Transgenes and Transgressions: Scientific Dissent as Heterogeneous Practice

Abstract

Although scholars in science and technology studies have explored many dynamics and consequences of scientific controversy, no coherent theory of scientific dissent has emerged. This paper proposes the elements of such a framework, based on understanding scientific dissent as a set of heterogeneous practices. I use the controversy over the presence of transgenic DNA in Mexican maize in the early 2000s to point to a processual model of scientific dissent. 'Contrarian science' includes knowledge claims that challenge the dominant scientific trajectory, but need not necessarily lead to dissent. 'Impedance' represents efforts to undermine the credibility of contrarian science (or contrarian scientists) and may originate within or outside of the scientific community. In the face of impedance, contrarian scientists may become dissenters. The actions of the scientist at the center of the case study, Professor Ignacio Chapela of the University of California, Berkeley, demonstrate particular practices of scientific dissent, ranging from 'agonistic engagement' to 'dissident science'. These practices speak not only to functional strategies of winning scientific debate, but also to attempts to reconfigure relations among scientists, publics, institutions, and politics that order knowledge production.Keywords agricultural biotechnology, contrarian science, dissident science, genetically modified crops, transgene flow Transgenes and Transgressions: Scientific Dissent as Heterogeneous PracticeJason A. Delborne [C]ontroversies over science and technology are struggles over meaning and morality, over the distribution of resources, and over the locus of power and control. (Nelkin, 1995: 445)

Suppression and Dissent in Science

“…This has the advantage of encouraging the analysis of the many ways in which scientists navigate controversies that erupt within and around their technical fields. In particular, the framework below draws attention to the uneven power structures and practices within scientific communities that shape the kind of knowledge that is produced and legitimized (for a more thorough treatment of this framework, see Delborne 2008).…”

On the Suppression of Vaccination Dissent

“…This can be a major undertaking, because many cases involve incredible detail, with claims and counter-claims and a complex set of circumstances (e.g., Delborne, 2008). However, there are a few convenient tests that can be used to make a preliminary judgment (Martin, 2013).…”

Shame, scientist! Degradation rituals in science

“…When scientific orthodoxy is backed by powerful groups such as governments, corporations or professions -for example in debates over fluoridation, pesticides, nuclear power and genetic engineering -then attacks on dissident scientists can be expected (Martin, 1999;Delborne, 2008), with degradation rituals as one tool available to orthodoxy.…”