As argued in the ‘history’ section, the emergence of science as both a practical activity and form of knowledge is closely interconnected with the emergence of modern notions of ‘the public’ and ‘public sphere’. This section explores the intersections between public spaces and technoscientific spaces. In doing so it raises questions about theoretical and empirical approaches to studying the democratic governance of science and technology. The term governance is used here to refer to the institutions, practices, and other ordering devices that produce collective action, and the justification of collective action, through appeal to the common good, pubic interest, or other such figures of democratic polities.
Schmid, S. (2006) ‘Celebrating Tomorrow Today: The Peaceful Atom on Display in the Soviet Union’, Social Studies of Science 36(3): 331-66.
Bingham, N. (2006) ‘Bees, Butterflies, and Bacteria: Biotechnology and the Politics of Nonhuman Friendship’ Environment and Planning A 38: 483-98.
Long Martello, M. (2004) ‘Negotiating Global Nature and Local Culture: The Case of Makah Whaling’, in S. Jasanoff & M. Long Martello (eds), Earthly Politics: Local and Global in Environmental Governance (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press) 263-84.
Hagendijk, R & A. Irwin (2006) ‘Public Deliberation and Governance: Engaging with Science and Technology in Contemporary Europe’, Minerva 44(2): 167-84.
Waterton, C. & B. Wynne (2004) ‘Knowledge and Political Order in the European Environment Agency’, in S. Jasanoff (ed.) States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge) 87-108.
Lezaun, J. (2006) ‘Creating a New Object of Government: Making Genetically Modified Organisms Traceable’ Social Studies of Science 36(4): 499-531. Freely accessible
Parry, B. (2004) ‘Taming the Slippery Beast: Regulating Trade in Bio-information” in B. Parry Trading the Genome: Investigating the Commodification of Bio-information (New York: Columbia University Press) 200-48.