RT Journal Article T1 Problem science society A1 Dr Jane Gregory YR 2016 VO 6 IS Autumn 2016 K1 Science communication K1 public engagement K1 commercialisation K1 innovation K1 responsibility AB Framing ‘science and society’ as a conflict has diverted us from more important problems. Our economic environment urges the commercialisation and social acceptance of new technologies, and science communicators and their publics contribute work to these ends. These activities neglect existing, uncontroversial technologies that, in a collaboration between responsible scientists and their publics, could be deployed to address global problems. PB The Science Museum Group SN 2054-5770 LA eng DO 10.15180/160607 UL http://journal.sciencemuseum.org.uk/browse/issue-06/problem-science-society/ CR Allum, N, Sturgis, P, Tabourazi, D and Brunton-Smith, I, 2008, ‘Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: A meta-analysis’, Public Understanding of Science, 17(1), pp 35–54 CR Atkinson, RC, 1978, ‘Rights and responsibilities in scientific research’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 34(10), pp 10–14 CR Balmer, A, Bulpin, K, Calvert, J, Kearnes, M, Mackenzie, A, Marris, C, Martin, P, Molyneux-Hodgson, S and Schyfter, P, 2012, Towards a Manifesto for Experimental Collaborations between Social and Natural Scientists. Accessible at: https://experimentalcollaborations.wordpress.com CR Bauer, M W, 2012, ‘Public attention to science 1820–2010 – a “longue durée” picture’, The Sciences’ Media Connection – Public Communication and its Repercussions, Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, Volume 28, pp 35–57 CR Bauer, M W, 2015, Atoms, Bytes and Genes: Public Resistance and Technoscientific Responses (London: Routledge) CR Bauer, M W and Gregory, J, 2007, ‘From journalism to corporate communication in post-War Britain’, in Bauer, M and Bucchi, M (eds), Journalism, Science and Society: between News and Public Relations (London: Routledge) CR Beckwith, J and Huang, F, 2005, ‘Should we make a fuss? A case for social responsibility in science’, Nature Biotechnology, 23(12), pp 1479–1480 CR Bhattachary, D, Calitz, J P, and Hunter, A, 2010, Synthetic Biology Dialogue, http://www.bbsrc. ac.uk/web/FILES/Reviews/1006-synthetic-biology-dialogue.pdf CR Billinge, M, 1982, ‘Reconstructing societies in the past: the collective biography of local communities’, in Baker, A R H, Billinge, M (eds), Period and Place: Research Methods in Historical Geography, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp 24–25 CR Bourdieu, P, (Nice, R, trans), 1984, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press) CR Bowler, P, 2009, Science for All: The Popularization of Science in Early Twentieth-Century Britain (University of Chicago Press) CR Calvert, J, 2013, ‘Engineering biology and society: reflections on synthetic biology’, Science Technology & Society 18, pp 405–420 CR Calvert, J and Martin, P, 2009, ‘The role of social scientists in synthetic biolog’, EMBO reports, 10(3), pp 201–204 CR Castells, M, 2000, The Rise of the Network Society (New York: Wiley, Blackwell) CR Collins, H and Evans, R, 2007, Rethinking Expertise (University of Chicago Press) CR Djurodie, W, 2003, ‘Limitations of public dialogue about science and the rise of the new “experts”’, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2003, 6(4), pp 82–92 CR Durant, D, 2010, ‘Public participation in the making of science policy’, Perspectives on Science, 18, pp 189–225 CR Elam, M and Bertilsson, M, 2003, ‘Consuming, engaging and confronting science: the emerging dimensions of scientific citizenship’, European Journal of Social Theory, 6(2), pp 233–251 CR Endy, D, Deese, I and Wadey, C, 2005, ‘Adventures in synthetic biology’, Nature 438.7067, pp 449–453 CR Escobar, O, 2011, Public dialogue and deliberation: A communication perspective for public engagement practitioners (The Edinburgh Beltane: University of Edinburgh) CR Evans, G and Durant, J, 1995, ‘The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain’, Public Understanding of Science, vol 4 no 1 pp 57–74 Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} CR Fyffe, A and Lightman, B, 2007, Science in the Marketplace: Nineteenth-Century Sites and Experiences (Chicago: University of Chicago Press) CR G2O, 2016, http://g2o.co/about-g2o. CR Gregory, J, 2001, ‘Reclaiming responsibility’, in Labinger, J and Collins, H M (eds), The One Culture?: A Conversation about Science (Chicago University Press), p 200 CR Gregory, J, 2003, ‘Popularisation and excommunication of Fred Hoyle’s “life-from-space” theory’, Public