Constructing audiences in scientific controversy

Social Epistemology

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 67-95

  Delborne, Jason A ^a  

^a Department of Geology and Geological Engineering   (United States)

Author keywords

Biotechnology; Public engagement; Public understanding of science; Scientific controversy; Theater studies

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650234950     PISSN: 02691728     EISSN: 14645297     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02691728.2010.534565     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Abbo, Shahal, and Baruch Rubin. 2000. Transgenic crops: A cautionary tale. Science 287 (5460): 1927b.
2. AgBioWorld. 2001a. Activist/scientist, debate in the UK, GM separation (28 November 2001).
3. AgBioView Archives [cited 16 February 2007]. Available from http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive&newsid=1268; INTERNET.
4. AgBioWorld. 2001b. Genetically modified material found in Mexican corn (28 November 2001).
5. AgBioView Archives [cited 16 February 2007]. Available from http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive&newsid=1267; INTERNET.
6. AgBioWorld. 2002. Activist joint statement, commentray [sic] on Chapela (21 February 2002).
7. AgBioView Archives [cited 20 February 2007]. Available from http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive&newsid=1363; INTERNET.
8. AgBioWorld. 2005. About AgBioWorld [cited 7 June 2007]. Available from http://www.agbioworld.org/about/index.html; INTERNET.
9. AgBioWorld. 2007. AgBioView archives [cited 19 February 2007]. Available from http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive; INTERNET.
10. Alvarez-Morales, Ariel. 2002. Transgenes in maize landraces in Oaxaca: Official report on the extent and implications. In Proceedings of The 7th International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms: Meeting Proceedings of the International Society for Biosafety Research, Beijing, China [cited 8 June 2007]. Available from http://www.isbr.info/symposia/docs/isbgmo.pdf, INTERNET.
11. An Inconvenient Truth: A Global Warning. Dir. Davis Guggenheim, perf. Al Gore. Paramount, 2006.
12. BBC. 1998. Experiment fuels modified food concern, 10 August, 7:51 GMT [cited 10 May 2005]. Available from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/148384.stm; INTERNET.
13. Benford, Robert D., and David A. Snow. 2000. Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611-639.
14. Bennett, Susan. 1990. Theatre audiences: A theory of production and reception. London: Routledge.
15. Blau, Herbert. 1986. Odd, anonymous needs: The audience in a dramatized society. Performing Arts Journal 10 (1): 34-42.
16. Blumestyk, Goldie. 2003. The price of research. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 31 October, A26.
17. Bucchi, Massimiano, and Federico Neresini. 2008. Science and public participation. In The handbook of science and technology studies, 3rd ed., edited by Edward J. Hacket, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch, and Judy Wajcman, pp. 449-472. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
18. Burress, Charles. 2004. Students support tenure for professor: Some feel teacher being punished for corporate criticism. San Francisco Chronicle, 10 December, B-5 [cited 6 July 2010]. Available from http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/12/10/BAGGJA9OA21.DTL; INTERNET.
19. Campbell, Phillip. 2002. Letters: Spiked. The Guardian, 15 May 2002 [cited 16 September 2010]. Available from http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2002/may/15/guardianletters;INTERNET.
20. Chapela, Ignacio H., and David Quist. 2005. Response to PNAS article failing to detect transgenes in maize from Oaxaca, Mexico. Pulse of Science, 12 August [cited 2 November 2005]. Available from http://pulseofscience.org/pnasstatement; INTERNET.
21. Christou, Paul. 2002. Editorial: No credible scientific evidence is presented to support claims that transgenic DNA was introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Transgenic Research 11 (1): 3-5.
22. Crease, Robert P. 1993. The play of nature: Experimentation as performance. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
23. Dalton, Rex. 2003. Berkeley accused of biotech bias as ecologist is denied tenure. Nature 426: 591.
24. Dalton, Rex. 2005. Ecologist's tenure hailed as triumph for academic freedom. Nature 435 (7041): 390-391.
25. Delborne, Jason A. 2005. Pathways of scientific dissent in agricultural biotechnology. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley.
26. Delborne, Jason A. 2008. Transgenes and transgressions: Scientific dissent as heterogeneous practice. Social Studies of Science 38 (4): 509-541.
27. Delborne, Jason A. 2010. Biofuels: Streams and themes. In Controversies in science and technology: From evolution to energy, edited by Daniel Lee Kleinman, Jason Delborne, Karen H. Cloud- Hansen and Jo Handelsman, pp. 175-90. New Rochelle, NY: Mary Ann Liebert.
