The analysis of dissent, or the mobilization of scientific claims to challenge existing political arrangements, has a long history in STS and was central to the formation of the field of STS itself and its current contours. Based on a conference that sought to bring together analysts and activists from around the world and from varied disciplines, this collection illuminates new temporal, geographic, and epistemological lenses through which scientists and other people have creatively challenged relationships of power. First, by attending to long-past practices and to the long-term development of styles and forms of dissent and resistance in Latin America, South Asia, Africa, Europe, and the USA, contributors show how geography and situated forms of politics are mobilized in scientific dissent. Second, contributors also examine how political arrangements shape the ways that the movement of bodies, as well as their sensory qualities, is central to many forms of technoscientific dissent. A third focus, on epistemic politics, demonstrates how building parallel or alternative structures and systems of knowledge pose challenges to power arrangements, even when those systems are not mobilized to make formal legal or administrative challenges.
{"title":"Science & Dissent: Alternative Temporalities, Geographies, Epistemologies","authors":"K. Moore, B. Strasser","doi":"10.17351/ests2022.489","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.489","url":null,"abstract":"The analysis of dissent, or the mobilization of scientific claims to challenge existing political arrangements, has a long history in STS and was central to the formation of the field of STS itself and its current contours. Based on a conference that sought to bring together analysts and activists from around the world and from varied disciplines, this collection illuminates new temporal, geographic, and epistemological lenses through which scientists and other people have creatively challenged relationships of power. First, by attending to long-past practices and to the long-term development of styles and forms of dissent and resistance in Latin America, South Asia, Africa, Europe, and the USA, contributors show how geography and situated forms of politics are mobilized in scientific dissent. Second, contributors also examine how political arrangements shape the ways that the movement of bodies, as well as their sensory qualities, is central to many forms of technoscientific dissent. A third focus, on epistemic politics, demonstrates how building parallel or alternative structures and systems of knowledge pose challenges to power arrangements, even when those systems are not mobilized to make formal legal or administrative challenges.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49058467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper examines alliances between scientists and local groups in the context of environmental justice conflicts. We analyze the trajectories of two white male scientific experts collaborating with activist groups in mining and nuclear conflicts around the world. We posit the knowledge co-production processes that take place in these collaborations can challenge (internal and external) power relations and hegemonic discourses around pollution. These collaborations can entail three types of co-production: (i) co-production of knowledge where new technical knowledge is co-created; (ii) co-production of interpretation through which knowledge is contextualized technically and politically; and (iii) the co-production of the mobilization of knowledge where different expertise collaborate in the elaboration of strategies based on their (scientific, local, Indigenous, traditional or experiential) knowledges and networks. Whilst knowledge co-production provides legitimacy and confidence to local groups; knowledge interpretation and its mobilization provide public legitimacy, visibility, and political leverage. This paper unsettles seemingly colonial processes pointing to the importance of locally driven alliances, the collaborative dynamics at play merging local and scientific expertise as well as the motivations and trajectories of scientists and local groups. Our approach makes visible how these alliances are the result of supra-local networks of support that connect scientists with local groups struggling against extractive activities.
{"title":"Knowledge Co-Production in Scientific and Activist Alliances: Unsettling Coloniality","authors":"Marta Conde, Mariana Walter","doi":"10.17351/ests2022.479","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.479","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines alliances between scientists and local groups in the context of environmental justice conflicts. We analyze the trajectories of two white male scientific experts collaborating with activist groups in mining and nuclear conflicts around the world. We posit the knowledge co-production processes that take place in these collaborations can challenge (internal and external) power relations and hegemonic discourses around pollution. These collaborations can entail three types of co-production: (i) co-production of knowledge where new technical knowledge is co-created; (ii) co-production of interpretation through which knowledge is contextualized technically and politically; and (iii) the co-production of the mobilization of knowledge where different expertise collaborate in the elaboration of strategies based on their (scientific, local, Indigenous, traditional or experiential) knowledges and networks. Whilst knowledge co-production provides legitimacy and confidence to local groups; knowledge interpretation and its mobilization provide public legitimacy, visibility, and political leverage. This paper unsettles seemingly colonial processes pointing to the importance of locally driven alliances, the collaborative dynamics at play merging local and scientific expertise as well as the motivations and trajectories of scientists and local groups. Our approach makes visible how these alliances are the result of supra-local networks of support that connect scientists with local groups struggling against extractive activities.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46212451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this review essay, I discuss the relations between Clarissa Lee’s (2021) Artscience: A Curious Education, Bruno Latour and Peter Weibel’s (2020) edition Critical Zones: The Science and Politics of Landing on Earth, and Arturo Escobar’s (2020) Pluriversal Politics: The Real and the Possible from the point of view of their contribution to cosmoecology and the need to think and inhabit the earth differently.
