Suchergebnisse

"When is Covid Covid?" is the title of a discussion paper published by the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University on 11 September 2020. Amid the multinational struggle for an appropriate social and political approach to the crisis triggered by Covid-19, a recognized panel of medical experts alerts us that Covid-19 is defined very differently in different contexts. One definition focuses on symptoms, another one on RNA sequences of the virus. In the present contribution, this debate is taken up to discuss the extent to which new sequencing practices and their "seamless webs" become socially effective as instances of interpretation and design. At the same time, the limitations of such webs become noticeable as ruptures, seams, and scars.

La biología de sistemas y la biología sintética pueden ser consideradas como ejemplos de tecnociencias emergentes. Están esencialmente marcadas por promesas de futuro y por visiones, por una cierta lógica y uso de términos, por determinadas formas de organización social, por la integración en un régimen específico de fomento e innovación, así como por una matriz característica de orientaciones para la praxis de investigación. Esta constitución específica de la biología de sistemas y de la biología sintética tiene, por su parte, consecuencias fundamentales para la práctica científica, su análisis y su gobierno.

Post-Normal Science (PNS) as a theory links epistemology and governance. It not only focuses on problem situations where facts are uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high and decisions urgent, but also tries to develop epistemic approaches that allow for sound scientific answers. The following article addresses major epistemological challenges within a typical ''wicked-problem situation'', i.e., risk assessment of emerging technologies. Such challenges include (a) epistemological problems intrinsic to the task of proving the absence of risk, (b) problems related to the multi-sited production of evidence and the multitude of epistemic cultures involved, (c) the incompatibility of the various implicit objectives and (d) the complex actor-constellations, that shape not only the way scientific knowledge is translated into action, but also which kind of knowledge is produced and which experts are listened to. To illustrate and discuss these characteristics, the article draws on an empirical study of risk research in the fields of agri-biotechnology and telecommunication technology in Germany. It concludes that although some aspects of PNS are already part of current epistemic practices in these fields, a state of ''functional post-normality'' depends upon a meaningful co-evolution between post-normal science and post-normal governance that has not yet been achieved.

This open access edited book provides new thinking on scientific identity formation. It thoroughly interrogates the concepts of community and identity, including both historical and contemporaneous analyses of several scientific fields. Chapters examine whether, and how, today's scientific identities and communities are subject to fundamental changes, reacting to tangible shifts in research funding as well as more intangible transformations in our society's understanding and expectations of technoscience. In so doing, this book reinvigorates the concept of scientific community. Readers will discover empirical analyses of newly emerging fields such as synthetic biology, systems biology and nanotechnology, and accounts of the evolution of theoretical conceptions of scientific identity and community. With inspiring examples of technoscientific identity work and community constellations, along with thought-provoking hypotheses and discussion, the work has a broad appeal. Those involved in science governance will benefit particularly from this book, and it has much to offer those in scholarly fields including sociology of science, science studies, philosophy of science and history of science, as well as teachers of science and scientists themselves. ; Reinvigorates the concept of scientific community Delineates ongoing changes across a range of epistemic cultures Elaborates on social, cultural and political aspects of contemporary technoscience Traces historical influences on technoscience, including in the European context Provides new thinking on scientific identity formation

Inter- und Transdisziplinarität wurden einstmals dem Randbereich wissenschaftlicher Praxis zugerechnet. Heute gelten sie als Normalfall, sowohl im Forschungsbetrieb wie auch in der wissenschaftlichen Politikberatung. Beispiele für diesen Wandel finden sich in der Nachhaltigkeits- und Sicherheitsforschung, der Technikfolgenabschätzung und der Kommissionsethik. Der Fokus des Bandes liegt auf der empirischen Untersuchung dieser Praxisfelder aus der Perspektive der Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung. Im Vordergrund steht die kritische Analyse aktueller Potenziale und Probleme von Wissenschaft jenseits disziplinärer Grenzen.Zu den Herausgebern:Die Herausgeber sind wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiter am Institut für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften

Weimer und Vining (1999) unterscheiden drei Rollen, die WissenschafterInnen in Politikberatung einnehmen können: den objective technician, den issue advocate und den client's advocate. Dieser Beitrag widmet sich jener Rolle, die in der gegenwärtigen Diskussion kaum reflektiert wird, aber dennoch für die Normativität von Technikfolgenabschätzung (TA) relevant ist: dem client's advocate. Basierend auf Daten aus einer empirischen internen Erhebung von Praxen, Konstellationen und Paradigmen der Politikberatung am österreichischen Institut für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung (ITA), stellen wir (1) das in den Projekten des Instituts realisierte Portfolio an Geldgebern bzw. Auftraggebern dar, setzen es (2) in Bezug zu den in den Projekten des ITA angesprochenen Issues und zu Ergebnissen aus vier projektspezifischen Fallstudien und formulieren (3) offene Fragen an die TA-Praxis und TA-Community. ; Weimer and Vining (1999) discern three roles for scientific policy advisers: the objective technician, the issue advocate, and the client's advocate. This contribution focuses on the latter – a role that is rarely reflected upon in current discussions about technology assessment (TA) practice. Based on empirical data on the practices, constellations, and paradigms prevalent in policy advice activities at the Austrian Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA), we (1) present the portfolio and characteristics of the institute's clients, (2) relate these to the issues addressed in the institute's projects and to four project-specific case studies, and (3) present open questions to the practice and community of TA pertaining to its relation to its clients.

Weimer und Vining (1999) unterscheiden drei Rollen, die WissenschafterInnen in Politikberatung einnehmen können: den objective technician, den issue advocate und den client's advocate. Dieser Beitrag widmet sich jener Rolle, die in der gegenwärtigen Diskussion kaum reflektiert wird, aber dennoch für die Normativität von Technikfolgenabschätzung (TA) relevant ist: dem client's advocate. Basierend auf Daten aus einer empirischen internen Erhebung von Praxen, Konstellationen und Paradigmen der Politikberatung am österreichischen Institut für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung (ITA), stellen wir (1) das in den Projekten des Instituts realisierte Portfolio an Geldgebern bzw. Auftraggebern dar, setzen es (2) in Bezug zu den in den Projekten des ITA angesprochenen Issues und zu Ergebnissen aus vier projektspezifischen Fallstudien und formulieren (3) offene Fragen an die TA-Praxis und TA-Community.