Public dialogue and the scientific citizen

Risk and the Public Acceptance of New Technologies

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 24-40

  Irwin, Alan ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b Department of International Economics and Management   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84996437686     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1057/9780230591288     Document Type: Chapter

References (20)

1. Tony Blair, Science Matters. April 10, 2002. Available from: www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page 1715.asp [accessed 17 November 2006].
2. R. Brickman, S. Jasanoff and T. Ilgen, Controlling Chemicals: the politics of regulation in Europe and the United States (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1985).
3. Council for Science and Technology, 'Policy through dialogue: informing policies based on science and technology'. A report from the Council for Science and Technology, March 2005: www.cst.gov.uk/cst/reports/#8 [accessed 17November 2006].
4. H. Collins and T. Pinch, The Golem (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993).
5. Department of Trade and Industry, Excellence and Opportunity: a science and innovation policy for the 21st century (London: The Stationery Office, 2000).
6. European Commission, Science and Society: Action Plan (Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities, 2002).
7. R. Grove-White, 'New Wine, Old Bottles? Personal reflections on the new biotechnology commissions', The Political Quarterly, 72(4) (2001) 466-472.
8. R. Hagendijk, P. Healey, M. Horst and A. Irwin, 'Science, Technology and Governance in Europe: challenges of public engagement', STAGE Final Report, February 2005.
9. R. Hagendijk and A. Irwin, 'Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe', Minerva, 44 (2006)167-184.
10. House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, Science and Society(London: The Stationery Office, 2000).
11. A. Irwin, Risk and the Control of Technology (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1985).
12. A. Irwin, 'The politics of talk: coming to terms with the "new" scientific governance', Social Studies of Science, Vol. 36(2) (2006) 299-320.
13. A. Irwin and B. Wynne, Misunderstanding Science? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).
14. Office of Science and Technology, Guidelines 2000: scientific advice and policy making, DTI, London: www.dti.gov/uk/science/page15432.html [accessed 17 November 2006].
15. A.M. Pettigrew, 'The character and significance of management research on the public services', The Academy of Management Journal, 48(6) (2005) 973-977.
16. Lord Phillips, J. Bridgeman and M. Ferguson-Smith, The BSE Inquiry: The Report(London: The Stationery Office, 2000).
17. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, Setting Environmental Standards.21st report (London: The Stationery Office, October, 1998).
18. Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering, Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. RS policy document 19/04. July 2004 (London: Royal Society).
19. A. Stirling, 'Opening up or closing down? Analysis, participation and power in the social appraisal of technology', in Leach, M., Scoones, I. and Wynne, B.(eds) Science and Citizens: globalization and the challenge of engagement (London and New York: Zed Books, 2005) 218-231.
20. B. Wynne, 'Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science-hitting the notes, but missing the music?', Community Genetics, 9(3) (2006)211-220.