Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Science and Technology Policy: A Cross-National Comparison

这个比较项目，由科学与社会计划资助，旨在开发一个新的理论框架，了解在科学和技术（ST）创新的全球政治。 它将研究国家政治文化和生产的“社会技术资料”在美国，韩国和德国的科技决策之间的关系。 社会技术领域被定义为“以创新的科学和/或技术项目的发展和实现为中心的社会生活和社会秩序的想象形式”。"通过系统的跨国比较，该项目希望克服许多STS研究的微观焦点，阐明三种不同的民主政治文化是如何制定技术创新的目标、风险和收益的，以及它们是如何应对民主包容、专家咨询、伦理和问责制等相关政治挑战的。该项目的第一阶段将开展国家科技政策案例研究，重点关注三种技术--一种是旧的，一种是当前的，一种是新兴的：核能;干细胞;和纳米技术。 这个设计将提供历史深度以及对国家科技想象力的当代洞察力。 案例将按沿着几个方面的主题组织，包括处理国家需要、团结、暂时性、竞争力以及风险和利益。 第二阶段将在全国范围内比较第一阶段的结果，得出规范性和与政策有关的结论，并传播结果。 本研究将采用定性的、解释性的STS方法，综合运用政策分析、法学、人类学、科学史和科学社会学等学科的研究方法，促进我们对&当今世界三个快速创新地区的科技发展的理解（美国，欧洲，亚洲），并将阐明以下问题：在科技政策制定过程中，每个科技项目的社会意义是如何想象、构建和表现&的？在政策制定和实施过程中，如何定义、建模和评估利益和风险（物理、社会和环境）？在每个案例研究中，公民和公众是如何概念化的？公民权和参与的文化观念对每一个选定的科技项目的框架、实施和可能的验证有什么影响？我们能否确定和描述每个研究国家的科技政策制定的国家风格？通过对三国科技政策制定和社会技术能力的比较分析，可以看出三种影响。 首先，它将增进对全球科技政治的跨文化理解，从而为美国政策和跨国合作与治理奠定更坚实的基础。 第二，它将为改进科技政策的分析和执行提供新的概念和经验资源，具体而言，包括：评估新技术和新兴技术的风险和利益;制定标准和处理不确定性;设计新的公众参与形式;制定更好的伦理分析和审议程序;突出国际科技合作的机会、障碍和可能的模式。 第三，它将有助于博士后、研究生和本科生的教学和培训。

This comparative project, funded by the Science and Society Program, aims to develop a new theoretical framework for understanding the global politics of innovation in science and technology (S&T). It will examine the relationship between national political cultures and the production of ''sociotechnical imaginaries'' in S&T policymaking in the United States, South Korea, and Germany. Sociotechnical imaginaries are defined as ''imagined forms of social life and social order that center on the development and fulfillment of innovative scientific and/or technological projects.'' Through systematic cross-national comparison, the project hopes to overcome the micro-focus of many STS studies and to illuminate how three different democratic political cultures are framing the goals, risks, and benefits of technological innovation, and how they are meeting the associated political challenges of democratic inclusion, expert advice, ethics, and accountability.Phase I of the project will develop national case studies of S&T policy, focusing on three technologies - one old, one current, and one emerging: nuclear power; stem cells; and nanotechnology. This design will provide historical depth as well as contemporary insight into national technoscientific imaginations. The cases will be organized thematically along several dimensions, including the treatment of national needs, solidarity, temporality, competitiveness, and risks and benefits. Phase II will compare the results of Phase I cross-nationally, draw normative and policy-relevant conclusions, and disseminate the results. The research will use qualitative, interpretive STS methods, integrating approaches from policy analysis, law, anthropology, and history and sociology of science.The proposed study will advance our understanding of contemporary S&T developments in three rapidly innovating regions of the world (US, Europe, Asia) and will shed light on the following questions: How is the societal significance of each technoscientific project imagined, framed, and represented in the course of S&T policymaking? How are the benefits and risks - physical, social, and environmental - defined, modeled, and assessed, during policy formulation and implementation? How are citizens and publics conceptualized in each case study? What influences do cultural ideas of citizenship and participation have on the framing, implementation, and possible contestation of each selected technoscientific project? Can we identify and characterize national styles of S&T policymaking in each study country?The comparative analysis of S&T policymaking and sociotechnical imaginaries in three nations promises to have three kinds of broader impacts. First, it will improve cross-cultural understanding of the global politics of S&T, thereby building stronger foundations for US policy and for transnational cooperation and governance. Second, it will provide new conceptual and empirical resources for improving S&T policy analysis and implementation, specifically: in assessing the risks and benefits of new and emerging technologies; in standard-setting and the treatment of uncertainty; in the design of new forms of public engagement; in developing improved processes of ethical analysis and deliberation; and in highlighting opportunities for, barriers to, and possible modes of international S&T collaboration. Third, it will contribute to postdoctoral, graduate, and undergraduate teaching and training.