Theory and Society

, Volume 40, Issue 5, pp 505–532 | Cite as

Science and neoliberal globalization: a political sociological approach

  • Kelly Moore
  • Daniel Lee Kleinman
  • David Hess
  • Scott Frickel
Article

Abstract

The political ideology of neoliberalism is widely recognized as having influenced the organization of national and global economies and public policies since the 1970s. In this article, we examine the relationship between the neoliberal variant of globalization and science. To do so, we develop a framework for sociology of science that emphasizes closer ties among political sociology, the sociology of social movements, and economic and organizational sociology and that draws attention to patterns of increasing and uneven industrial influence amid several countervailing processes. Specifically, we explore three fundamental changes since the 1970s: the advent of the knowledge economy and the increasing interchange between academic and industrial research and development signified by academic capitalism and asymmetric convergence; the increasing prominence of science-based regulation of technology in global trade liberalization, marked by the heightened role of international organizations and the convergence of scientism and neoliberalism; and the epistemic modernization of the relationship between scientists and publics, represented by the proliferation of new institutions of deliberation, participation, activism, enterprise, and social movement mobilization.

Keywords

Political sociology of science Scientization New knowledge economy Epistemic modernization Social movements 

References

  1. Albert, M. (2003). Universities and the market economy: the differential impact of knowledge production in sociology and economics. Higher Education, 45(2), 147–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, B. (2003). Uneasy alchemy: citizens and experts in Louisiana’s chemical corridor disputes. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  3. Association for University Technology Managers. (2000). Licensing survey, FY2000: Full report. Deerfield: Association of University Technology Managers.Google Scholar
  4. Barns, I. (1995). Manufacturing consensus: Reflections on the UK national consensus conference on plant biotechnology. Science as Culture, 12, 199–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barreda, A. (2003). Biopiracy, bioprospecting, and resistance: Four cases in Mexico. In T. A. Wise, H. Salazar, & L. Carlsen (Eds.), Confronting globalization: Economic integration and popular resistance in Mexico. Sterling: Kumarian.Google Scholar
  6. Berman, E. P. (2008). The politics of patent law and its material effects: The changing relationship between universities and the marketplace. In T. Pinch & R. Swedberg (Eds.), Living in a material world: Economic sociology meets science and technology studies (pp. 191–213). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  7. Biermann, F. (2002). Institutions for scientific advice: Global environmental assessments and their influence in developing countries. Global Governance, 8(2), 195–219.Google Scholar
  8. Bonnano, A., & Constance, D. (2007). Agency and resistance in the sociology of agriculture and food. In W. Wright & G. Midderndorf (Eds.), Food fights (pp. 29–43). University Park: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bonnano, A., & Constance, D. (2008). Stories of globalization: Transnational corporations, resistance, and the state. College Park: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Boroush, M. (2008). New Estimates of National R&D Expenditures Show 5–8% Growth in 2007. (www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08317, accessed January 21, 2009).
  11. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Science of science and reflexivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bourdieu, P. (2005). The social structures of the economy. Malden: Polity.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, P. (2007). Toxic exposures: Contested illnesses and the environmental health movement. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, P., McCormick, S., Mayer, B., Zavestoski, S., Morello-Frosh, R., Gasior-Altman, R., et al. (2006). A Lab of Our Own: Environmental causation of breast cancer and challenges to the dominant epidemiological paradigm. Science, Technology and Human Values, 31, 499–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown, P., & Zavestoski, S. (Eds.). (2007). Social movements and health. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Busch, L., & Bain, C. (2004). The transformation of the global agrifood system. Rural Sociology, 69(3), 321–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Buttel, F., & Gould, K. (2004). Global social movement(s) at the crossroads: Some observations on the trajectory of the anti-corporate globalization movement. Journal of World Systems Research, 10(1), 37–66.Google Scholar
  18. Campbell, J., & Pederson, O. (Eds.). (2001). The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Castells, M. (1996). The information age: Economy, society, and culture. Volume 1. The rise of the network society. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Chase-Dunn, C., & Hall, T. (1997). Rise and demise: Comparing world systems. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
  21. Clark, A. (1998). Disciplining reproduction: Modernity, American life sciences, and ‘the problems of Sex’. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  22. Clarke, A., Shim, J. K., Shostak, S., & Nelson, A. (2009). Biomedicalising genetic health, diseases and identities. In P. Atkinson, P. Glasner, & M. Lock (Eds.), The handbook of genetics and society: Mapping the new genomic era. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Colyvas, J., & Powell, W. (2007). From vulnerable to venerated: The institutionalization of academic entrepreneurship in the life sciences. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 25, 219–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cohen, L. (2003). A Consumer’s republic: The politics of consumption in postwar America. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  25. Conroy, M. (2007). Branded! How the ‘Certification Revolution’ is transforming global corporations. Gabriola Island: New Society.Google Scholar
