The deliberative turn in social studies of science and technology and its reflections on the new innovation regimen
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.v8i1.467Keywords:
Democracy, Participation, Technology Assessment, Innovation, Social TechnologiesAbstract
From the identification of a ´deliberative turn´ in Science and Technology Studies (STS), it is possible to point out reflections in some innovation studies and practices. This article proposes two categories of public engagement: the first one, born in the STS, aims mostly at the technology producers, while the second centers the analysis on the innovation users. Although each category is divergent about its institutional settings and purposes, they are complementary conceptual frameworks that can be particularly useful in policy making for the development of Social Innovations or Technologies.
References
BERRY, D. M. Copy, rip, burn: the politics of copyleft and open source. London: Pluto Press, 2008.
CALLON, M.; LASCOUMES, P.; BARTHE, Y. Acting in an uncertain world: an essay on technical democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2009.
CHESBROUGH, H. W. Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2003.
COLLINS, H. M.; EVANS, R. The third wave of science studies: studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, v. 32, n. 2, p. 235-296, 2002.
DAGNINO, R.; BRANDÃO, F. C.; NOVAES, H. T. Sobre o marco -conceitual da tecnologia social. In: PAULO, A. D.; MELLO, C. J. et al (Ed.). Tecnologia social: uma para o desenvolvimento. Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Banco do Brasil, 2004.
ENKEL, E.; GASSMANN, O.; CHESBROUGH, H. Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management, v. 39, n. 4, p. 311-316, 2009.
FRANKE, N.; VON HIPPEL, E.; SCHREIER, M. Finding commercially attractive user innovations: a test of lead-user theory*. Journal of Product Innovation Management, v. 23, n. 4, p. 301-315, 2006.
GENUS, A. Rethinking constructive technology assessment as democratic, reflective, discourse. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 73, n. 1, p. 13-26, 2006.
GODIN, B. T. Innovation: the history of a category. [S.l.: s.n.], 2008. Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation Working Paper. V. 1.
GUSTON, D. H.; SAREWITZ, D. Real time technolgy assessment. Technology in Society, v. 23, n. 4, p. 1-17, 2001.
HENKEL, J.; VON HIPPEL, E. Welfare implications of user innovation. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003.
INVERNIZZI, N. Science policy and social inclusion: advances and limits of brazilian nanotechnology policy. In: COZZENS, S. E.; WETMORE, J. M. (Ed.). Yearbook of nanotechnology in society: nanotechnology and the challenges of equity, equality and development. New York: Springer, 2011. V. 2. Cap. 18, p.291-318.
INSTITUTO DE TECNOLOGIAS SOCIAIS - ITS. sobre a do conceito de tecnologia social. In: PAULO, A. D.; MELLO, C. J. et al (Ed.). Tecnologia social: uma para o desenvolvimento. Rio de Janeiro: Banco do Brasil, 2004. IRWIN, A. The politics of talk. Social Studies of Science, v. 36, n. 2, p. 299-320, Apr. 2006.
JASANOFF, S. Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva, v. 41, p. 223-244, 2003.
JOLY, P.-B.; KAUFMANN, A. Lost in translation?: the need for ‘Upstream Engagement’ with nanotechnology on trial. Science as Culture, v. 17, n. 3, p. 225-247, 2008.
LATOUR, B. Science in action: sixth. Massachussets: Harvard University Press, 1987.
NAHUIS, R.; VAN LENTE, H. Where are the politics?: perspectives on democracy and technology. Science Technology and Human Values, v. 33, n. 5, p. 559-581, 2008.
PEREIRA, T. S. et al. Parlamento, conhecimento científico e deliberação: dois estudos de caso no parlamento português. In: JORNADAS LATINO-AMERICANAS DE ESTUDOS SOCIAIS DAS CIÊNCIAS E DAS TECNOLOGIAS, 7., 2008, Rio de Janeiro. Anais... Rio de Janeiro: [s.n.], 2008.
PINCH, T.; BIJKER, W. The social construction of facts and artifacts: or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In: BIJKER, W.; HUGHES, T. et al (Ed.). The social construction of technological systems. [S.l.]: MIT Press, 1989. p.17-50.
RIP, A. Assessing the impact of innovation: new developments in technology assessment. In: OECD (Ed.). OECD Proceedings: Social Sciences and Innovation. Paris, 2001. p.197-213.
RIP, A. Technology assessment as part of the co-evolution of nanotechnology and society: the thrust of the TA Program in NanoNed: nanotechnology in science, economy and society. Marburg: [s.n.], 2005.
RODRIGUES, I.; BARBIERI, J. C. A emergência da tecnologia social: revisitando o movimento da tecnologia apropriada como estratégia de desenvolvimento sustentável. Revista de Administração Pública, v. 42, p. 1069-1094, 2008.
SALLES-FILHO, S.; BIN, A.; FERRO, A. F. P. Abordagens abertas e as implicações para a gestão de C,T&I. Conhecimento e Inovação, v. 4, n. 1, 2008.
SANTOS, B. D. S.; AVRITZER, L. Para ampliar o cânone democrático. In: SANTOS, B. D. S. (Ed.). Democratizar a democracia: os caminhos da democracia participativa. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 2002. p.39-82.
SCHOT, J. Towards New forms of participatory technology development. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, v. 13, n. 1, p. 39-52, 2001.
SCHOT, J. ; RIP, A. The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 54, n. 2-3, p. 251-268, 1997.
SILVA, F. Democracia deliberativa: avaliando seus limites. In: CONGRESSO DA ASSOCIAÇÃO PORTUGUESA DE CIÊNCIA POLÍTICA, 2., 2004. Anais... [S.l.]: Fundação Calouste Gulbeikian 2004.
THORPE, C. Participation as post-fordist politics: demos, new labour, and science policy. Minerva, v. 48, n. 4, p. 389-411, 2010.
VON HIPPEL, E. Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2005.
WILSDON, J.; WILLIS, R. See-through science: why public engagement needs to move upstream. [S.l.: s.n.], 2004.
WINNER, L. Do artifacts have politics?. In: MACKENZIE, D. E. A. (Ed.). The social shaping of technology. Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1983.
WYNNE, B. Misunderstood misunderstanding: social identities and public uptake of science. Public Understanding of Science, v. 1, n. 3, p. 281-304, 1992.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Paulo Fonseca
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant Liinc em Revista the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors have permission and are encouraged to deposit their manuscripts and versios of record (VoR) in their personal web pages or institutional repositories, generic repositories etc., before (pre-print) or after (post-print) the publication in Liinc em Revista, according to its open access depositing policy registered in the Directory of Editorial Policies of Brazilian Journals (DIADORIM), kindly providing a link to the article published on Liinc's website.
Liinc em Revista, published by Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License – CC BY 4.0 