Understanding of Science, 12, pp 25–46 CR Gregory, J, 2011, ‘Science communication’ in Hook, D, Franks, B and Bauer, M (eds), The Social Psychology of Communication (London: Routledge) CR Gregory, J and Lock, S, 2008, ‘The evolution of “public understanding of science”: public engagement as a tool of science policy in the UK’, Sociology Compass, 4 no 1, pp 57–74 CR Giddens, A, 1998, The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy (Cambridge: Polity Press) CR Hilgartner, S, 1990, ‘The dominant view of popularisation: conceptual problems, political use’, in Social Studies of Science, 20, pp 519–539 CR House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (2000), Science and Society, 3rd Report of Session 1999–2000 (London: the Stationery Office) CR Irwin, A and Wynne, B, 1996, Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology (Cambridge University Press) CR Jurdant, B, 1969, ‘Vulgarisation scientifique et idéologie’ in Communications, 14, pp 150–161 CR Jurdant, B, 1993, ‘Popularization of science as the autobiography of science’, in Public Understanding of Science, 2(4), pp 365–373 CR Labinger, J, and Collins, HM, 2001, The One Culture (Chicago University Press) CR Levidow, L, 2007, Democratising technology choices? European public participation in agbiotech assessments, IIED Gatekeeper Series No 135, December, International Institute for Environment and Development. Available at: http://www.iied.org/NR/agbioliv/gatekeepers CR Lewenstein, B V, 1995, ‘From fax to facts: communication in the cold fusion saga’, Social Studies of Science, 25, pp 408–424 CR Lezaun, J and Soneryd, L, 2007, ‘Consulting citizens: technologies of elicitation and the mobility of publics’, Public Understanding of Science, 16, pp 279–297 CR Lock, S J, 2009, ‘Lost in translations: discourses, boundaries and legitimacy in the public understanding of science in the UK’, PhD thesis, University of London CR Martin, B, 1993, ‘The critique of science becomes academic’, in Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18(2), pp 247–259 CR Neidhardt, F, 1993, ‘The public as a communication system’, Public Understanding of Science, 2, pp 339–350 CR Ocloo, J and Matthews, R, 2016, ‘From tokenism to empowerment: progressing patient and public involvement in healthcare improvement’, in BMJ Quality and Safety, 0, 1-7; doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004839 CR Porter, R, 1990, ‘The history of science and the history of society’, in Olby, R C, Cantor, G N, Christie, J R R and Hodge, M J S (eds), Companion to the History of Modern Science (London: Routledge Reference), p 43 CR Rip, A and Boeker, E, 1975, ‘Scientists and social responsibility in the Netherland’, in Social Studies of Science, 5(4), pp 457–484 CR Rose, H and Lambert, H, 1996, inIrwin, A and Wynne, B, 1996, Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology (Cambridge University Press) CR Rose, H, and Rose, S, 1969, Science and Society (London: Allen Lane) CR Shapin, S, 2008, The Scientific Life: a Moral History of a Late Modern Vocation (Chicago University Press) CR Stirling, A, 2008, ‘“Opening up” and “closing down” power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology’, in Science, Technology & Human Values, 33(2), pp 262–294 Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} CR Thorpe, C and Gregory, J, (2010), ‘Producing the post-Fordist public: the political economy of public engagement with science’, in Science as Culture, 19:3, pp 273–301 CR Wagner, C, 2008, The New Invisible College: Science for Development (Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press) CR Wilkins, M, 2003, The Third Man of the Double Helix: An Autobiography (Oxford University Press) CR Wilsdon, J and Willis, R, 2004, See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream (London: Demos) CR Wilson Center, 2016, for example, http://www.synbioproject.org/topics/ CR Wynne, B, 1980, ‘Technology, risk and participation: on the social treatment of uncertainty’, in Conrad, J (ed), Society, Technology and Risk (London, New York: Academic Press) CR Wynne, B, 1992, ‘Public understanding of science research: new horizons or hall of mirrors?’, in Public Understanding of Science, 1, pp 37–43 CR Wynne, B, 1996, ‘Misunderstood misunderstandings: social identities and public uptake of science’, in Irwin, A and Wynne, B (eds), Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp 19–46 CR Wynne, B, 2006, ‘Public engagement as means of restoring trust in science? Hitting the notes, but missing the music’, in Community Genetics, 9(3), pp 211–220 WT Science Museum Group Journal OL 30