  26. Croissant, J., & Smith-Doerr, L. (2007). Organizational contexts of science: Boundaries and relationships between university and industry. In J. Wajcman, E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, & M. Lynch (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 691–718). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  27. Davis, M. (2006). Planet of slums. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  28. Della Porta, D., & Tarrow, S. (Eds.). (2005). Transnational protest and global activism: People, passions, and power. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  29. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Donoghue, F. (2008). The last professors: The corporate university and the fate of the humanities. Bronx: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Duggan, L. (2004). The twilight of equality? Neoliberalism, cultural politics, and the attack on democracy. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  32. DuPuis, M. E., & Goodman, D. (2005). Should we go ‘home’ to eat? Toward a reflexive politics of localism. Journal of Rural Studies, 21, 359–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Edelman, R. (2008). Edelman Trust Barometer 2008. (www.edelman.co.uk/files/trust-barometer-2008.pdf. Accessed January 21, 2009).
  34. Epstein, S. (1996). Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  35. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., & Healy, P. (1998). Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  36. Ferguson, J. (2006). Global shadows: Africa in the neoliberal world order. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Forman, P. (1987). Behind quantum electronics: national security as a basis for physical research in the U.S., 1940–1960. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 18, 149–229.Google Scholar
  38. Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the college de France, 1978–1979. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
  39. Fournier, M., Germain, A., Yves, & Maheu, L. (1975). The scientific field of Quebec: structure, functioning, and functions. Sociologie et Societes, 7, 119–132.Google Scholar
  40. Frickel, S. (2004). Chemical consequences: Environmental mutagens, scientist activism, and the rise of genetic toxicology. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Frickel, S. (2010). Shadow mobilizations for environmental health and justice. In J. Banaszak-Holl, S. Levitsky, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and the transformation of U.S. health care (pp. 171–187). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Frickel, S. (2011). Who are the expert activists of environmental health justice? In B. Cohen & G. Ottinger (Eds.), Engineers, scientists, and environmental justice: Transforming expert cultures through grassroots engagement. Cambridge: MIT (in press).Google Scholar
  43. Frickel, S., & Moore, K. (Eds.). (2006). The new political sociology of science. University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  44. Frickel, S., Gibbon, S., Howard, J., Kempner, J., Ottinger, G., & Hess, D. (2010). Undone science: charting social movement and civil society challenges to research agenda settings. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 35(4), 444–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, September 13, p. 32.Google Scholar
  46. Gautney, H., Dahbour, O., Dawson, A., & Smith, N. (2009). Democracy, states, and the struggle for global justice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  48. Habermas, J. (1970). Toward a rational society: Student protest, science, and politics. Trans. by Jeremy Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  49. Halfon, S. (2010). Confronting the WTO: intervention strategies in GMO adjudication. Science, Technology & Human Values, 35, 307–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Haufler, V. (2001). A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy. Washington: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  51. Haufler, V. (2006). Global governance and the private sector. In C. May (Ed.), Global corporate power (pp. 95–105). Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  52. Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Hayden, C. (2003). When nature goes public: The making and unmaking of bioprospecting in Mexico. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Hayden, C. (2007). Taking as giving: Bio-science, exchange, and the politics of benefit sharing. Social Studies of Science, 37, 729–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hendrickson, M. K., & Heffernan, W. D. (2002). Opening spaces through relocalization: Locating potential resistance in the weaknesses of the global food system. Sociologia Ruralis, 42(4), 347–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hess, D. (2007). Alternative pathways in science and industry. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  57. Hess, D. (2009a). Localist movements in a global economy. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  58. Hess, D. (2009b). The potentials and limitations of civil society research: Getting undone science done. Sociological Inquiry, 79(3), 306–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hess, D. (2010). The environmental, health, and safety implications of nanotechnology: environmental organizations and undone science in the United States. Science as Culture, 19(2), 181–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hessen, B. (1971). The social and economic roots of Newton’s principia. New York: Howard Fertig.Google Scholar
  61. Hirst, P., & Thompson, G. (1999). Globalization in question: The international economy and the possibilities of governance (2nd ed.). Malden: Blackwell/Oxford.Google Scholar
