. Sabatier, Paul 1988. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2-3), 129-168.
91. Sarewitz, Daniel 1996. Frontiers of Illusion. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
92. Schattschneider, E E 1960. The Semi-Sovereign People: a Realist's View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Wilson.
93. Schön, Donald and Martin Rein 1995. Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. New York: Basic Books.
94. Schwartz, John 2009. Cancer patients challenge the patenting of a gene. New York Times, 12 May.
95. Silverman, Chloe and Jeffrey Brosco 2007. Parents and pediatricians in historical perspective. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 161(4), 392-398.
96. Simpson, John 2007. Op-ed commentary: California group turns up heat on WARF stem cell patents. Wisconsin Technology Network, 14 July.
97. Snow, David A and Robert D Benford 1988. Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Journal of Social Movement Research, 1, 197-218.
98. Stabiner, Karen 1998. To Dance with the Devil: The New War on Breast Cancer: Politics, Power, People. New York: Delta Press.
99. Tickner, Joel A and Sara Wright 2003. The precautionary principle and democratizing expertise: a US perspective. Science and Public Policy, 30(3), June, 213-218.
100. Tilly, Charles and Sidney Tarrow 2006. Contentious Politics. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
101. United States Patent and Trademark Office 2008. Manual of Patent Examination Practice.
102. US House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Courts, Civil Liberties, and the Administration of Justice 1988. Patents and the Constitution: Transgenic Animals. 100th Congress, 1st session. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
103. Weiss, R 1998. Patent sought on making of part-human creatures. Washington Post, 2 April, A12.
104. Wynne, Brian 2006. Public Engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science -hitting the notes, but missing the music? Community Genetics, 9(3), 211-200.
105. Zwerdling, D. 1998. Humanimals: weekend all things considered. National Public Radio, 5 April.