Stop looking up the ladder: Analyzing the impact of participatory technology assessment from a process perspective

Science and Public Policy

Volumn 38, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 599-608

  Loeber, Anne ^a   Griessler, Erich ^b   Versteeg, Wytske ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; DECISION MAKING; DEMOCRATIZATION; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; PLANNING METHOD; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

AUSTRIA; NETHERLANDS; SWITZERLAND;

EID: 80053185405     PISSN: 03023427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/030234211X13111546663296     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Abels, G 2007. Citizen involvement in public policy-making: Does it improve democratic legitimacy and accountability? The case of pTA. Interdisciplinary Information Sciences, 13(1), 103-116.
2. Abels, G 2010. Participatory technology assessment and the 'institutional void': investigating democratic theory and representative politics. In Democratic Transgressions of Law: Governing Technology through Public Participation. A Bora and H Hausendorf (eds.). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
3. Abels, G and A Bora 2004. Demokratische Technikbewertung. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.
4. Akkerman, T, M Hajer and J Grin 2004. The interactive state: democratization from above? Political Studies, 52(1), 82-95.
5. Arnstein, R S 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(July), 216-229.
6. Bogner, A 2004. Partizipative Politikberatung am Beispiel der Bürgerinnenkonferenz 2003. Endbericht (unpublished manuscript).
7. Bora, A and H Hausendorf 2004. PARADYS. Participation and the Dynamics of Social Positioning. Final Report to the European Commission. Bielefeld and Beyreuth, Germany: University of Bielefeld and Universität Bayreuth.
8. Bütschi, D and M Nentwich 2002. The role of participatory technology assessment in the policy-making process. In Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives, S Joss and S Bellucci (eds.), pp 235-256. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
9. Callon, M, P Laredo, V Rabeharisoa, T Gonard and T Leray 1992. The management and evaluation of technological programs and the dynamics of techno-economic networks: The case of AFME. Research Policy, 21, 215-236.
10. Collins, H M and R Evans 2002. The third wave of science studies: studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32(2), 235-239.
11. Decker, M and M Ladikas (eds.) 2004a. Bridges between Science, Society and Policy. Technology Assessment - Methods and Impacts. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
12. Decker, M and M Ladikas 2004b. Technology assessment in Europe; between method and impact - the TAMI project. In Bridges between Science, Society and Policy. Technology Assessment - Methods and Impacts. M Decker and M Ladikas (eds.), pp 1-10. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
13. Dewey, J 1991 [1927]. The Public and its Problems. Athens, OH: Swallow Press.
14. Edelenbos, J 2000. Proces in vorm: procesbegeleiding van interactieve beleidsvorming over lokale ruimtelijke projecten. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Lemma.
15. Fiorino, D J 1990. Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 15(2), 226-243.
16. Gaskell, G, S Stares, A Allansdottir, N Allum, P Castro et al. 2010. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2010. Winds of Change? Brussels: Directorate-General for Research, European Commission.
17. Grabner, P, W Peissl and H Torgesen 2002. Austria: methodological innovations from a latecomer. In Participatory Technology Assessment. S Joss and S Bellucci (eds.), pp 61-74. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
18. Griessler, E 2010. 'Weil das so ein heißes Thema ist, rühren wir das besser nicht an.' Zur Regulierung kontroverser biomedizinischer Forschung in Österreich. In Steuerung von Wissenschaft? Die Governance des österreichischen Innovationssystems, P Biegelbauer (ed.), pp 143-186. Innsbruck, Bozen, and Vienna: Studienverlag.
19. Griessler, E 2011. Participatory technology assessment and Swiss xenotransplantation policy. Impact of Citizen Participation on Decision-Making in a Knowledge Intensive Policy Field' (CIT-PART), 7th EU Framework Programme for Research - Socioeconomic Sciences and Humanities. Vienna: Institute for Advanced Studies.
20. Guba, E G and Y S Lincoln 1989. Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
21. Hajer, M A 2003. Policy without a polity: policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, 36(2), 175-195.
22. Hennen, L 2002. Impacts of participatory technology assessment on its societal environment. In Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives, S Joss and S Bellucci (eds.), pp 257-275. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
23. Hüsing, B, E-M Engels, T Frick, K Menrad and T Reiss 1998. Xenotransplantation. technology assessment, TA 30/1998. Bern, Switzerland: Schweizerischer Wissenschaftsrat.
24. Jamison, A., (ed) 1998. Technology Policy Meets the Public. Pesto Papers 2. Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg University Press.
