Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-6992-201934020009Keywords:
Citizen participation, science and technology governance, expertise, technologies of humility, riskAbstract
Building on recent theories of science in society, such as that provided by the ‘Mode 2’ framework, this paper argues that governments should reconsider existing relations among decision-makers, experts, and citizens in the management of technology. Policy-makers need a set of ‘technologies of humility’ for systematically assessing the unknown and the uncertain. Appropriate focal points for such modest assessments are framing, vulnerability, distribution, and learning.
Downloads
References
BECK, Ulrich. Risk society: towards a new modernity. London: Sage, 1992. [ Links ]
BIMBER, Bruce. The politics of expertise in Congress: the rise and fall of the Office of Technology Assessment. Albany (NY): State University of New York Press, 1996. [ Links ]
BOEHMER-CHRISTIANSEN, Sonja. Global climate protection policy: the limits of scientific advice, parts 1 and 2. Global Environmental Change, v. 4, n. 2, p. 140-159, 1994; v. 4, n. 3, p. 185-200, 1994. [ Links ]
BUSH, Vannevar. Science - the endless frontier. Washington (DC): US Government Printing Office, 1945. [ Links ]
CAMPBELL, Philip. Nature regrets publication of corn study. The Washington Times, 5 Apr. 2002. Disponível em: <http://www.washingtontimes. com/national/200 20405-9384015.htm>. [ Links ]
CLARKE, Lee. Acceptable risk? Making decisions in a toxic environment. Berkeley (CA): University of California Press, 1989. [ Links ]
COMISSÃO EUROPEIA. Comunicação da Comissão Europeia sobre saúde e segurança do consumidor, p. 183, 1997, COM (97). Disponível em: <http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/index_en.html>. [ Links ]
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12298. “Federal actions to address enviromental justice in minority populations and low-income populations”. Washington (DC): White House, 11 Feb. 1994. [ Links ]
FUNTOWICZ, Silvio O.; Ravetz, Jerome R. Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post normal science. In: KRIMSKYE, Sheldon; GOLDING, Dominic (Orgs.). Social theories of risk. New York: Praeger, 1992. [ Links ]
EWENE, Stanley W. B.; PUSZTAI, Arpad. Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthusnivalis lectin on rat small intestine. Lancet, n. 354, p. 1353-1354, 1999. [ Links ]
GIBBONS, Michael; LIMOGES, Camille; NOWOTNY, Helga; SCHWARTZMAN, Simon, SCOTT, Peter; TROW, Martin. The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies, London: Sage, 1994. [ Links ]
GRAHAM, John D.; WIENER, Jonathan B. (Orgs.). Risk versus risk: tradeoffs in protecting health and the environment, Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 1995. [ Links ]
GREENBERG, Daniel S. Science, money, and politics: political triumph and ethical erosion, Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 2001. [ Links ]
GUSTON, David H. Between politics and science: assuring the integrity and productivity of research. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 2001. [ Links ]
IRWIN, Alan; WYNNE, Brian (Orgs.). Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 1996. [ Links ]
JASANOFF, Sheila. The fifth branch: science advisers as policy-makers, Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 1990. [ Links ]
JASANOFF, Sheila; MARKLE, Gerald E.; PETERSEN, James C.; PINCH, Trevor (Orgs.). Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage, 1995. [ Links ]
JOSS, Simon; DURANT, John (Ed.). Public participation in science: the role of consensus conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum, 1995. [ Links ]
KEVLES, Daniel J. The Baltimore case: a trial of politics, science, and character. New York: Norton, 1998. [ Links ]
LOSEY, John E.; RAYOR, L. S.; CARTER, M. E. Transgenic Pollen Harms Monarch Larvae. Nature, n. 399, 1999. [ Links ]
NOWOTNY, Helga; SCOTT, Peter; GIBBONS, Michael. Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge (UK): Polity, 2001. [ Links ]
PERROW, Charles. Normal accidents: living with high risk technologies. New York: Basic Books, 1984. [ Links ]
PORTER, Theodore M. Trust in numbers: the pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press, 1995. [ Links ]
PRICE, Don K. The scientific estate. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 1965. [ Links ]
SERVICE, Robert F. Seed-sterilizing “Terminator Technology” sows discord. Science, n. 282, p. 850-851, 1998. [ Links ]
SCHON, Donald A.; REIN, Martin. Frame reflection: toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books, 1994. [ Links ]
SHORT, James F.; CLAKE, Lee (Eds.). Organizations, uncertainties, and risk. Boulder (CO): Westview Press, 1992. [ Links ]
STERN, Paul C.; FINEBERG, Harvey V. (Eds.). Understanding risk: informing decisions in a democratic society. Washington (DC): National Academy of Science Press, 1995. [ Links ]
STOKES, Donald E. Pasteur’s quadrant: basic science and technological innovation. Washington (DC): Brookings Institution, 1997. [ Links ]
VAUGHAN, Diane. The challenger launch decision: risk technology, culture, and deviance at Nasa. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 1996. [ Links ]
WINNER, Langdon. On not hitting the tar baby. In: WINNER, Langdon (Org.). The whale and the reactor: a search for limits in an age of high technology, p. 138-154. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 1986.