This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, F.R. (2003), ‘Peer review of data’, The National Law Journal, September 29, 2003.
Beck, U. (1992), Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, London: Sage.
Boffey, P.M. (1975), The Brain Bank of America: An Inquiry into the Politics of Science, New York: McGraw Hill.
Brickman, R., S. Jasanoff, and T. Ilgen (1985), Controlling Chemicals: The Politics of Regulation in Europe and the U.S., Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Bush, V. (1945), Science — The Endless Frontier, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
Carson, J. (2004), ‘The merit of science and the science of merit’, in S. Jasanoff (ed.), States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order, London: Routledge, pp. 181–205.
Dahl, R.A. (1961), Who Governs?, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dennis, M.A. (1994), ‘“Our first line of defense’”: Two university laboratories in the postwar American State’, Isis 85(3): 427–55.
Dennis, M.A. (2004), ‘Reconstructing sociotechnical order: Vannevar Bush and US Science Policy’, in S. Jasanoff (ed.), States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order, London: Routledge.
Ezrahi, Y. (1990), The Descent of Icarus: Science and the Transformation of Contemporary Democracy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, and M. Trow (1994), The New Production of Knowledge, London: Sage Publications.
Gieryn, T. (1999), Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Golinski, J. (1992), Science as Public Culture: Chemistry and Enlightenment in Britain, 1760–1820, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Greenberg, D.S. (2001), Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guston, D.H. (2000), Between Politics and Science: Assuring the Integrity and Productivity of Research, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jardine, L. (1999), Ingenious Pursuits: Building the Scientific Revolution, London: Little, Brown.
Jasanoff, S. (1986), Risk Management and Political Culture, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Jasanoff, S. (1987), ‘Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science’, Social Studies of Science 17: 195–230.
Jasanoff, S. (1990), The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jasanoff, S. (1996), ‘Beyond epistemology: Relativism and engagement in the politics of science,’ Social Studies of Science 26(2): 393–418.
Jasanoff, S. (2003), ‘(No) Accounting for expertise?’, Science and Public Policy 30(3): 157–62.
Jasanoff, S. (ed.) (2004), States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order, London: Routledge.
Jasanoff, S. (2005), Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kevles, D. (1987), The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kevles, D.J. (1998), The Baltimore Case: A Trial of Politics, Science, and Character, New York: W.W. Norton.
Krimsky, S. (2003), Science in the Private Interest: How the Lure of Profits Has Corrupted the Virtue of Biomedical Research, Lanham, MD: Rowman-Littlefield, 2003).
Krimsky, S. and D. Golding (eds.), (1992), Social Theories of Risk, London: Praeger.
Merton, R.K. (1973), ‘The normative structure of science,’ in R.K. Merton, The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 267–78.
Mukerji, C. (1989), A Fragile Power: Scientists and the State, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
National Research Council (1983), Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nowotny, H., P. Scott, and M. Gibbons (2001), Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty, Cambridge, MA: Polity.
Philadelphia Inquirer (January 25, 2004), Editorial, ‘The White House vs. Science.’
Office of Management and Budget (2003), Proposed Bulletin on Peer Review and Information Quality, Federal Register, Vol. 68, No. 178, Monday, September 15, pp. 54023–29.
Press, E. and J. Washburn (2000), ‘The kept university’, Atlantic Monthly, March 2000: 39–54.
Price, D.K. (1965), The Scientific Estate, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shapin, S. and S. Schaffer (1985), Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Solingen, E. (1993), ‘Between markets and the state: Scientists in comparative perspective,’ Comparative Politics 26: 31–51.
Steinbrook, R. (2004), ‘Peer review and federal regulations’, New England Journal of Medicine 350(2):103–4.
Stokes, D.E. (1997), Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Winickoff, D., S. Jasanoff, L. Busch, R. Grove-White, and B. Wynne (2005), ‘Adjudicating the GM food wars: Science, risk, and democracy in world trade law’, Yale Journal of International Law 30: 81–123.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jasanoff, S. (2005). Judgment Under Siege: The Three-Body Problem of Expert Legitimacy. In: Maasen, S., Weingart, P. (eds) Democratization of Expertise?. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, vol 24. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3754-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3754-6_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3753-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-3754-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)