25. Joly, P B and G Assouline 2001. Assessing Public Debate and Participation in Technology Assessment in Europe. Final Report. June 2001 (Contract no. Bio-CT 980318). Available at http://www.inra.fr/internet/Directions/SED/sciencegouvernance/pub/ADAPTA/adapta-pdg.pdf, last accessed 2 December 2009.
26. Joss, S 1998. The Danish consensus conferences as model of participatory technology assessment. Science and Public Policy, 25(1), 2-22.
27. Joss, S and H Torgersen 2002. Implementing participatory technology assessment - from import to national innovation. In Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives, S Joss and S Bellucci (eds.), pp 157-178. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
28. Joss, S and S Bellucci (eds.) 2002. Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
29. King, C S, K M Feltey and B O'Neill Susel 1998. The question of participation: toward authentic public participation in public administration. Public Administration Review, 58(4), 317-326.
30. Klüver, L et al.2000.EUROpTA,European ParticipatoryTechnology Assessment and Technology Decision-Making. Available at www.tekno.dk/europta, last accessed 18 October 2000.
31. Laird, F N 1993. Participatory analysis, democracy and technological decision making. Science, Technology and Human Values, 18(3), 341-361.
32. Lijphart, A 2008. Thinking about Democracy Power Sharing and Majority Rule in Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
33. Lindblom, C 1965. The Intelligence of Democracy. New York: Free Press.
34. Lindblom, C and E J Woodhouse 1993. The Policy-Making Process, 3rd edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
35. Loeber, A 2004. Practical wisdom in the risk society. Methods and practice of interpretive analysis on questions of sustainable development. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.
36. Loeber, A, M Hajer and J van Tatenhove 2007. Investigating new participatory practices of the 'politics of life' in a European context. Final Report - Theory and Method. Deliverable 5. Participatory Governance and Institutional Innovation. 6th EU Programme for Research and Technology. Contract No. CIT2- CT-2004-50579. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
37. Marres, N 2006. No issue, no public: democratic deficits after the displacement of politics. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.
38. Mayer, I 1997. Debating Technologies. A Methodological Contribution to the Design and Evaluation of Participatory Policy Analysis. (PhD thesis). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
39. McAdam, D, S Tarrow and C Tilly 2001. Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40. Menasse, P 2004. Genetische Daten: woher? Wohin? Wozu?. Die Konsenskonferenz als neues Instrument der Public Relations. In Erfolgsfaktor Public Relations. Ausgezeichnete Praxisbeispiele aus Österreich, P Hörschinger and B Signitzer (eds.), pp 91-103. Frankfurt, Germany: Redline Wirtschaft.
41. Menasse, Peter, 2004. Personal communication, Vienna, 6 September 2004.
42. Nationalrat 1996. 96.3233. Interpellation von Felten. Xenotransplantation in der Schweiz.
43. Nationalrat 1997. Motion Kommission für Wissenschaft, Bildung und Kultur NR (96.419). Xenotransplantation. Regelung. 97.3251.
44. Renn, O, Th Webler, H Rakel, P Dienel and B Johnson 1993. Public participation in decision making: a three-step procedure. Policy Sciences, 26(3), 189-214.
45. Schot, J and A Rip 1997. The past and the future of constructive technology assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 54(2-3), 251-268.
46. Schweizerischer Bundesrat 2001. 01.057. Botschaft zum Bundesgesetz über die Transplantation von Organen, Geweben und Zellen (Transplantationsgesetz), 12.0.2001.
47. Smits, R and J Leyten 1991. Technology Assessment: waakhond of speurhond? Naar een integraal technologiebeleid. Zeist, The Netherlands: Kerckebosch Bv.
48. Van Est, R 1999. Winds of Change. A Comparative Study of the Politics of Wind Energy Innovation in California and Denmark. Utrecht, the Netherlands: International Books.
49. Vergragt, Ph and L Jansen (1993) Sustainable technological development: the making of a Dutch long-term oriented technology programme. Project Appraisal, 8(3), 134-140.
50. Versteeg W and A Loeber 2011. CIT-PART WP 10: The xenotransplantation debate in the Netherlands; a case study. 'Impact of Citizen Participation on Decision-Making in a Knowledge Intensive Policy Field' (CIT-PART), 7th EU Framework Programme for Research - Socioeconomic Sciences and Humanities. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
51. Warren, M E 2001. Democracy and Association. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
52. Warren, M E 2002. What can democratic participation mean today? Political Theory, 30(5), 677-701.
53. Zentrum für Technologiefolgen-Abschätzung, Bundesamt für Gesundheit, Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung wissenschaftlicher Forschung 2001. Transplantationsmedizin. Bericht des Bürgerpanels TA-P2/2000d, held 24-27 November 2000 in Bern, Switzerland.