28. Dolan, Jill. 1996. Fathom languages: Feminist performance theory, pedagogy, and practice. In A sourcebook of feminist theatre and performance: On and beyond the stage, edited by Carol Martin, pp. 1-20. New York: Routledge.
29. Dowie, Mark. 2004. Biotech critics at risk: Economics calls the shots in the debate. San Francisco Chronicle, 11 January, D3 [cited 17 August 2005]. Available from http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/01/11/INGHT44JFS1.DTL; INTERNET.
30. Enciso L. Angelica. 2002. Resultados de estudios obligan a reconsiderar las medidas de bioseguridad: Exequiel Ezcurra confirma el ine la presencia de transgénicos en cultivos de Oaxaca: Investigadores corroboraron el descubrimiento de Ignacio Chapela, que pretendió negarse. La Jornada, 12 August [cited 24 June 2005]. Available from http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2002/ago02/020812/042n1soc.php?printver=1; INTERNET.
31. Epstein, Steven. 1996. Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.
32. Ewen, Stanley W. B., and Arpad Pusztai. 1999. Effects of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine. The Lancet 354 (9187): 1353-1354.
33. Food First. 2002. Joint statement on the Mexican GM maize scandal. Institute for Food and Development Policy, 18 February [cited 21 February 2007]. Available from http://www.foodfirst.org/node/198; INTERNET.
34. Frickel, Scott. 2004. Chemical consequences: Environmental mutagens, scientist activism, and the rise of genetic toxicology. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
35. Frickel, Scott, and Kelly Moore, eds. 2006. The new political sociology of science: Institutions, networks, and power. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
36. Gieryn, Thomas F. 1999. Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Greenpeace. 2001a. Greenpeace and world scientists call for action to save Mexico's maize from genetic contamination [cited 24 January 2006]. Available from http://archive.greenpeace.org/geneng/highlights/food/mexcorncontamin2.htm; INTERNET.
38. Greenpeace. 2001b. Mexican environment and farming groups launch formal complaint process against GE corn imports, 11 December [cited 9 June 2007]. Available from
39. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/mexican-environment-and-farmin#;INTERNET.
40. Greenpeace. 2001c. Serious genetic contamination revealed in Mexican maize, 27 September [cited 13 August 2009]. Available from http://www.biotech-info.net/contamination_revealed.html;INTERNET.
41. Hayes, Tyrone B., Atif Collins, Melissa Lee, Magdelena Mendoza, Nigel Noriega, A. Ali Stuart, and Aaron Vonk. 2002a. Hermaphroditic, demasculinized frogs after exposure to the herbicide atrazine at low ecologically relevant doses. PNAS 99 (8): 5476-5480.
42. Hayes, Tyrone, Kelly Haston, Mable Tsui, Anhthu Hoang, Cathryn Haeffele, and Aaron Vonk. 2002b. Herbicides: Feminization of male frogs in the wild. Nature 419 (6910): 895-896.
43. Herrnstein, Richard J., and Charles A. Murray. 1994. The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: Free Press.
44. Hilgartner, Stephen. 2000. Science on stage: Expert advice as public drama. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
45. Ho, Mae-Wan. 2002. "Worst ever" contamination of Mexican landraces. Institute of Science in Society [cited 2 November 2005]. Available from http://www.i-sis.org.uk/contamination.php;INTERNET.
46. Kaplinsky, Nick, David Braun, Damon Lisch, Angela Hay, Sarah Hake, and Michael Freeling. 2002. Biodiversity (communications arising): Maize transgene results in Mexico are artefacts. Nature 416 (11 April): 601-602.
47. Kleinman, Daniel Lee. 2003. Impure cultures: Biology and the world of commerce. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
48. Klug, Aaron. 1999. Correspondence: Commentary: GM food debate. The Lancet 354 (13 November): 1729.
49. Knight, Jonathan. 2003. Scientists attack industrial influence. Nature 426 (18/25 December): 741.
50. Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51. Latour, Bruno. 1999 [1983]. Give me a laboratory and I will raise the world. In The science studies reader, edited by Mario Biagioli, pp. 258-275. New York: Routledge.
52. Latour, Bruno. 2005. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Lepkowski, Wil. 2002. Biotech's OK corral. Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes Perspectives 13 (9 July) [cited 13 June 2005]. Available from http://www.cspo.org/ourlibrary/documents/060902.html; INTERNET.
54. Losey, John E., Linda S. Rayor, and Maureen E. Carter. 1999. Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae. Nature 399 (20 May): 214.
55. Mann, Charles C. 2002. Mexican maize: Transgene data deemed unconvincing. Science 296 (5566): 236b-237b.
56. Martin, Brian. 1991. Scientific knowledge in controversy: The social dynamics of the fluoridation debate. Albany: State University of New York Press.
57. Martínez-Soriano, Juan Pablo Ricardo, and Diana Sara Leal-Klevezas. 2000. Transgenic maize in Mexico: No need for concern. Science 287 (5457): 1399.
