7 found
Order:
  1.  57
    Exploring Scientific Misconduct: Isolated Individuals, Impure Institutions, or an Inevitable Idiom of Modern Science? [REVIEW]Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2008 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (4):271-282.
    This paper identifies three distinct narratives concerning scientific misconduct: a narrative of “individual impurity” promoted by those wishing to see science self-regulated; a narrative of “institutional impropriety” promoted by those seeking greater external control of science; and a narrative of “structural crisis” among those critiquing the entire process of research itself. The paper begins by assessing contemporary definitions and estimates of scientific misconduct. It emphasizes disagreements over such definitions and estimates as a way to tease out tension and controversy over (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  2.  40
    Using Criminalization and Due Process to Reduce Scientific Misconduct.Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2005 - American Journal of Bioethics 5 (5):W1-W7.
    The issue of how to best minimize scientific misconduct remains a controversial topic among bioethicists, professors, policymakers, and attorneys. This paper suggests that harsher criminal sanctions against misconduct, better protections for whistleblowers, and the creation of due process standards for misconduct investigations are urgently needed. Although the causes of misconduct and estimates of problem remain varied, the literature suggests that scientific misconduct?fraud, fabrication, and plagiarism of scientific research?continues to damage public health and trust in science. Providing stricter criminal statutes against (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  3.  1
    Back to the Future: Small Modular Reactors, Nuclear Fantasies, and Symbolic Convergence.M. V. Ramana & Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2015 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 40 (1):96-125.
    In this article, we argue that scientists and technologists associated with the nuclear industry are building support for small modular reactors by advancing five rhetorical visions imbued with elements of fantasy that cater to various social expectations. The five visions are as follows: a vision of risk-free energy would eliminate catastrophic accidents and meltdowns. A vision of indigenous self-energization would see SMRs empowering remote communities and developing economies. A vision of water security would see SMR-powered desalination plants satisfying the world’s (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  4.  1
    Reconfiguration, Contestation, and Decline: Conceptualizing Mature Large Technical Systems.Marie Blanche Ting, Katherine Lovell & Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2018 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 43 (6):1066-1097.
    Large technical systems are integral to modern lifestyles but arduous to analyze. In this paper, we advance a conceptualization of LTS using the notion of mature “phases,” drawing from insights into innovation studies, science and technology studies, political science, the sociology of infrastructure, history of technology, and governance. We begin by defining LTS as a unit of analysis and explaining its conceptual utility and novelty, situating it among other prominent sociotechnical theories. Next, we argue that after LTS have moved through (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  9
    Climate Change and Global Energy Security: Technology and Policy Options.Marilyn A. Brown & Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2011 - MIT Press.
    An exploration of commercially available technologies that can enhance energy security and address climate change and public policy options crucial to their adoption.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  48
    Erasing Knowledge: The Discursive Structure of Globalization.Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2010 - Social Epistemology 24 (1):15 – 28.
    This article identifies two common academic discourses about globalization: that it is a “new” process unleashing fundamentally novel changes on society, and that it is an “old” process merely extending and building from previous events. Drawing from recent advances in social, cultural, and political theory, the article critiques both of these discourses and articulates four discursive themes—homogenization, aggrandizing, flexibility, and erasure—that occur in the way that both proponents and opponents conceive of globalization. Instead of treating globalization as homogeneous and all-encompassing, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7.  12
    Making the Ethical and Philosophical Case for “Energy Justice”.Benjamin R. Jones, Benjamin K. Sovacool & Roman V. Sidortsov - 2015 - Environmental Ethics 37 (2):145-168.
    A new conceptual framework, “energy justice,” provides a more comprehensive and, po­tentially, better way to assess and resolve energy-related dilemmas. This new framework of energy justice builds on four fundamental assumptions and consists of two key principles: a prohibitive principle which states that “energy systems must be designed and constructed in such a way that they do not unduly interfere with the ability of people to acquire those basic goods to which they are justly entitled,” and an affirmative principle which (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark