Constructive Technology Assessment and the Methodology of Insertion

Philosophy of Engineering and Technology

Volumn 16, Issue , 2013, Pages 37-53

  Rip, Arie ^a   Robinson, Douglas K R ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b TEQNODE Limited   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PARIS EST   (France)

Author keywords

Nanotechnology Development; Responsible Innovation; Service Role; Technology Assessment; Technology Developer

Indexed keywords

EID: 85101622994     PISSN: 18797202     EISSN: 18797210     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_3     Document Type: Chapter

References (42)

1. Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (2012). Participatory research methods: A methodological approach in motion. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1), 1–13.
2. Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., & Barthe, Y. (2001). Agir dans un monde incertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique. Paris: éd. Seuil.
3. Daey Ouwens, C., van Hoogstraten, P., Jelsma, J., Prakke, F., & Rip, A. (1987). Constructief Technologisch Aspectenonderzoek. Een Verkenning. Den Haag: Staatsuitgeverij (NOTA Voorstudie 4).
4. Delvenne, P. (2011). Science, technologie et innovation sur le chemin de la réflexivité. Enjeus et dynamiques du Technology Assessment parlementaire. Louvain-La-Neuve: Harmattan-Academia.
5. European Commission (2008, February 7). Commission recommendation on a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research (C(2008)424 final) Available at http://ec.europa.eu/nanotechnology/pdf/nanocode-rec_pe0894c_en.pdf
6. Fenn, J. (1999). When to leap on the hype cycle: Research note. Stamford: Gartner Group. www.cata. ca/files/PDF/Resource:Centres/hightech/reports/indepstudies/Whentoleaponthehypecycle.pdf
7. Garud, R., & Ahlstrom, D. (1997). Technology assessment: A socio-cognitive perspective. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 14, 25–48.
8. Genus, A. (2006). Rethinking constructive technology assessment as democratic, reflective, discourse. Technology Forecasting and Social Change, 73, 13–26.
9. Grin, J., & Van de Graaf, H. (1996). Technology assessment as learning. Science Technology & Human Values, 21, 72–99.
10. Guston, D. H., & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-time technology assessment. Technology and Society, 24, 93–109.
11. Harremoës, P. (Ed.). (2001). Late lessons from early warnings: The precautionary principle 1896– 2000. Copenhagen: European Environmental Agency.
12. Hoogma, R. (2000). Exploiting technological niches: Strategies for experimental introduction of electric vehicles. PhD dissertation, Twente University Press, Enschede.
13. Hoogma, R., Kemp, R., Schot, J., & Truffer, B. (2002). Experimenting for sustainable transport: The approach of strategic niche management. London: Spon Press.
14. Laurent, B., & van Oudheusden, M. (2013). Experimental normativity. Shifting and deepening engagement in public participation in science and technology. Manuscript, Paris: CSI, Ecole des Mines.
15. Lindblom, C. E. (1990). Inquiry and change. The troubled attempt to understand and shape society. New Haven: Yale University Press.
16. LMC, et al. (2010). (Local Monitoring Committee, Olivier Lemaire, Anne Moneyron, Jean E. Masson), “Interactive Technology Assessment” and beyond: The Field Trial of Genetically Modified Grapevines at INRA-Colmar. PLoS Biology, 8(11), separately paginated 1–7.
17. Marris, C., Rip, A., & Joly, P.-B. (2008). Interactive technology assessment in the real world: Dual dynamics in an iTA exercise on genetically modified vines’. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33(1), 77–100.
18. Ministerie van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen. (1983–1984). Integratie van Wetenschap en Technologie in de Samenleving. Beleidsnota, ‘s-Gravenhage: Tweede Kamer, 18 421, nrs. 1–2. (Policy Memorandum: Integration of Science and Technology in Society)
19. Nordmann, A., & Rip, A. (2009). Mind the gap revisited. Nature Nanotechnology, 4(May 2009), 273–274.
20. Parandian, A. (2012). Constructive TA of newly emerging technologies. Stimulating learning by anticipation through bridging events. PhD thesis, Technical University Delft, defended 12 Mar 2012.