58. Matthews, Jonathan. 2002. Amaizing disgrace. The Ecologist 32 (4): 30.
59. Metz, Matthew, and Johannes Fütterer. 2002. Biodiversity (communications arising): Suspect evidence of transgenic contamination. Nature 416 (11 April): 601-602.
60. Monbiot, George. 2002. The fake persuaders: Corporations are inventing people to rubbish their opponents on the internet. The Guardian, 14 May.
61. Nature Editor. 2002a. Editorial note. Nature 416 (11 April): 601.
62. Nature Editor. 2002b. Nature comments. Nature 417 (27 June): 898.
63. Nigh, Ronald, Charles Benbrook, Stephen Brush, Luis Garcia-Barrios, Rafael Ortega-Paczka, and Hugo R. Perales. 2000. Transgenic crops: A cautionary tale. Science 287 (5460): 1927.
64. Norfolk Genetic Information Network. 2002. India-farmers want compensation after ruined GM crops, 11 September [cited 7 July 2009]. Available from http://ngin.tripod.com/110902a.htm; INTERNET.
65. Ortiz-García, Sol, and Exequiel Ezcurra. 2003. Transgenic maize in Mexico: Risks and reality. In Proceedings of Conference of the Botanical Society of America [cited 8 June 2007]. Available from http://www.2003.botanyconference.org/engine/search/detail.php?aid=365, INTERNET.
66. Ortiz-García, S., E. Ezcurra, B. Schoel, F. Acevedo, J. Soberon, and A. A. Snow. 2005. Absence of detectable transgenes in local landraces of maize in Oaxaca, Mexico (2003-2004). PNAS 102 (35): 12338-12343.
67. Pierce, Alison. 2004. Bioscience warfare. SF Weekly 23 (18, 2-8 June): 19-27.
68. PIFB. 2003. Gene flow: What does it mean for biodiversity and centers of origin. Conference proceedings of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology and FUMEC [US-Mexico Foundation for Science], Mexico City, 29-30 September.
69. Piñeyro-Nelson, A., J. Van Heerwaarden, H. R. Perales, J. A. Serratos-Hernádez, A. Rangel, M. B. Hufford, P. Gepts, A. Garay-Arroyo, R. Rivera-Bustamante, and Elena R. Álvarez-Buylla. 2009. Transgenes in Mexican maize: Molecular evidence and methodological considerations for GMO detection in landrace populations. Molecular Ecology 18 (4): 750-761.
70. Proctor, Robert N. 1995. Cancer wars: How politics shapes what we know and don't know about cancer. New York: BasicBooks.
71. Quist, David, and Ignacio H. Chapela. 2001. Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature 414 (29 November): 541-543.
72. Quist, David, and Ignacio H. Chapela. 2002. Biodiversity (communications arising): Quist and Chapela reply. Nature 416 (11 April): 602.
73. Rowell, Andrew. 2003. Don't worry it's safe to eat: The true story of GM food, BSE & foot and mouth. London: Earthscan Publications.
74. Schön, Jan Hendrik, Hong Meng, and Zhenan Bao. 2003. Retraction: Self-assembled monolayer organic field-effect transistors. Nature 422 (6927): 92.
75. Shapin, Steven. 1999. The house of experiment in seventeenth century England. In The science studies reader, edited by Mario Biagioli, pp. 479-504. New York: Routledge.
76. Shelton, Anthony M., and Richard T. Roush. 1999. Commentary: False reports and the ears of men. Nature Biotechnology 17 (9): 832.
77. Sibum, Heinz Otto. 1995. Reworking the mechanical value of heat: Instruments of precision and gestures of accuracy in early victorian England. Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A 26 (1): 73-106.
78. Sismondo, Sergio. 2010. An introduction to science and technology studies. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
79. Stewart, C. Neal, Matthew D. Halfhill, and Suzanne I. Warwick. 2003. Transgene introgression from genetically modified crops to their wild relatives. Nature Reviews Genetics 4: 806-817.
80. Suarez, Andrew V., Mike Benard, Neil D. Tsutsui, Todd A. Blackledge, Kirsten Copren, Eli M. Sarnat, Alex L. Wild, Wayne M. Getz, Philip T. Starks, Kipling Will, Per J. Palsbøll, Mark E. Hauber, Craig Moritz, and Adam D. Richman. 2002. Correspondence: Conflicts around a study of Mexican crops. Nature 417 (27 June): 897.
81. Whitley, Richard. 2000. The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
82. Wilson, Allison K., Jonathan R. Latham, and Ricarda A. Steinbrecher. 2006. Transformationinduced mutations in transgenic plants: Analysis and biosafety implications. Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews 23 (December): 209-234.
83. Woodhouse, Edward, David Hess, Steve Breyman, and Brian Martin. 2002. Science studies and activism: Possibilities and problems for reconstructivist agendas. Social Studies of Science 32 (2): 297-319.
84. Worthy, Kenneth, Richard C. Strohman, and Paul R. Billings. 2002. Correspondence: Conflicts around a study of Mexican crops. Nature 417 (27 June): 897.
85. Yoon, Carol Kaesuk. 2001. Genetic modification taints corn in Mexico. New York Times, 2 October, F7.
86. Zald, Mayer N. 1996. Culture, ideology, and strategic framing. In Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framings, edited by Doug McAdam, John McCarthy and Mayer Zald, pp. 261-74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.