While in the beginning of the environmental debate, conflicts over environmental and technological issues had primarily been understood in terms of ‘‘risk’’, over the past two decades the relevance of ignorance, or nonknowledge, was emphasized. Referring to this shift of attention to nonknowledge the article presents two main findings: first, that in debates on what is not known and how to appraise it different and partly conflicting epistemic cultures of nonknowledge can be discerned and, second, that drawing attention to nonknowledge (...) in technology conflicts results in significant institutional effects and new constellations of actors in public debates. To illustrate and substantiate this political dynamics of nonknowledge we draw upon examples from the areas of agri-biotechnology and mobile phoning. In a first step, we develop in greater detail the concept of scientific cultures of nonknowledge and identify three such cultures involved in the social conflicts within the two areas. Subsequently, we analyze the specific dynamics of the politicisation of nonknowledge looking at the variety of actors involved and the pluralisation of perceptions and evaluations of what is not known. Then, we point out some of the institutional reactions to the political and cultural dynamics of scientific nonknowledge. We argue that the equal recognition of the diverse cultures of nonknowledge is a key prerequisite for socially legitimate and ‘‘robust’’ decision-making under conditions of politicised scientific nonknowledge. (shrink)

In recent years, citizens’ and civil society engagement with science and technology has become almost synonymous with participation in institutionally organized formats of participatory technology assessment (pTA) such as consensus conferences or stakeholder dialogues. Contrary to this view, it is argued in the article that beyond these standardized models of “invited” participation, there exist various forms of “uninvited” and independent civil society engagement, which frequently not only have more significant impact but are profoundly democratically legitimate as well. Using the two (...) examples of patient associations and environmental and consumer organizations in the field of nanotechnology, it is illustrated that interest-based civil society interventions do play an important role in the polycentric governance of science and technology. In conclusion, some implications for the activities of TA institutions and the design of novel TA procedures are outlined. (shrink)

Definition of the problem The present article focuses on the current international ethical debate on “responsible implementation” of expanded carrier screening to public healthcare systems. Expanded carrier screening is a novel genetic test which aims to provide information to couples about whether both partners carry a genetic variation for the same recessively inherited condition. It was introduced to the market by commercial laboratories in the U.S. in 2010; since about 2015, however, international debates have emerged on how and why to (...) offer the screening as a public health service. Arguments It is shown that, initially, enhancement of couples’ reproductive autonomy, not prevention of recessive disorders, has been established as the ethically well-founded aim and guiding principle of responsible implementation. Recently, however, in 2019, three well-known Dutch bioethicists argued that this aim has been embraced without much reflection and should therefore be replaced with the guiding principle of “responsible parenthood”. According to the latter, autonomous reproductive decision-making of couples or women is morally acceptable solely when carrier screening is done only during pregnancy. Before pregnancy, by contrast, couples are held to have a moral duty to take preventive measures if their future children are at risk of being affected by one of the “worst” recessive conditions. In the present paper, both of these conflicting ethical framings of expanded carrier screening are critically examined. Conclusions While the aim of reproductive autonomy also has problematic aspects, the notion of “responsible parenthood” is much more objectionable since it challenges voluntary participation in carrier screening, argues for directive genetic counseling, limits reproductive self-determination of women and couples, and introduces dubious concepts to the debate. (shrink)

In recent years, citizens’ and civil society engagement with science and technology has become almost synonymous with participation in institutionally organized formats of participatory technology assessment (pTA) such as consensus conferences or stakeholder dialogues. Contrary to this view, it is argued in the article that beyond these standardized models of “invited” participation, there exist various forms of “uninvited” and independent civil society engagement, which frequently not only have more significant impact but are profoundly democratically legitimate as well. Using the two (...) examples of patient associations and environmental and consumer organizations in the field of nanotechnology, it is illustrated that interest-based civil society interventions do play an important role in the polycentric governance of science and technology. In conclusion, some implications for the activities of TA institutions and the design of novel TA procedures are outlined. (shrink)