21. Parandian, A., Rip, A., & Te Kulve, H. (2012). Dual dynamics of promises and waiting games around emerging nanotechnologies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(6), 565–582.
22. Rip, A. (1992). Between innovation and evaluation: Sociology of technology applied to technology policy and technology assessment. RISESST, 2, 39–68.
23. Rip, A. (2001a). Technology assessment. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 23, pp. 15512–15515). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Rip, A. (2001b). Assessing the impacts of innovation: New developments in technology assessment. In OECD proceedings, social sciences and innovation (pp. 197–213). Paris: OECD.
25. Rip, A. (2002, June 7). Co-evolution of science, technology and society. Expert review for the Bundesministerium Bildung and Forschung’s Förderinitiative ‘Politik, Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft’ (Science Policy Studies), managed by the Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Enschede: University of Twente.
26. Rip, A. (2006). Futures of ELSA. EMBO Reports, 10(7), 666–670.
27. Rip, A. (2010a). Protected spaces of science: Their emergence and further evolution in a changing world. In M. Carrier & A. Nordmann (Eds.), Science in the context of application: Methodological change, conceptual transformation, cultural reorientation (pp. 197–220). Dordrecht: Springer.
28. Rip, A. (2010b). De facto governance of nanotechnologies. In M. Goodwin, B.-J. Koops, & R. Leenes (Eds.), Dimensions of technology regulation (pp. 285–308). Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.
29. Rip, A. (2010c). Processes of Entanglement, in Madeleine Akrich, Yannick Barthe, Fabian Muniesa et Philippe Mustar (réd.), Débordements. Mélanges offerts à Michel Callon (pp. 381–392). Paris: Transvalor – Presses des Mines.
30. Rip, A., & Groen, A. (2001). Many visible hands. In R. Coombs, K. Green, V. Walsh, & A. Richards (Eds.), Technology and the market. Demands, users and innovation (pp. 12–37). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
31. Rip, A., & Shelley-Egan, C. (2010). Positions and responsibilities in the “real” world of nanotechnology. In R. von Schomberg & S. Davies (Eds.), Understanding public debate on nanotechnologies. Options for framing public policy (pp. 31–38). Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
32. Rip, A., & Te Kulve, H. (2008). Constructive technology assessment and sociotechnical scenarios. In E. Fisher, C. Selin, & J. M. Wetmore (Eds.), The yearbook of nanotechnology in society (Presenting futures, Vol. I, pp. 49–70). Berlin etc.: Springer.
33. Rip, A., Misa, T. J., & Schot, J. (Eds.). (1995). Managing technology in society. The approach of constructive technology assessment. London/New York: Pinter Publishers.
34. Robinson, D. K. R. (2009). Co-evolutionary scenarios: An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76, 1222–1239.
35. Robinson, D. K. R. (2010). Constructive technology assessment of emerging nanotechnologies. Experiments in interactions. Enschede: University of Twente. PhD thesis, defended 25 Nov 2010.
36. Robinson, D. K. R., & Propp, T. (2008). Multi-path mapping as a tool for reflexive alignment in emerging S&T. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(2008), 517–538.
37. Schot, J., & Rip, A. (1997). The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 54(1997), 251–268.
38. Schuurbiers, D., & Fisher, E. (2009). Lab-scale intervention. EMBO Reports, 10(5), 424–427.
39. Swierstra, T., & Rip, A. (2007). Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: Patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. NanoEthics, 1(2007), 3–20.
40. Te Kulve, H. (2011). Anticipatory interventions in the co-evolution of nanotechnology and society. PhD thesis, University of Twente, defended 21 Apr 2011.
41. Van de Poel, I. R. (1998). Changing technologies A comparative study of eight processes of transformation of technological regimes. Enschede: Twente University Press.
42. Von Schomberg, R. (2007). From the ethics of technology towards and ethics of knowledge policy. Working document of the Service of the European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/pdf/ethicsofknowledgepolicy_en.pdf