Public engagement in the governance of science and technology

Science and Technology Governance and Ethics: A Global Perspective from Europe, India and China

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 39-51

  Zhao, Yandong ^a   Fautz, Camilo ^b   Hennen, Leonhard ^b   Ravi Srinivas, Krishna ^c   Li, Qiang ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS   (China)

^b KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^c Habitat Centre   (India)

Author keywords

Participatory technology assessment; Policy; Public engagement; Science and technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84944597326     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-14693-5_4     Document Type: Chapter

References (23)

1. Abels G (2007) Citizen involvement in policy making: does it improve democratic legitimacy and accountability? The case of pTA. Interdisc Inf Sci 13(1):103–107
2. Albaek E (1995) Between knowledge and power. Utilisation of science in public policy making. Policy Sci 28:79–100
3. Ansell C, Maxwell R, Sicurelli D (2006) Protesting food: NGOs and political mobilization in Europe. In: Ansell C (ed) What’s the beef?. MIT Press, Boston, The contested governance of European food safety, pp 97–122
4. Bora A, Hausendorfer H (2006) Participatory science governance revisited: normative expectations versus empirical evidence. Sci Public Policy 33(7):478–488
5. China (2008) Law of the People’s Republic of China on science and technology progress. Ministry of Science and Technology. http://www.most.gov.cn/fggw/fl/200801/t20080108_58302.htm. Accessed 4 July 2014
6. Decker M, Ladikas M (eds) (2004) Bridges between science, technology and policy: technology assessment—methods and impacts. Springer, Berlin
7. EC (2001a) European governance: a white paper. COM (2001) 428 final, European Commission, Brussels
8. EC (2001b) Democratising expertise and establishing scientific reference systems. Report of the working group on the white paper on governance, European Commission, Brussels, May 2001
9. EC (2001c) Science and society: action plan. COM (2001) 714 final, European Commission, Brussels
10. Fan C et al (2011) Public participation in science and technology decision-making in the 12th five-year period: needs and measures. China Soft Sci 6
11. Fiorino DJ (1990) Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Sci Technol Human Values 15(2):226–243
12. Hansen J (2006) Operationalising the public in participatory technology assessment: a framework for comparison applied to three cases. Sci Public Policy 33(8):571–584
13. Hennen L (2002) Impacts of participatory technology assessment on its social environment. In: Joss S, Bellucci S (eds) Participatory technology assessment: European perspectives. University of Westminster, London, pp 257–275
14. Hennen L (2013) Parliamentary technology assessment in Europe and the role of public participation. In: O’Doherty K, Einsiedel E (eds) Public engagement and emerging technologies. UBC Press, Vancouver, pp 27–44
15. Jasanoff S (2005) Designs on nature: science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press, Princeton
16. Joss S, Bellucci S (eds) (2002) Participatory technology assessment: European perspectives. University of Westminster, London
17. Li C (2011) The recommendation of promoting public engagement in science and technology policy making. Internal report of Chinese Academy of Science and Technology for Development, No. 16, Beijing
18. Mashelkar RA (2008) Indian science, technology, and society: the changing landscape. Technol Soc 30(3):299–308
19. National Research Council (1996) Understanding risk: informing decisions in a democratic society. National Academy Press, Washington DC
20. Rayner S (2003) Democracy in the age of assessment: reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision making. Sci Public Policy 30(3):163–170
21. Song Y, Yu W (2012) Exploring the reason for non-institutional political participation: an example from Xiamen PX. J Beijing Univ Technol (Soc Sci Ed) 12(1)
22. Stirling A (2007) ‘Opening up’ and ‘closing down’: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Sci Technol Human Values 33(2):262–294
23. Wynne B (2001) Creating public alienation: expert cultures of risk and ethics on GMOs. Sci Cult 10(4):445–481