  62. Jasanoff, S. (2004). Ordering knowledge, ordering society. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of knowledge: The coproduction of science and social order. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Jasanoff, S. (2007). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Kevles, D. (1997). The physicists: The history of a scientific community in modern America. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  66. Kinchy, A. (2010). Anti-genetic engineering activism and scientized politics in the case of ‘Contaminated’ Mexican maize. Agriculture and Human Values, 27(4), 505–517.Google Scholar
  67. Kinchy, A., Kleinman, D. L., & Autry, R. (2008). Against free markets, against science? Regulating the socio-economic effects of biotechnology. Rural Sociology, 73(2), 147–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. King, B., & Soule, S. A. (2007). Social movements as extra-institutional entrepreneurs: The effect of protest on stock price returns. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 413–442.Google Scholar
  69. Kingsbury, B., Krisch, N., & Stewart, R. B. (2005). The emergence of global administrative law. Law and Contemporary Problems, 68(3–4), 15–61.Google Scholar
  70. Klawiter, M. (2008). The biopolitics of breast cancer: Changing cultures of disease and activism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  71. Kleinman, D. L. (2003). Impure cultures: University biology at the millennium. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  72. Kleinman, D. L. (2010). The commercialization of academic culture and the future of the university. In H. Radder (Ed.), The commodification of academic research: Science and the modern university (pp. 24–43). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  73. Kleinman, D. L., & Kinchy, A. J. (2003). Why ban bovine growth hormone? Science, social welfare, and the divergent biotech policy landscapes in Europe and the United States. Science as Culture, 12(3), 375–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Kleinman, D. L., & Kinchy, A. J. (2007). Against the neoliberal steamroller? The biosafety protocol and the social regulation of agricultural biotechnology. Agriculture and Human Values, 24(2), 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Kleinman, D. L., & Vallas, S. (2001). Science, capitalism, and the rise of the ‘knowledge worker’: the changing structure of knowledge production in the United States. Theory and Society, 30, 451–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Kleinman, D. L., Powell, M., Grice, J., Adrian, J., & Lobes, C. (2007). A toolkit for democratizing science and technology policy: the practical mechanics of organizing a consensus conference. Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society, 27(2), 154–169.Google Scholar
  77. Knorr-Cetina, K., & Mulkay, M. (Eds.). (1983). Science observed. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  78. Levidow, L., & Carr, S. (2009). GM food on trial: Testing European democracy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  79. Lind, A. (Ed.). (2010). Development, sexual rights and global governance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  80. Lindne, L. F. (2008). Regulating food safety: the power of alignment and drive towards convergence. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 21, 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Livermore, M. (2006). Authority and legitimacy in global governance: Deliberation, institutional differentiation, and the Codex Alimentarius. New York University Law Review, 81, 766–801.Google Scholar
  82. Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university: Power, governance, and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  83. McCormick, S. (2009). Mobilizing science: Movements, participation, and the remaking of knowledge. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  84. McMichael, P. (2000). Development and social change: A global perspective. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge.Google Scholar
  85. Merton, R. (1973). The sociology of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  86. Miller, C. (2004). Climate science and the making of global political order. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of knowledge (pp. 46–66). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  87. Moore, K. (2008). Disrupting science: Social movements, American scientists, and the politics of the military, 1945–1975. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Mushita, A., & Thompson. C. (2008). Agricultural Biodiversity: African alternatives to a ‘Green Revolution.’ Development 488–495.Google Scholar
  89. Nelson, A. (2011). Body and soul: The Black Panther Party and the fight against medical discrimination. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  90. Noble, D. (1977). America by design: Science, technology, and the rise of corporate capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Ong, A. (2006). Neoliberalism as exception: Mutations in citizenship and sovereignty. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Ottinger, G. (2010). Buckets of resistance: standards and the effectiveness of citizen science. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35(2), 244–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Dockets, deals, and sagas: commensuration and the rationalization of experience in university licensing. Social Studies of Science, 35(1), 69–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Peck, J., & Tickel, A. (2002). Neoliberalizing space. Antipode, 34(3), 380–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Pellow, D. N. (2007). Resisting global toxics: Transnational movements for environmental justice. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  96. Portes, A. (1994). When more can Be less: Labor standards, development, and the informal economy. In C. Rakowski (Ed.), Contrapunto: The informal sector debate in Latin America (pp. 113–129). Albany: SUNY.Google Scholar
