David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):699-714 (2011)
Engagement with stakeholders and civil society is increasingly important for new scientific and technological developments. Preparation of such engagements sets the stage for engagement activities and thus contributes to their outcomes. Preparation is a demanding task, particularly if the facilitating agent aims for timely engagement related to emerging technologies. Requirements for such preparation include understanding of the emerging science & technology and its dynamics. Multi-level analysis and socio-technical scenarios are two complementary tools for constructing productive engagement. Examination of the emergence of nanotechnologies in the food packaging sector demonstrates how these tools work. In light of recent policy demands for responsible innovation, but also more generally, the role of organizers of engagement activities is one that deserves reflection insofar as it can extend beyond that of preparation and facilitation
|Keywords||Engagement Pre-engagement Multi-level dynamics Anticipatory co-ordination Nanotechnology Scenarios|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Shannon N. Conley (2011). Engagement Agents in the Making: On the Front Lines of Socio-Technical Integration. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):715-721.
Kristen Lyons & James Whelan (2010). Community Engagement to Facilitate, Legitimize and Accelerate the Advancement of Nanotechnologies in Australia. Nanoethics 4 (1):53-66.
Tee Rogers-Hayden, Alison Mohr & Nick Pidgeon (2007). Introduction: Engaging with Nanotechnologies – Engaging Differently? [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (2):123-130.
Michelle Greenwood (2007). Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4):315 - 327.
Terry L. Besser (2012). Inside the Black Box: College Graduation and Civic Engagement. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 10 (4):313-325.
Shelby L. Sheppard (2011). School Engagement: A 'Danse Macabre'? Journal of Philosophy of Education 45 (1):111-123.
Matthew Kearnes & Brian Wynne (2007). On Nanotechnology and Ambivalence: The Politics of Enthusiasm. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (2):131-142.
Susanne Sleenhoff Daan Schuurbiers, F. Jacobs Johannes & Patricia Osseweijer (2009). Multidisciplinary Engagement with Nanoethics Through Education—the Nanobio-Raise Advanced Courses as a Case Study and Model. Nanoethics 3 (3).
Daan Schuurbiers, Susanne Sleenhoff, Johannes Jacobs & Patricia Osseweijer (2009). Multidisciplinary Engagement with Nanoethics Through Education—The Nanobio-RAISE Advanced Courses as a Case Study and Model. Nanoethics 3 (3):197-211.
Brice Laurent (2011). Technologies of Democracy: Experiments and Demonstrations. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):649-666.
Carine Girard & André Sobczak (2012). Towards a Model of Corporate and Social Stakeholder Engagement: Analyzing the Relations Between a French Mutual Bank and Its Members. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 107 (2):215-225.
Nancy Grudens-Schuck (2000). Conflict and Engagement: An Empirical Study of a Farmer-Extension Partnership in a Sustainable Agriculture Program. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (1):79-100.
Alison Mohr (2011). Publics in the Making: Mediating Different Methods of Engagement and the Publics These Construct. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):667-672.
Wim Vandekerckhove, Jos Leys & Dirk Van Braeckel (2008). A Speech-Act Model for Talking to Management. Building a Framework for Evaluating Communication Within the Sri Engagement Process. Journal of Business Ethics 82 (1):77 - 91.
Added to index2011-09-10
Total downloads9 ( #126,760 of 1,010,216 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,700 of 1,010,216 )
How can I increase my downloads?