Lab Work Goes Social, and Vice Versa: Strategising Public Engagement Processes: Commentary on: “What Happens in the Lab Does Not Stay in the Lab: Applying Midstream Modulation to Enhance Critical Reflection in the Laboratory”

Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):791-800 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Midstream modulation is a form of public engagement with science which benefits from strategic application of science and technology studies (STS) insights accumulated over nearly 20 years. These have been developed from STS researchers’ involvement in practical engagement processes and research with scientists, science funders, policy and other public stakeholders. The strategic aim of this specific method, to develop what is termed second-order reflexivity amongst scientist-technologists, builds upon and advances earlier more general STS work. However this method is focused and structured so as to help generate such reflexivity—over the ‘upstream’ questions which have been identified in other STS research as important public issues for scientific research, development and innovation—amongst practising scientists-technologists in their specialist contexts (public or private, in principle). This is a different focus from virtually all such previous work, and offers novel opportunities for those key broader issues to be opened up. The further development of these promising results depends on some important conditions such as identifying and engaging research funders and other stakeholders like affected publics in similar exercises. Implementing these conditions could connect the productive impacts of midstream modulation with wider public engagement work, including with ‘uninvited’ public engagement with science. It would also generate broader institutional and political changes in the larger networks of institutional actors which constitute contemporary technoscientific innovation and governance processes. All of these various broader dimensions, far beyond the laboratory alone, need to be appropriately open, committed to democratic needs, and reflexive, for the aims of midstream modulation to be achieved, whilst allowing specialists to work as specialists

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,199

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Broad Challenge of Public Engagement in Science.Rinie Est - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):639-648.
The laboratory revisited.Robert Doubleday - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (2):167-176.
Constitutional Moments in Governing Science and Technology.Sheila Jasanoff - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):621-638.
Technologies of Democracy: Experiments and Demonstrations.Brice Laurent - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):649-666.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-10-21

Downloads
32 (#366,945)

6 months
13 (#73,249)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Midstream Modulation of Technology: Governance From Within.Carl Mitcham, Roop L. Mahajan & Erik Fisher - 2006 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 26 (6):485-496.
Plant Sciences and the Public Good.Brian Wynne, Claire Waterton, Jane Taylor & Katrina Stengel - 2009 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 34 (3):289-312.

Add more references