Untitled

Pestré, Dominique

doi:10.1023/a:1025553311412

Cited by 148 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the fact that many scientists see their work as apolitical, science in practice is not free of power relations: scientific agendas are often shaped by economic interests and government priorities (Atkinson-Grosjean 2002;Pestre 2003;Kleinman 2003;Blumenthal 2003;Mirowski 2011). Societal challenges to dominant techno-scientific agendas are themselves often regarded as significant political and policy challenges.…”

Section: Political-economic Context: the Politics Of Scientific Fieldsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reflexive scientist: an approach to transforming public engagement

Salmon

Priestley

Goven³

2015

J Environ Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Calls for greater public engagement with science (PES) are widespread, but there appears to be little agreement on the meaning and purpose of engagement across the various actors calling for it. This reflects a persistent gulf between PES scholars and scientists communicating with the public. We argue that direct engagement between PES scholars and scientist-communicators could, by facilitating greater reflexivity, lead to a step-change in the calibre and clarity of activities that are designed to support enhanced public engagement with science and technology. In this paper, we, as authors beginning from different perspectives, explore the potential of, and barriers to, a conversation between critical social scientists and members of the science community about public engagement. We demonstrate how and why the PES literature does not Bspeak for itself^to scientists but provides a starting point for conversation rather than a substitute for it. We then explore what reflexivity might mean for PES and argue for three important foci: political-economic context or politics of the field; institutional context; and personal assumptions. We then discuss barriers to, as well as strategies for, fostering such reflexivity, concluding that new models of authorship and publication are needed if this promise is to be fulfilled.

show abstract

Section: Political-economic Context: the Politics Of Scientific Fieldsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reflexive scientist: an approach to transforming public engagement

Salmon

Priestley

Goven³

2015

J Environ Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The encroachment of neoliberal values in the organization of innovation extended beyond the competitiveness coalition; in fact, it reached the very regime of knowledge production including researchers themselves (Nedeva and Boden 2006; Pestre 2003, 2005). The transition to the new mode of knowledge production, or “Mode 2,” is characterized by greater attention to the context of application (Gibbons et al 1994; Nowotny, Scott, and Gibbons 2001).…”

Section: The Changing Terms Of the Bayh-dole Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

The Stakes in Bayh-Dole: Public Values Beyond the Pace of Innovation

Valdivia

2011

Minerva

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation studies of the Bayh-Dole Act are generally concerned with the pace of innovation or the transgressions to the independence of research. While these concerns are important, I propose here to expand the range of public values considered in assessing Bayh-Dole and formulating future reforms. To this end, I first examine the changes in the terms of the Bayh-Dole debate and the drift in its design. Neoliberal ideas have had a definitive influence on U.S. innovation policy for the last thirty years, including legislation to strengthen patent protection. Moreover, the neoliberal policy agenda is articulated and justified in the interest of “competitiveness.” Rhetorically, this agenda equates competitiveness with economic growth and this with the public interest. Against that backdrop, I use Public Value Failure criteria to show that values such as political equality, transparency, and fairness in the distribution of the benefits of innovation, are worth considering to counter the “policy drift” of Bayh-Dole.

show abstract

“…Under labels such as ‘entrepreneurial science’ (Etzkowitz 1998), Post-Academic Science (Ziman 2000), and Mode 2 knowledge production (Gibbons et al 1994; Nowotny et al 2003), influential scholars have reported an increasing intertwinement of university research with practical applications. However, these diagnoses have been criticized for their theoretical shortcomings and for lack of empirical support (Pestre 2003; Hessels and van Lente 2008). Our starting point in this paper is that two major developments can be discerned in the governance of academic research, which may be (partly) in contradiction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Practical Applications as a Source of Credibility: A Comparison of Three Fields of Dutch Academic Chemistry

Hessels

Lente

2011

Minerva

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many Western science systems, funding structures increasingly stimulate academic research to contribute to practical applications, but at the same time the rise of bibliometric performance assessments have strengthened the pressure on academics to conduct excellent basic research that can be published in scholarly literature. We analyze the interplay between these two developments in a set of three case studies of fields of chemistry in the Netherlands. First, we describe how the conditions under which academic chemists work have changed since 1975. Second, we investigate whether practical applications have become a source of credibility for individual researchers. Indeed, this turns out to be the case in catalysis, where connecting with industrial applications helps in many steps of the credibility cycle. Practical applications yield much less credibility in environmental chemistry, where application-oriented research agendas help to acquire funding, but not to publish prestigious papers or to earn peer recognition. In biochemistry practical applications hardly help in gaining credibility, as this field is still strongly oriented at fundamental questions. The differences between the fields can be explained by the presence or absence of powerful upstream end-users, who can afford to invest in academic research with promising long term benefits.

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 148 publications

References 0 publications

The reflexive scientist: an approach to transforming public engagement

The reflexive scientist: an approach to transforming public engagement

The Stakes in Bayh-Dole: Public Values Beyond the Pace of Innovation

Practical Applications as a Source of Credibility: A Comparison of Three Fields of Dutch Academic Chemistry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About