  97. Portes, A., & Roberts, B. (2005). The free-market city: Latin American urbanization in the years of the neoliberal experiment. Studies in Comparative International Development, 40(1), 43–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Post, D. (2005). Standards and regulatory capitalism: the diffusion of food safety standards in developing countries. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 598, 168–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Powell, W., Owen-Smith, J., & Colyvas, J. (2007). Innovation and emulation: lessons from the experiences of U.S. universities in selling private rights to public knowledge. Minerva, 45, 121–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Rabinow, P. (1996). Making PCR: A story of biotechnology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  101. Routledge, P., Nativel, C., & Cumbers, A. (2006). Entangled logics and grassroots imaginaries of global justice networks. Environmental Politics, 15(5), 839–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Sassen, S. (2000). Cities in a world economy: Sociology for a new century. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge/Sage.Google Scholar
  103. Schmitt, J. (2000). Inequality and globalization: Some evidence from the United States. In D. Kalb, M. van der Lind, R. Staring, B. van Steenbergen, & N. Wilterdink (Eds.), The ends of globalization (pp. 157–168). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  104. Seifert, F., & Torgersen, H. (1997). How to keep out what we don’t want: an assessment of ‘Sociolverträglichkeit’ under the Austrian Genetic Engineering Act. Public Understanding of Science, 6(4), 301–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Schurman, R., & Munro, W. (2004). Fighting frankenfoods: industry structures and the efficacy of the anti-biotech movement in Western Europe. Social Problems, 51(2), 243–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Sklair, L. (2001). The transnational capitalist class. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  107. Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  108. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  109. Smith, J., & Bandy, J. (Eds.). (2005). Coalitions across borders: Transnational protest and the neoliberal order. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  110. Smith-Doerr, L. (2004). Women’s work: Gender equality vs. hierarchy in the life science. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  111. Stehr, N. (2002). Knowledge and economic conduct: The social foundations of the modern economy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  112. Steigerwald, D. (2006). All hail the republic of choice: consumer history as contemporary thought. Journal of American History, 93, 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Stiglitz, J. (2007). Making globalization work. W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  114. Strathern, M. (Ed.). (2000). Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics, and the academy. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  115. Swyngedouw, E. (2005). Governance innovation and the citizen: The Janus face of governance-beyond-the-state. Urban Studies, 42(11), 1991–2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Szasz, A. (2007). Shopping our way to safety. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  117. Valdiya, S. (2010). Neoliberal Reform and Biomedical Research in India: Globalization, Industrial Change, and Science. Ph.D. dissertation, Science and Technology Studies Department, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.Google Scholar
  118. Vallas, S. P., & Kleinman, D. L. (2008). Contradiction, convergence, and the knowledge economy: the co-evolution of academic and commercial biotechnology. Socio-Economic Review, 6(2), 283–311.Google Scholar
  119. Vogel, D. (2008). Private global business regulation. Annual Review of Political Science., 11, 261–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Weber, E. (2003). Bringing society back in: Grassroots ecosystem management, accountability, and sustainable communities. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  121. Weber, K., Thomas, L. G., & Rao, H. (2009). From streets to suites: how the anti-biotech movement penetrated German pharmaceutical firms. American Sociological Review, 74(2), 106–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Winickoff, D. E., & Bushey, D. (2010). Science and power in global food regulation: the rise of Codex Alimentarius. Science. Technology and Human Values, 35(3), 356–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Winickoff, D., Jasanoff, S., Busch, L., Grove-White, R., & Wynne, B. (2005). Adjudicating the GM food wars: science, risk, and democracy in world trade Law. The Yale Journal of International Law, 30(1), 82–123.Google Scholar
  124. Winter, M. (2003). Embeddedness, the new food economy and defensive localism. Journal of Rural Studies, 19(1), 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Wood, L. J. (2005). Bridging the chasms: the case of People’s Global Action. In J. Smith & J. Bandy (Eds.), Coalitions across borders (pp. 95–117). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  126. Wood, L. J., & Moore, K. (2002). Target practice: Community activism in a global era. In R. Hayduk & B. Shepard (Eds.), From ACT UP to the WTO: Urban protest and community building in an era of globalization. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  127. Wright, W., & Midderndorf, G. (Eds.). (2007). Food fights: Producers, consumers, and activists challenge the global food system. University Park: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  128. Wynne, B. (2005). Risk as globalizing ‘Democratic’ discourse? Framing subjects and citizens. In M. Leach, I. Scoones, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Science and citizens: Globalization and the challenge of engagement (pp. 66–82). London: Zed.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kelly Moore
    • 1
  • Daniel Lee Kleinman
    • 2
  • David Hess
    • 3
  • Scott Frickel
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of SociologyLoyola University-ChicagoChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Community and Environmental SociologyUniversity of WisconsinMadisonUSA
  3. 3.Department of SociologyVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  4. 4.Department of SociologyWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA

Personalised recommendations