A failed platform: The Citizen Consensus Conference travels to Chile

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 499-511

  Ureta, Sebastián ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD ALBERTO HURTADO   (Chile)

^b TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Chile; consensus conferences; experiments; platforms; technologies of democracy

Indexed keywords

CHILE; COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; SCIENCE; TECHNOLOGY;

CHILE; COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; SCIENCE; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84964806986     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662514561940     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. A.Barry (2001) Political Machines, Governing and Technological Society. London: The Athlone Press.
2. A.Blok (2007) Experts on public trial: On democratizing expertise through a Danish consensus conference. Public Understanding of Science16: 163–182.
3. A.Bogner (2012) The paradox of participation experiments. Science, Technology & Human Values37(5): 506–527.
4. K.BraunS.Schultz (2010) ‘…a Certain Amount of Engineering Involved’: Constructing the public in participatory governance arrangements. Public Understanding of Science19(4): 403–419.
5. M.BucchiF.Neresini (2008) Science and public participation. In: (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 449–472.
6. M.De LaetA.Mol (2000) The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology. Social Studies of Science30(2): 225–263.
7. P.Doing (2008) Give me a laboratory and I will raise a discipline: The past, present and future politics of laboratory studies in STS. In: (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edn.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 279–296.
8. E.EinsienelE.JolsoeT.Breck (2001) Publics at the technology table: The consensus conference in Denmark, Canada, and Australia. Public Understanding of Science10(1): 83–98.
9. U.FeltB.Wynne (2007) Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously. Geneva: European Commission.
10. R.E.GoodinJ.S.Dryzek (2006) Deliberative impacts: The macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Politics & Society34(2): 219–244.
11. J.Goven (2003) Deploying the consensus conference in New Zealand: Democracy and de-problematization. Public Understanding of Science12(4): 423–440.
12. J.Grundahl (1995) The Danish consensus conference model. In: (eds) Public Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum, pp. 31–41.
13. C.Hendriks (2002) Institutions of deliberative democratic processes and interest groups: Roles, tensions and incentives. Australian Journal of Public Administration61(1): 64–75.
14. M.HorstA.Irwin (2010) Nations at ease with radical knowledge on consensus, consensusing and false consensusness. Social Studies of Science40(1): 105–126.
15. S.Jasanoff (2003) Technologies of humility: Citizen participation in governing science. Minerva41: 223–244.
16. C.B.Jensen (2005) Citizen projects and consensus-building at the Danish Board of Technology: On experiments in democracy. Acta Sociologica48(3): 221–235.
17. S.Joss (1995) Evaluating consensus conferences: Necessity or luxury. In: (eds) Public Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum, pp. 89–108.
18. S.Joss (1998) Danish consensus conferences as a model of participatory technology assessment: An impact study of consensus conferences on Danish parliament and Danish public debate. Science and Public Policy25(1): 2–22.
19. S.JossJ.Durant (eds) (1995) Public Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum with the Support of the European Commission Directorate General XII.
20. K.Knorr Cetina (1981) The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon. Available at: http://cds.cern.ch/record/232962
21. B.Latour (1983) Give me a laboratory and I will raise the world. In: (eds) Science Observed. London: SAGE, pp. 141–170.
22. B.Latour (1987) Science in Action, How to Follow Engineers and Scientists through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. B.Laurent (2009) Replicating participatory devices: The consensus conference confronts nanotechnology. CSI Working Papers Series18: 1–36.
24. B.Laurent (2011) Technologies of democracy: Experiments and demonstrations. Science and Engineering Ethics17(4): 649–666.
25. J.Law (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: SAGE.
26. J.LawA.Mol (2001) Situating technoscience: An inquiry into spatialities. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space19: 609–621.
27. J.Lezaun (2011) Offshore democracy: Launch and landfall of a socio-technical experiment. Economy and Society40(4): 553–581.
28. J.LezaunL.Soneryd (2007) Consulting citizens: Technologies of elicitation and the mobility of publics. Public Understanding of Science16(3): 279–297.
29. F.MuniesaM.Callon (2007) Economic experiments and the construction of markets. In: (eds) Do Economist Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 163–189.
30. A.P.NielsenJ.LassenP.Sandoe (2007) Democracy at its best? The consensus conference in a cross-national perspective. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics20: 13–35.
31. Organización Panamericana de la Salud [Pan-American Health Organization] (PAHO) (2002) Conferencias De Consenso Ciudadano: Orientaciones Conceptuales Y Metodológicas [Citizen Consensus Conferences: Conceptual and methodological orientations]. Washington, DC: PAHO.
32. D.Papadopoulos (2011) Alter-ontologies: Towards a constituent politics in technoscience. Social Studies of Science41(2): 177–201.
33. A.PellegriniL.Zurita (2004) Evaluación Preliminar de La Primera Conferencia de Consenso Ciudadano de Chile [Preliminary evaluation of the first Citizen Consensus Conference in Chile]. Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica15(5): 351–357.
34. A.M.PinoR.Elizalde (2004) Primera Conferencia de Consenso Ciudadano “El Manejo de Mi Ficha Clínica de Salud” [First Citizen Consensus Conference, ‘The management of my Patient Health Record’]. 22 Al 24 de Noviembre 2003-Informe Final. Santiago: Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile.
35. F.Seifert (2006) Local steps in an international career: A Danish-style consensus conference in Austria. Public Understanding of Science15(1): 73–88.
36. G.Smith (2009) Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. S.Ureta (2014) ‘Because in Chile [carbon] Markets Work!’ Exploring an experimental implementation of an emissions trading scheme to deal with industrial air pollution in Santiago. Economy and Society43(2): 285–306.
38. R.VacarezzaE.Núñez (2003) A Quien Pertenece La Ficha Clínica? [Who is the owner of the Patient Health Record?]Revista Médica de Chile131(1): 111–114.