Risk, science and public communication: Third-order thinking about scientific culture

Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 199-212

  Irwin, Alan ^a  

^a Department of International Economics and Management   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85136803940     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203928240-20     Document Type: Chapter

References (48)

1. Epstein, S. (1996) Impure Science: AIDS, Activism and the Politics of Knowledge, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
2. House of Lords, Select Committee on Science and Technology (2000) Science and Society, London:Stationery Office.
3. Irwin, A. (1995) Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development, London:Routledge.
4. Jasanoff, S. (2005) Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. Leach, M., Scoones, I. and Wynne, B. (eds) (2005) Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement, London/New York: Zed Books.
6. Stilgoe, J., Irwin, A. and Jones, K. (2006) The Received Wisdom: Opening Up Expert Advice, London: Demos.
7. Bauman, Z. (1991) Modernity and Ambivalence, Cambridge: Polity Press.
8. Beck, U. (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, London: Sage.
9. Blok, A. (2007) ‘Experts on public trial: on democratizing expertise through a Danish consensus conference’, Public Understanding of Science, 16: 163-82.
10. Bloor, M. (2000) ‘The South Wales Miners Federation: miners’ lung and the instrumental use of expertise, 1900-1950', Social Studies of Science, 30: 125-40.
11. Brown, P. (1987) ‘Popular epidemiology: community response to toxic waste induced disease in Woburn Massachusetts’, Science, Technology and Human Values, 12: 76-85.
12. DTI (2000) Excellence and Opportunity: A Science and Innovation Policy for the 21st Century, London:Department of Trade and Industry/Stationery Office.
13. Dryzek, J. S. (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations, Oxford:Oxford University Press.
14. Epstein, S. (1996) Impure Science: AIDS, Activism and the Politics of Knowledge, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
15. European Commission (2002) Science and Society Action Plan, http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/science-society/pdf/ss_ap_en.pdf
16. Ezrahi, Y. (1990) The Descent of Icarus: Science and the Transformation of Contemporary Democracy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Cambridge:Polity Press.
18. Habermas, J. (1978) Towards a Rational Society, London: Heinemann.
19. Hagendijk, R. and Irwin, A. (2006) ‘Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe’, Minerva, 44: 167-84.
20. Hagendijk, R., Healey, P., Horst, M. and Irwin, A. (2005) Report on the STAGE Project: Science, Technology and Governance in Europe, STAGE, www.stage-research.net
21. Heller, R. (2003) GM Nation? The Findings of the Public Debate, London: Department of Trade and Industry.
22. Horst, M. (2003) ‘Controversy and collectivity - articulations of social and natural order in mass mediated representations of biotechnology’, PhD thesis, Copenhagen Business School, Doctoral School on Knowledge and Management, Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy.
23. House of Commons, Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (2003) Conduct of the GM Public Debate, 18th Report of Session 2002-2003, London: Stationery Office.
24. House of Lords, Select Committee on Science and Technology (2000) Science and Society, London:Stationery Office.
25. Irwin, A. (1995) Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development, London:Routledge.
26. Irwin, A. (2001) ‘Constructing the scientific citizen: science and democracy in the biosciences’, Public Understanding of Science, 10: 1-18.
27. Irwin, A. (2006a) ‘The politics of talk: coming to terms with the “new” scientific governance’, Social Studies of Science, 36: 299-320.
28. Irwin, A. (2006b) ‘The global context for risk governance: national regulatory policy in an international framework’, in Bennett, B. and Tomossy, G. (eds) Globalization and Health: Challenges for Health Law and Bioethics, Amsterdam: Springer, 71-85.
29. Irwin, A. and Wynne, B. (eds) (1996) Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Jasanoff, S. (1990) The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Jasanoff, S. (2005) Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
32. Jensen, C. B. (2005) ‘Citizen projects and consensus building at the Danish Board of Technology:on experiments in democracy’, Acta Sociologica, 48: 221-35.
33. Jones, K. E. (2004) ‘BSE and the Phillips report: a cautionary tale about the update of “risk”, in Stehr, N. (ed.) The Governance of Knowledge, New Brunswick/London: Transaction Publishers: 161-86.
34. Kearnes, M., Macnaghten, P. and Wilsdon, J. (2006) Governing at the Nanoscale: People, Policies and Emerging Technologies, London: Demos.
35. Kerr, A., Cunningham-Burley, S. and Amos, A. (1998) ‘The new human genetics: mobilizing lay expertise’, Public Understanding of Science, 7: 41-60.
36. Leach, M., Scoones, I. and Wynne, B. (eds) (2005) Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement, London/New York: Zed Books.
37. Mouffe, C. (1993) The Return of the Political, London/New York: Verso.
38. Mouffe, C. (2000) The Democratic Paradox, London/New York: Verso.
39. Phillips, Lord, Bridgeman, J. and Ferguson-Smith, M. (2000) The BSE Inquiry: The Report, London: Stationery Office, www.bseinquiry.gov.uk
40. Rawls, J. (1972) A Theory of Justice, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
41. Rowe, G. and Frewer, L. (2005) ‘A typology of public engagement mechanisms’, Science, Technology and Human Values, 30: 251-90.
42. RCEP (1998) Setting Environmental Standards: 21st Report, London: Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution/Stationery Office.
43. RS/RAE (2004) Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties, RS policy document 19/04, London: Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering.
44. Stilgoe, J., Irwin, A. and Jones, K. (2006) The Received Wisdom: Opening Up Expert Advice, London: Demos.
45. Understanding Risk Team (2004) An Independent Evaluation of the GM Nation? Public Debate about the Possible Commercialisation of Transgenic Crops in Britain, 2003, Understanding Risk working paper 04-02, www.risks.org.uk
46. Wilsdon, J. and Willis, R. (2004) See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream, London: Demos.
47. Wynne, B. (1995) ‘Public understanding of science’, in Jasanoff, S., Markle, G. E., Petersen, J. C. and Pinch, T. (eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 361-88.
48. Wynne, B. (2002) ‘Risk and environment as legitimatory discourses of technology: reflexivity inside out?', Current Sociology, 50: 459-77.