No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this paper we explore new avenues of analysis on the thorny issue of the impact of participatory technology assessment (PTA). We apply qualitative comparative analysis to data abstracted from a series of detailed country case studies of policy-making on xenotransplantation to explore which factors are decisive for policy outcomes. Contrary to our expectations that PTAs would contribute to restrictive policy outcomes, we find that this is not the case and that a combination of politicisation and public vigilance is pivotal to explaining policy outcomes. Further, our analysis was symmetrical in attempting to account for both permissive and restrictive policies. We conclude that the paper makes both a substantial and a methodological contribution to the literature on public participation in technology assessment and policy-making.

No abstract

Citizen participation in terms of participatory technology assessment (PTA) has caused a lot of debate in science and technology policy. However, there are still many open questions: What is the actual impact of PTA on policy-making? On which normative theory of democracy is the evaluation of PTA based and does it make a difference which theory is used? Which framework is appropriate to evaluate the often fuzzy impact of PTA on policy-making? Is PTA actually a central element for policy-making or are other factors much more relevant such as politicians' involvement or the presence of industry interests? What is the 'nature' of the public in different national and institutional contexts? How are expectations of policy-makers played out in the perceived need for regulation? These issues are addressed in a series of comparative papers in this issue which focus on the regulation of xenotransplantation in the 1990s and early 2000s.