The state of Science in Society research

1
The state of Science in Society research

• Arie Rip(University of Twente)

2
Not just the SiS program

• Science (and Technoscience) in Society
• Science Technology Studies (including history
  and philosophy)
• Science, Technology and Society studies
• Science, Technology and Innovation Policy studies
  ( Governance)
• Label SiS/STS
• Core journals like Social Studies of Science and
  Research Policy, and new journals a blossoming
  field

3
Ambivalent reception

• SiS/STS often starts by undermining received
  opinions(cf. rather than searching for a
  solution, we need to reframe the question ),
• before it outlines better insights and approaches
• If audiences just hear the undermining, they may
  turn away, and not wait to listen to the useful
  insights

4
Ambivalent production

• SiS/STS scholars may get carried away by their
  message about neglect of the real issues, and
  just criticize (in their own inimitable jargon)
• Example Report of EU expert group on Science and
  Governance (Taking the European Knowledge Society
  Seriously)
• I am guilty as well of getting carried away

5
Science in Society Programme

• Impressive record of high-quality studies
• Uncovering assumptions, but not always achieving
  the next step, better insights and approaches
• Trying to reach audiences (e.g. brochures showing
  findings/insights)
• ESRC support (SiS and other programmes) was
  important to maintain SiS/STS research, when the
  UKs earlier lead in the field had gone

6
So what to do next?(to regain the lead?)

• ESRC, also other sponsors (DTI, charitable
  foundations), each with their specific interests
• The SiS/STS (overlapping) communities themselves
• But also mainstreaming of STS its approach is
  taken up in many scholarly domains, including
  business studies ( diaspora)

7
Mainstreaming concentration

• Dispersion and wider uptake is OK, and important
  to translate SiS/STS to be directly relevant
• But quality control and cumulative developments
  need concentrated effort so there must be core
  STS, somewhat protected
• Who will be responsible for maintaining a core
  STS presence?

8
Who is to maintain core SiS/STS?

• STS communities themselves
• Sponsors? (cf. example of German BMBF)
• Patchwork of actions rather than a concerted
  approach (esp. for UK)
• forum type meetings, twice a year, to discuss
  findings, further questions challenges(Six
  Countries Program as a model?)

9
Perspectives, directions to go

• First how science is done in the real world, and
  the diversity of approaches and frameworks
• Insights, from Thomas Kuhn to Bruno Latour
• Science, as well as the real world are changing
  how to diagnose changes?
• New mode of knowledge production (Gibbons,
  Nowotny) entrance point, not a final answer

10
Re-contextualization of science
Patient associations influence research agendas
and engage in research themselves, undermining
the exclusive rights of scientists
Technology Assessment, Ethical, Legal Social
Aspects surround ongoing science and technology
(Human Genome Project initiated this)
Outreach, public engagement feedback into
research agendas? (ex. interactive TA of GM
vines)
Also consultancies (and NGOs) bridging science
and the economy, science and the community
Increasing interactions between science and
society
1870
1945
1970
Authority over science (knowledge production) is
also claimed by non-scientists (from USA
Congressmen to patients and indigenous people)
counter-authority is not the answer.
1985
2000
11
Second What comes after deficit models?

• Deficit models about publics having to understand
  science, having to accept technoscientific
  promises (so talking down)
• Upstream public engagement (now fashionable in
  UK) is only a partial answer
• What is actually out there? Cf. SiS projects
• Connoisseurship rather than participation
• Midstream (and downstream) engagement, linked to
  actual decision making (example of French INRA)

12
Third Governance issues

• One example role of expertise.
• Separate from management decision making (cf.
  risk analysis separate from risk management)?
• In practice, always entangled. So inquire into
  productive entanglements
• SiS/STS studies have shown entanglement, new task
  is to find out how to be more productive

13
nano-development and society two separate worlds?
society
nano RD
uptake in society
innovation
enacting nano-promises
14
responsible development of nanotechnology
perceptions, culture
upstream public engagement
society
outreach
ELSA, Constructive TA
regulation
acceptance
nano RD
uptake in society
innovation
enacting nano-promises
15
coordination, soft (and hard) governance
perceptions, culture
upstream public engagement
society
outreach
soft structures
ELSA, Constructive TA
regulation
acceptance
soft law
anticipation
co-learning
nano RD
uptake in society
innovation
enacting nano-promises
16
Next steps (after SiS program)

• SiS program, with its projects and its strong
  diagnosis (cf. brochures), is itself part of a
  larger development
• Science technology in society are becoming more
  reflexive (including public scrutiny and
  accountability)
• SiS/STS studies trace such developments, but can
  also improve, and co-construct
• That requires receptivity in the real world, and
  rethinking of the message of SiS/STS

17
Concretely? In the UK?

• Lots of such interactions are going on already
• For concrete issues, there is receptivity and
  often sponsorship for dedicated research and
  reflection
• Challenge is how to support/maintain the
  necessary scholarly competencies, network
  interactions and assurance of quality control
• Need to create an alliance for SiS/STS