Participation in 'big style': first observations at the German citizens' dialogue on future technologies [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
Poiesis and Praxis 9 (1-2):81-99 (2012)
|Abstract||In 2010, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research started a series of citizens’ dialogues on future technologies. In the context of the German history of public participation in technology-oriented policy making, these dialogues are unique for at least two reasons: The Federal Ministry retains the responsibility for the entire process and is heavily involved in its planning, organization and communication, and the number of participants and process elements is significantly higher than in most other participative events. The paper presents insights into the political background of the citizens’ dialogues, its general concept as well as first observations from the dialogue rounds on energy and high-tech medicine. In addition, it discusses reactions of other political actors and expectations regarding legitimacy and representativeness of the dialogue results|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Timur Kuran (1998). Insincere Deliberation and Democratic Failure. Critical Review 12 (4):529-544.
Sarah Fine (2011). Democracy, Citizenship and the Bits in Between. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (5):623-640.
Ulrike Felt & Maximilian Fochler (2010). Machineries for Making Publics: Inscribing and De-Scribing Publics in Public Engagement. Minerva 48 (3):219-238.
Christoph Stückelberger (2009). Dialogue Ethics: Ethical Criteria and Conditions for a Successful Dialogue Between Companies and Societal Actors. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 84 (3):329 - 339.
Nicholas Saul (ed.) (2002). Philosophy and German Literature, 1700-1990. Cambridge University Press.
Susanne Benöhr-Laqueur (2011). Fighting in the Legal Grey Area: An Analysis of the German Federal Court of Justice Decision in Case Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis. Poiesis and Praxis 8 (1):3-8.
Heidrun Åm (2011). Trust as Glue in Nanotechnology Governance Networks. Nanoethics 5 (1):115-128.
Michael Zschiesche (2012). Assessing Project Approval Procedures as Formalised Forms of Public Participation. Poiesis and Praxis 9 (1-2):145-156.
Michael Decker & Torsten Fleischer (2010). When Should There Be Which Kind of Technology Assessment? A Plea for a Strictly Problem-Oriented Approach From the Very Outset. Poiesis and Praxis 7 (1-2):117-133.
Armin Grunwald (2004). Participation as a Means of Enhancing the Legitimacy of Decisions on Technology? A Sceptical Analysis. Poiesis and Praxis 3 (s 1-2):106-122.
Niklas Gudowsky, Walter Peissl, Mahshid Sotoudeh & Ulrike Bechtold (2012). Forward-Looking Activities: Incorporating Citizens' Visions. Poiesis and Praxis 9 (1-2):101-123.
Françoise Baylis & Matthew Herder (2009). Policy Design for Human Embryo Research in Canada: An Analysis (Part 2 of 2). [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (3):351-365.
Brice Laurent (2011). Technologies of Democracy: Experiments and Demonstrations. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):649-666.
Jeremy Waldron (1998). Participation: The Right of Rights. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 98 (3):307–337.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-11-16
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?