Engineering acceptance: Representations of ‘the public’ in debates on biotechnology

The Social Management of Genetic Engineering

Volumn , Issue , 2019, Pages 201-217

  Hill, Alison ^a   Michael, Mike ^a  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85082474932     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780429423499-12     Document Type: Chapter

References (42)

1. Bauman, Z. (1991) Ambivalence and Modernity, Polity, Cambridge.
2. Beck, U. (1992) Risk society: Towards a New Modernity, Sage, London.
3. Commission of the European Communities (1993) ‘White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment,' COM (93) 700, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
4. Commission of the European Communities (1994a) ‘Biotechnology and the White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment’, COM (94) 219 final, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
5. Commission of the European Communities/Directorate General XII (1994b) Biotechnology Work Programme, DG XII, Dir. E-I, Brussels.
6. Commission of the European Communities (1995a) Framework Programmes for Research (1994-98) and their Implementation, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
7. Commission of the European Communities (1995b) ‘White Paper on Education and Training: Teaching and Learning -Towards the Learning Society’, COM (95) 590 final, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
8. Durant, J.R., et al. (1989), ‘The Public Understanding of Science’, Nature, vol. 340, (6 July), pp. 11-14.
9. Eurobarometer 35, 1 (1993), Europeans, Science and Technology, Public understanding and Attitudes by INRA (Europe) and Report International, Commission of the European Communities, EUR no. 15461, Brussels.
10. Evans, G.A. and J.A. Durant, (1989) ‘The Understanding of Science in Britain and the USA’, in R. Jowell et al. (eds). British Social Attitudes, Gower. Aldershot.
11. Food and Drink Federation (1995) Consumers and Biotechnology, FDF, London.
12. Frankenfeld, P.J. (1992) ‘Technological citizenship: A normative framework for risk studies’, Science, Technology and Human Values, vol. 17, pp. 459-84.
13. Gabriel, Y. and Lang, T. (1995) The Unmanageable Consumer: Contemporary Consumption and its Fragmentation, Sage, London.
14. GenEthics News (1996) Issue 13, July/August 1st.
15. Genetics Forum (1996) ‘Europe rejects strict controls on gene foods’, Splice of Life, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 1-2.
16. Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity, Polity, Cambridge. Group of Advisers on the Ethical Implications of Biotechnology of the European.
17. Commission (1995) Ethical Aspects of the Labelling of Foods Derived From Modern Biotechnology, European Commission, Brussels.
18. Hansen, B. (1996) ‘A European Perspective on the Development and Applications of Biotechnologies’, in B.J. Marshall, et al. (eds) Biotechnologies in Agriculture and Food Coming To Market, University of Reading: Centre for Agricultural Strategy, Reading.
19. Irwin, A. (1995) Citizen Science, Routledge, London.
20. Keat, R., et al. (1994) ‘Introduction’, in R. Keat, et al. (eds), The Authority of the Consumer, Routledge, London.
21. Latour, B. (1993), We Have Never Been Modern, Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead.
22. Layton, D., et al., (1993), Inarticulate Science, Driffield Studies in Education, W.Yorks.
23. Lex, M. (1995) ‘Public Acceptability of Agricultural Biotechnology’, in, T.B. Mepham, et al., (eds.), Issues in Agricultural Bioethics, Nottingham University Press, Nottingham.
24. MAFF (1993) Report of the Committee on the Ethics of Genetic Modification and Food Use, HMSO, London.
25. Marlier, E. (1992), ‘Eurobarometer 35.1: Opinions of Europeans on biotechnology in 1991', in Durant. J. (ed.) Biotechnology in Public: A Review of Recent Research, Science Museum, London.
26. Melucci, A. (1989a) Nomads of the Present, Hutchinson Radius, London.
27. Melucci, A. (1989b) ‘The symbolic challenge of contemporary movements’, Social Research, vol. 52, pp.789-816.
28. Michael, M. (1992) ‘Lay discourses of science: science in general, science in particular, and self, Science, Technology and Human Values, vol. 17, pp. 313-33.
29. Michael, M. (1994) ‘The power-persuasion-identity nexus: Anarchism and actor networks’, Anarchist Studies, vol. 2, pp. 25-42.
30. Michael, M. (1996a) Constructing Identities: The Social, the Nonhuman and Change, Sage, London.
31. Michael, M. (1996b) ‘Ignoring Science: discourses of ignorance in the public understanding of science’, in A. Irwin and B. Wynne (eds.) Misunderstanding Science ? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
32. Michael, M., et al. (1997) ‘Teachers of Biotechnology: Identity in the Context of Ignorance and Knowledgeability’, Public Understanding of Science, vol. 6, pp. 1-17.
33. Official Journal of the European Communities (1997) ‘Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997 concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients’, Official Journal of the European Communities, vol. 40 (L 43), 14th February, pp. 1-6.
34. Rose, N. (1996) Inventing Our Selves, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
35. Royal Society (1985) The Public Understanding of Science, The Royal Society, London.
36. Saunders, P. (1993) ‘Citizenship in a Liberal Society’, in B.S. Turner (ed). Citizenship and Social Theory, Sage, London.
37. Spiegel, G. (1996) ‘The Food Chain: Greens and Genes’, BBC News and Current Affairs Unit, 19th September, London.
38. Turner, J. and Michael, M. (1996) ‘What do we know about “don’t knows”? Or, contexts of ignorance’, Social Science Information, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 15-37.
39. Wynne, B. (1991) ‘Knowledges in context’, Science, Technology and Human Values vol. 16, pp. 111-21.
40. Wynne, B. (1995) ‘Public understanding of Science’, in S. Jasanoff, et al. (eds.) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Sage, London.
41. Yearley, S. (n.d.) Biotechnology: For or Against Public Beliefs, Attitudes and Understanding, Biotechnology Joint Advisory Board, London.
42. Zimmerman, A.D. (1995) ‘Towards a more democratic ethic of technological governance’, Science, Technology and Human Values, vol. 20, pp. 86-107.