'Heating up' or 'cooling down'? Analysing and performing broadened participation in technoscientific conflicts
'Heating up' or 'cooling down'? Analysing and performing broadened participation in technoscientific conflicts
复制标题
DOI：
10.1068/a4611
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Sundqvist, Goran
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sundqvist, Goran
今天，利益相关者和公民经常被邀请在有争议的科学和技术决策过程中进行审议。科学和技术研究(STS)领域的学者长期以来一直支持这些倡议，以超越专家和非专家之间的强烈分歧。然而，尽管作出了许多这样的贡献，但无论是在理论上还是在实践中，都没有就如何扩大参与达成一致。本文的理论目标是重新阐述米歇尔·卡隆和哈里·柯林斯关于公众参与科技决策的对立观点。有人争辩说，他们试图对他们研究的问题“加热”(Callon)或“冷却”(Collins)：也就是说，他们用不同的方式来处理这些问题。分析了这两种参与策略的绩效结果。经验方面的雄心是研究比利时和瑞典在放射性废物管理参与性办法方面的最新发展，以及社会科学在这方面的作用。由于公众对早期自上而下的技术官僚方法的批评，这一领域在颁布和支持扩大参与方面发挥了重要作用。此外，虽然比利时和瑞典的废物方案都被国际公认为认真对待参与，但它们在参与性技术和社会科学的参与方面有很大的不同。结论是，社会科学研究影响了放射性废物项目中参与性参与的组织方式，从而参与了“升温”和“降温”的过程。然而，社会科学家以及所有行为者都需要更多地意识到他们自己对这一问题的先入为主的看法--就其“热”或“冷”而言--以及这些法令的后果。
Stakeholders and citizens today are often invited to deliberate in controversial processes of scientific and technological decision making. Scholars in the field of science and technology studies (STS) have long supported these initiatives to transcend strong expert-lay divides. However, despite many such contributions, there is no agreement on how such broadened participation should be performed, either in theory or in practice. The theoretical ambition of this paper is to reformulate the opposing viewpoints of Michel Callon and Harry Collins on public participation in scientific and technological decision making. It is argued that they try to 'heat up' (Callon) or 'cool down' (Collins) the issues they study: that is, that they enact them differently. The performative outcomes of these two strategies for participation are analysed. The empirical ambition is to study recent developments in participatory approaches to radioactive waste management in Belgium and Sweden and the role of social science in connection with these. Due to public criticism of earlier top-down technocratic approaches, this field has played a significant role in enacting and supporting broadened participation. Moreover, while the waste programmes in Belgium and Sweden have both been internationally recognised as taking participation seriously, they have varied considerably in terms of participatory technologies and involvement of social science. A conclusion is that social science research has influenced how participatory engagements are organised in radioactive waste programmes, and thereby has become involved in processes of 'heating up' and 'cooling down'. However, social scientists, as well as all actors, need to be more aware of their own preconceptions about the issue at stake-in terms of its being "hot" or "cold"-and the consequences of these enactments.