Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sociology and Science Policy: Opening and Managing the ‘Black Box’

  • Chapter
Science, Technology and Society

Part of the book series: Sociology for a Changing World ((SCW))

Abstract

So far, we have presented science as a form of social and cognitive activity. But it is of course a very powerful form of activity: while sociologists may challenge the conventional image of science as unequivocal, authoritative, objective knowledge, this does not mean that it has fooled us, and itself — like the Emperor with no clothes — all along. Science and technology are genuinely powerful knowledge-based systems reproduced by a range of powerful social and professional institutions, such as the Royal Society in England or the National Science Foundation in the US, and encapsulated in powerful technologies such as the Cruise missile that, so we are told, defends them both. Technology and science are also powerful in a less obvious way in that they are often said to be the measure of all that we should hold true and progressive. Many science-fiction writers trade off this belief in constructing their scenarios for the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Advisory Council for Applied Research and Development (1986) Exploitable Areas of Science (London: HMSO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Alter, P. (1987) The Reluctant Patron: Science and the State in Britain 1850–1920 (London: Berg).

    Google Scholar 

  • Annerstedt, J. and Jamison, A. (1988) From Research Policy to Social Intelligence (London: Macmillan).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, A. D. (1987) (ed.) Technology Transfer: A European Perspective (Sheffield: University of Sheffield).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohme, G. (1983) ‘Introduction: the social determinants of knowledge’, in W. Schafer (ed.), Finalisation in Science: The Social Orientation of Scientific Progress (Dordrecht: Reidel).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brickman, R. et al. (1986) Controlling Chemicals: the politics of regulation in Europe and the United States (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. (1987) ‘Opening Address’, in G. Ashworth and A. Thornton (eds), Technology Transfer and Innovation (London: Taylor Graham).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabinet Office (1986) Annual Review of Government Funded R&D (London: HMSO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, N. (1985) The Political Economy of Science and Technology (Oxford: Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. (1982) ‘The TEA Set: Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks’, in B. Barnes and D. Edge (eds), Science in Context: Readings in the Sociology of Science (Milton Keynes: Open University).

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. (1985) Changing Order (London: Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingridge, D. and C. Reeve (1986) Science Speaks to Power: The Role of Experts in Policy Making (London: Frances Pinter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conroy, R. (1988) ‘Technology and Economic Development’, in R. Benewick and P. Wingrove (eds), Reforming the Revolution China in Transition (London: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, R. et al. (1987) Economics and Technical Change (London: Macmillan).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cozzens, S. E. (1986) ‘Funding and Knowledge Growth’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 16, pp. 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. (1974) The Economics of Industrial Innovation (Harmondsworth: Penguin).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman C. (1988) ‘Qualitative and Quantitative Factors in National Technology Policies’, in J. Annerstedt and A. Jamison (eds), From Research Policy to Social Intelligence (London: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gummett, P. (1986) ‘How to Influence Government Policy’, Science and Public Policy, Feb., pp. 60–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guy, K. et al. (1987) Evaluation of the Alvey Programme (London: HMSO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes, N. (1986) The Worst Accident in the World: Chernobyl, the end of the nuclear dream (London: Heinemann).

    Google Scholar 

  • HMSO (1914–16) Scheme for the Organisation and Development of Scientific and Industrial Research, Cd 8005, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • HMSO (1979) The Control of Radioactive Wastes: a review of Cmnd 884 (London: HMSO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Irvine, J. and B. Martin (1984) Foresight in Science: Picking the Winners (London: Frances Pinter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A. (1985) Risk and the Control of Technology (Manchester: Manchester University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A. and P. Vergragt (1989) ‘Rethinking the relationship between environmental regulation and industrial innovation: the social negotiation of technical change’, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, Vol. 1 (1), pp. 57–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ives, J. (1986) Transnational Corporations and Environmental Control (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. S. (1987) ‘Contested Boundaries in Policy Related Science’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 17, pp. 195–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamin, L. J. (1974) The Science and Politics of IQ (Maryland: Erlbaum).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. (1980) The Policy Making Process (second edition) (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. and J. Irvine (1985) ‘Evaluating the Evaluators’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 15, pp. 558–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation (1989) Science Literature Indicators (Washington: NSF) (annually).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelkin, D. (1979) Controversy: politics of technical decisions (New York: Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronayne, J. (1984) Science in Government (London: Edward Arnold).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, S. (1976) ‘Scientific Racism and Ideology: The IQ Racket from Galton to Jensen’, in H. & S. Rose (eds), The Political Economy of Science (London: Macmillan).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R. (1984) ‘Difficulties of National Innovation Policies,’ in M. Gibbons et al. (eds), Science and Technology Policy in the 1980s and Beyond (Harlow: Longman).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, W. (1983) ‘The finalisation debate’, in W. Schafer (1983) (op. cit.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, S. F. (1979) ‘The Nuclear Waste Disposal Controversy’, in D. Nelkin (op. cit.) pp. 91–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (1986) National Styles of Regulation: Environmental Policy in Great Britain and the United States (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Warnock, M. (1985) A Question of Life: The Warnock Report on Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Oxford: Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1982) Rationality and Ritual: The Windscale Inquiry and Nuclear Decisions in Britain (Chalfont St Giles: British Society for the History of Science).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. ‘Not in My Backyard’, The Times Higher Education Supplement, 25 November 1988, pp. 20–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yearley, S. (1987) Science, Technology and Social Change (London: Unwin Hyman).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Andrew Webster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1991 Andrew Webster

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Webster, A. (1991). Sociology and Science Policy: Opening and Managing the ‘Black Box’. In: Science, Technology and Society. Sociology for a Changing World. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21875-2_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation