Democratizing science on the international scene

a debate on the concept of epistemic communities and its perspective of science in international politics

Authors

  • Nicole Aguilar Gayard Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP). Campinas, SP, Brasil.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.v13i1.3769

Keywords:

Governance in S&T, Democratization, Epistemic Communities

Abstract

This article explores the debates around calls and experiments of democratization in science and technology governance, and compares them with the perspective of science embedded in the concept of epistemic communities, as employed by International Relations theories. It emphasizes the different understandings about "Science and Technology" in each of these approaches. The review and comparison between perspectives of science provided by the Social Studies of Science and Technology and International Relations seeks to contribute to the debate of democratization and public engagement in science and technology beyond a national perspective. The article concludes by pointing to the necessity of recognizing contemporary perspectives of knowledge, as a heterogeneous field of action composed by multiple actors and networks, for an improved analysis of the role of knowledge in international politics.

 

References

BECK, U. Risk society: Towards a new modernity. [s.l.] Sage, 1992. v. 17

BUEGER, C. From Expert Communities to Epistemic Arrangements: Situating Expertise in International Relations. In: The Global Politics of Science and Technology-Vol. 1. [s.l.] Springer, 2014. p. 39–54.

BUSH, V. Science: The endless frontier. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science (1903-), v. 48, n. 3, p. 231–264, 1945.

CALLON, M.; LASCOUMES, P.; BARTHE, Y. Acting in an uncertain world. Boston, MA: MIT Press, 2010.

COLLINGRIDGE, D.; REEVE, C. Science speaks to power: The role of experts in policy making. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1986.

GERARD RUGGIE, J.; KATZENSTEIN, P. J.; KEOHANE, R. O.; SCHMITTER, P. C. Transformations in world politics: The intellectual contributions of Ernst B. Haas. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci., v. 8, p. 271–296, 2005.

GIBBONS, M.; LIMOGES, C.; NOWOTNY, H.; SCHWARTZMAN, S.; SCOTT, P.; TROW, M. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. [s.l.] Sage, 1994.

GIDDENS, A. As conseqüências da modernidade. [s.l.] unesp, 1990.

HAAS, E. B. Beyond the nation state: Functionalism and international organization. [s.l.] ECPR Press, 2008.

HAAS, P. M. Epistemic Communities and International-Policy Coordination-Introduction. MIT Press 55 Hayward St Journals Dept, Cambridge, Ma 02142, , 1992.

___. Policy Knowledge : Epistemic Communities. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. [s.l.] Elsevier, 2001. p. 11578–11586.

HAAS, P. M.; HAAS, E. B. Pragmatic constructivism and the study of international institutions. Millennium-Journal of International Studies, v. 31, n. 3, p. 573–601, 2002.

HAGENDIJK, R. O. B.; IRWIN, A. Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary europe. p. 167–184, 2006.

HORIZON 2020. What is Horizon 2020? Disponível em: <https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020>. Acesso em: 30 jan. 2017.

HORLICK-JONES, T.; WALLS, J.; ROWE, G.; PIDGEON, N.; POORTINGA, W.; MURDOCK, G.; O’RIORDAN, T. The GM debate: risks, politics and public engagement. [s.l.] Routledge, 2007.

HORST, M. In search of dialogue: staging science communication in consensus conferences. In: CHENG, D.; CLAESSENS, M.; GASCOIGNE, T.; METCALFE, J.; SCHIELE, B.; SHI, S. (Eds.). . Communicating Science in Social Context: new models, new practices. [s.l.] Springer, 2008. .

HORST, M.; IRWIN, A.; HEALEY, P.; HAGENDIJK, R. European Scientific Governance in a Global Context : Resonances , Implications and Reflections. v. 38, n. 5, p. 6–20, 2007.

IRWIN, A. The politics of talk: coming to terms with the “new”scientific governance. Social studies of science, v. 36, n. 2, p. 299–320, 2006.

___. On the local constitution of global futures. Science and democratic engagement in a decentred world. Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies, v. 3, n. 2, 2015.

JASANOFF, S. Technologies of humility. Nature, v. 450, n. 7166, p. 33, 2007.

KRASNER, S. D. International regimes. [s.l.] Cornell University Press, 1983.

LITFIN, K. Ozone discourses: science and politics in global environmental cooperation. [s.l.] Columbia University Press, 1994.

MAYER, M.; CARPES, M.; KNOBLICH, R. The global politics of science and technology: An introduction. In: The Global Politics of Science and Technology-Vol. 1. [s.l.] Springer, 2014. p. 1–35.

MEJLGAARD, N.; BLOCH, C.; DEGN, L.; RAVN, T. Monitoring Policy and Research Activities on Science in Society in Europe ( MASIS ) Final synthesis report. [s.l: s.n.].

MITRANYI, D. A working peace system. Londres: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1943.

POLANYI, M. The Republic of Science: its political and economic theory. Minerva, v. 1, n. 1, 1962.

STILGOE, J.; OWEN, R.; MACNAGHTEN, P. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy2, v. 42, n. 9, 2013.

SYKES, K.; MACNAGHTEN, P. Responsible Innovation – Opening Up Dialogue and Debate. In: Responsible Innovation. [s.l.] John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2013. p. 85–107.

Published

05/06/2017

Issue

Section

Citizen Science and Citizen Labs