IsisCB Explore

Article ID: CBB153866236

‘Nothing to do with the science’: How an elite sociotechnical imaginary cements policy resistance to public perspectives on science and technology through the machinery of government (August 2020)

Melanie Smallman (Author)

Social Studies of Science
Volume: 50
Issue: 4
Pages: 589-608

DOI: 10.1177/0306312719879768

URI: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0306312719879768

Publication Date: August 2020
Edition Details: Sociotechnical imaginaries: An accidental themed issue
Language: English

Outside Links

WorldCat

Google Scholar

JSTOR

Academia.edu

Science Interviews Technoscience; science and technology studies Citizen participation Public policy Expertise Decision making Imaginaries Great Britain

That policymakers adopt technoscientific viewpoints and lack reflexivity is a common criticism of scientific decision-making, particularly in response to moves to democratize science. Drawing on interviews with UK-based national policymakers, I argue that an elite sociotechnical imaginary of ‘science to the rescue’ shapes how public perspectives are heard and distinguishes what is considered to be legitimate expertise. The machinery of policy-making has become shaped around this imaginary – particularly its focus on science as a problem-solver and on social and ethical issues as ‘nothing to do with the science’ – and this gives this viewpoint its power, persistence and endurance. With this imaginary at the heart of policy-making machinery, regardless of the perspectives of the policymakers, alternative views of science are either forced to take the form of the elite imaginary in order to be processed, or they simply cannot be accounted for within the policy-making processes. In this way, the elite sociotechnical imaginary (and technoscientific viewpoint) is enacted, but also elicited and perpetuated, without the need for policymakers to engage with or even be aware of the imaginary underpinning their actions.

...More

Included in

Article Sergio Sismondo (August 2020) Sociotechnical imaginaries: An accidental themed issue. Social Studies of Science (pp. 505-507). unapi

Citation URI

https://data.isiscb.org/isis/citation/CBB153866236/

Citations Indexes

Similar Citations

Article Yevgeniya Tomkiv; Astrid Liland; Deborah H. Oughton; Brian Wynne; (2017)
Assessing Quality of Stakeholder Engagement: From Bureaucracy to Democracy (/isis/citation/CBB106267662/)

Article Seungmi Chung; Kun Hee Kim; Yeseul Park; Hyomin Kim; (2021)
A Site of Bounded Imaginaries: Local Narratives of Buan after Protests against a Nuclear Waste Repository (/isis/citation/CBB959012966/)

Article Sung Hwan Kim; Hyomin Kim; Sungsoo Song; (September 2020)
Public Deliberation on South Korean Nuclear Power Plants: How Can Lay Knowledge Resist against Expertise? (/isis/citation/CBB276383449/)

Article Bert Toussaint; (August 2019)
(Transport) history as policy lab for democratic governance (/isis/citation/CBB608036589/)

Article Luis Reyes-Galindo; (January 2017)
Molecular Detector (Non)Technology in Mexico (/isis/citation/CBB757495306/)

Article Harry Collins; Robert Evans; Weinel; (August 2016)
STS as science or politics? (/isis/citation/CBB795627192/)

Article Jan-Peter Voß; Jannik Schritt; Volkan Sayman; (February 2022)
Politics at a distance: Infrastructuring knowledge flows for democratic innovation (/isis/citation/CBB229106240/)

Article Bruno M. L. Pinto; José L. Costa; Henrique N. Cabral; (2017)
How Do Science Communication Practitioners View Scientists and Audiences in Relation to Public Engagement Activities? A Research Note Concerning the Marine Sciences in Portugal (/isis/citation/CBB523457002/)

Article Jaya Keaney; (2022)
The Racializing Womb: Surrogacy and Epigenetic Kinship (/isis/citation/CBB389875479/)

Article Barbara L. Allen; (November 2018)
Strongly Participatory Science and Knowledge Justice in an Environmentally Contested Region (/isis/citation/CBB069762669/)

Article Christy Spackman; Gary A. Burlingame; (June 2018)
Sensory politics: The tug-of-war between potability and palatability in municipal water production (/isis/citation/CBB215070697/)

Article Marianne Ryghaug; Tomas Moe Skjølsvold; Sara Heidenreich; (April 2018)
Creating energy citizenship through material participation (/isis/citation/CBB950810562/)

Article Dow Schüll, Natusha; Zaloom, Caitlin; (August 2011)
The shortsighted brain: Neuroeconomics and the governance of choice in time (/isis/citation/CBB240640662/)

Article Thomas Völker; Ângela Guimarães Pereira; (2023)
“What Was That Word? It’s Part of Ensuring Its Future Existence” Exploring Engagement Collectives at the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (/isis/citation/CBB083165853/)

Article Shi Lin Loh; Sulfikar Amir; (June 2019)
Healing Fukushima: Radiation hazards and disaster medicine in post-3.11 Japan (/isis/citation/CBB754363980/)

Article Elina I. Mäkinen; (March 2018)
Action in the Space Between: From Latent to Active Boundaries (/isis/citation/CBB718195671/)

Article Christopher Lawless; (2020)
Assembling airspace: The Single European Sky and contested transnationalities of European air traffic management (/isis/citation/CBB169587089/)

Article Benjamin K Sovacool; Noam Bergman; Debbie Hopkins; Kirsten EH Jenkins; Sabine Hielscher; Andreas Goldthau; Brent Brossmann; (August 2020)
Imagining sustainable energy and mobility transitions: Valence, temporality, and radicalism in 38 visions of a low-carbon future (/isis/citation/CBB482828082/)

Article John Gardner; (September 2017)
Accelerating Innovation in the Creation of Biovalue: The Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult (/isis/citation/CBB000462445/)

Article Guus Dix; (April 2019)
Microeconomic forecasting: Constructing commensurable futures of educational reforms (/isis/citation/CBB842460109/)

Comments

{{ comment.created_by.username }} on {{ comment.created_on | date:'medium' }}