On the weakness of strong ties

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 43-47

  Horst, Maja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

consensus conferences; governance of science and technology; participation in science policy; public understanding of science

Indexed keywords

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; DENMARK; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PUBLIC OPINION; TECHNOLOGY;

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; DENMARK; FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84892460753     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662512473392     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Blok A.Experts on public trial: On democratizing expertise through a Danish consensus conference.Public Understanding of Science. 2007;16 (2): 163-182.
2. Cohen LThe Future. Leonard Cohen Stranger Music, Inc (BMI); 1992:.
3. Einsiedel EF.Assessing a controversial medical technology: Canadian public consultations on xenotransplantation.Public Understanding of Science. 2002;11:315-331.
4. Granovetter MS.The strength of weak ties.American Journal of Sociology. 1973;78 (6): 1360-1380.
5. Hedgecoe A,Martin P.The drugs don't work: Expectations and the shaping of pharmacogenetics.Social Studies of Science. 2003;33 (3): 327-364.
6. Horst M.Collective closure? Public debate as the solution to controversies about science and technology.Acta Sociologica. 2010;53 (3): 195-211.
7. Horst M,Irwin A.Nations at ease with radical knowledge.Social Studies of Science. 2010;40 (1): 105-126.
8. Jensen CB.Citizen projects and consensus-building at the Danish Board of Technology: On experiments in democracy.Acta Sociologica. 2005;48 (3): 221-235.
9. Klüwer LPublic Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe. Joss SDurant J, ed. London: Science Museum; 1995:41-49.
10. LassenJ (2004) Changing modes of biotechnology governance in Denmark. STAGE Discussion Paper 3. Available at: http://www.stage-research.net/STAGE/documents/3_BiotechnologyGovernanceDK_final.pdf.
11. Lezaun J,Soneryd L.Consulting citizens: Technologies of elicitation and the mobility of publics.Public Understanding of Science. 2007;16 (3): 279-297.
12. Lund AB,Horst MDen offentlige debat - mål, middel eller mantra. København: Fremad; 1999:.
13. Marres NMaking Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy. Latour BWeibel P, ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005:208-217.
14. Mejlgaard N.The trajectory of scientific citizenship in Denmark: Changing balances between public competence and public participation.Science and Public Policy. 2009;36 (6): 483-496.
15. Science in Dialogue Conference (2012) Odense, Denmark. http://scienceindialogue.dk/.
16. Stirling A.'Opening up' and 'closing down': Power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology.Science, Technology & Human Values. 2008;33 (2): 262-294.
17. Väliverronen E.Stories of the 'medicine cow': Representations of future promises in media discourse.Public Understanding of Science. 2004;13 (4): 363-377.