The fact that the emergence of “technoscience,” resulting from the coalescing of science and technology, may have serious social and cultural impact has been debated in recent years particularly with regard to the field of medicine. The present article is exploring the scope and limits of the “technoscientization” of medicine using the example of rare disease patient associations. It is investigated whether and to what extent these organizations adopt technoscientific illness identities and subscribe to the research priorities and objectives of (...) biomedicine. In addition, it is analyzed whether Paul Rabinow’s highly influential concept of biosociality entails a technoscientific model of identity or, quite to the contrary, offers a framework for contesting biomedical ascriptions of identities. As the article shows, patient associations do refer to technoscientific definitions of diseases yet constantly modify and transform them based on their everyday illness experiences. Likewise, the “biosociality” of rare disease patients emerges from the shared experience of having been neglected by mainstream medical research rather than from supposedly objective biomedical classifications. (shrink)

In recent years, citizens’ and civil society engagement with science and technology has become almost synonymous with participation in institutionally organized formats of participatory technology assessment such as consensus conferences or stakeholder dialogues. Contrary to this view, it is argued in the article that beyond these standardized models of “invited” participation, there exist various forms of “uninvited” and independent civil society engagement, which frequently not only have more significant impact but are profoundly democratically legitimate as well. Using the two examples (...) of patient associations and environmental and consumer organizations in the field of nanotechnology, it is illustrated that interest-based civil society interventions do play an important role in the polycentric governance of science and technology. In conclusion, some implications for the activities of TA institutions and the design of novel TA procedures are outlined. (shrink)

Die Wissenschaften erzeugen mit neuem Wissen gleichzeitig auch verschiedene Formen des Nichtwissens. Dieser scheinbar paradoxe Zusammenhang der "Ko-Produktion" von Wissen und Nichtwissen wird in der Wissenschaftsforschung in jungster Zeit zunehmend anerkannt. Mit dem Konzept "Nichtwissenskulturen" lasst sich sowohl theoretisch begreifen als auch empirisch analysieren, wie wissenschaftliche Erkenntnispraktiken mit dem Wissen zugleich neue Raume gewussten wie nicht-gewussten Nichtwissens hervorbringen. Wissenskulturen sind daher auch Nichtwissenskulturen, die sich anhand spezifischer Charakteristika ebenso voneinander unterscheiden wie vergleichen lassen. Die unterschiedlichen Nichtwissenskulturen stellen wichtige Bezugspunkte in (...) den offentlich-politischen Debatten uber den Umgang mit Nichtwissen dar. In diesen Nichtwissensdiskursen kann die Anerkennung einer Pluralitat gleichrangiger Nichtwissenskulturen wichtige neue Perspektiven und Reaktionsmoglichkeiten eroffnen. Mit Beitragen von Stefan Boschen, Karen Kastenhofer, Jens Soentgen, Peter Wehling. (shrink)

Since the 1980s the concepts of “neoliberalism” and “technoscience,” although both of them were coined earlier, have almost simultaneously become rather prominent conceptual tools in various fields of social science research. The starting point of Neoliberalism and Technoscience: Critical Assessments, edited by Luigi Pellizzoni and Marja Ylönen, is the assumption that this temporal overlap is not just a coincidence and that it would be “quite surprising, then, to find no or merely casual connections between neoliberalization processes and technoscience” . There (...) is already some work in science and technology studies and the sociology of science investigating the impact of neoliberalism on science, frequently focusing on the management of scientific institutions; in addition, there are a number of studies, often inspired by Michel Foucault’s work on biopolitics and governmentality, on the close relations of science and neoliberalism in the field of biomedicine .. (shrink)

Long description: Ignoranz, Unwissenheit und vor allem bewusstes Nicht-Wissen-Wollen gelten in den heutigen ”Wissensgesellschaften“ nach wie vor als anstößig. Nichtwissen wird als schnellstens zu behebender Mangel an vermeintlich unverzichtbarem Wissen begriffen. Aus Sicht verschiedener Disziplinen rücken die Beiträge dieses Bandes demgegenüber den vielfältigen Nutzen des Nichtwissens in unterschiedlichen sozialen Kontexten ins Licht - ohne dessen Nachteile zu bestreiten. Sie zeigen: Aktives Nichtwissen schützt uns vor Informationsüberflutung, vor belastendem Wissen und falschen Eindeutigkeiten, kann aber auch strategisch zum eigenen Vorteil genutzt werden.