在这篇综述文章中，我讨论了Clarissa Lee（2021）的《艺术科学：好奇的教育》、Bruno Latour和Peter Weibel（2020）的《临界区：登陆地球的科学与政治》之间的关系，以及阿图罗·埃斯科瓦尔（Arturo Escobar）（2020）的《多元政治：真实与可能》（Pluriversal Politics:The Real and The Possible），从他们对宇宙生态学的贡献以及对地球进行不同思考和居住的必要性的角度来看。
{"title":"How to Deal with Cosmoecological Perplexities: Artscience, Critical Zones, Pluriversal Politics","authors":"C. Jensen","doi":"10.17351/ests2022.1461","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.1461","url":null,"abstract":"In this review essay, I discuss the relations between Clarissa Lee’s (2021) Artscience: A Curious Education, Bruno Latour and Peter Weibel’s (2020) edition Critical Zones: The Science and Politics of Landing on Earth, and Arturo Escobar’s (2020) Pluriversal Politics: The Real and the Possible from the point of view of their contribution to cosmoecology and the need to think and inhabit the earth differently.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46187257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since the critique of science movements emerged in the 1970s, knowledge-power relationships in the technosciences have changed significantly. The mobilizations both of scientists to produce science for the people and of lay producers of knowledge and expertise have helped to remedy the perceived deficits of official science. STS research to date has abundantly and rather enthusiastically examined the forms and conditions of production of this critical, dissident, alternative knowledge, but few studies have looked at how scientific and political elites react to and engage with such knowledge-based mobilizations. Focusing on ways of governing techno-criticism, this article aims to contribute to filling this gap. It investigates the innovative capacity of social movements and public authorities as well as their capacity for renewal and ability to shift power relations in their favor, including in the inevitable crisis and scandal situations. Drawing on empirical evidence from a long-term sociohistorical study of the contestations over French nuclear complexes, I propose an analytical framework that distinguishes four historically situated modes of managing scientifically informed contestations of the technosciences. I conclude that scientized or expert activism can be most effective, including within top-down participatory settings, if it is accompanied by oppositional protest and even radical criticism.
{"title":"From Resistance to Co-Management?: Rethinking Scientization in the Contestation of the Technosciences","authors":"S. Topçu","doi":"10.17351/ests2022.473","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.473","url":null,"abstract":"Since the critique of science movements emerged in the 1970s, knowledge-power relationships in the technosciences have changed significantly. The mobilizations both of scientists to produce science for the people and of lay producers of knowledge and expertise have helped to remedy the perceived deficits of official science. STS research to date has abundantly and rather enthusiastically examined the forms and conditions of production of this critical, dissident, alternative knowledge, but few studies have looked at how scientific and political elites react to and engage with such knowledge-based mobilizations. Focusing on ways of governing techno-criticism, this article aims to contribute to filling this gap. It investigates the innovative capacity of social movements and public authorities as well as their capacity for renewal and ability to shift power relations in their favor, including in the inevitable crisis and scandal situations. Drawing on empirical evidence from a long-term sociohistorical study of the contestations over French nuclear complexes, I propose an analytical framework that distinguishes four historically situated modes of managing scientifically informed contestations of the technosciences. I conclude that scientized or expert activism can be most effective, including within top-down participatory settings, if it is accompanied by oppositional protest and even radical criticism.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47801283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A. Khandekar, Noela Invernizzi, Duygu Kaşdoğan, Alison Kenner, Angela Okune, G. Otsuki, S. Raman, A. Windle, Emily York
This editorial describes the crucial role of building transnationally diverse STS communities that our Editorial Collective (EC) has imagined and sought to implement for Engaging Science, Technology, and Society (ESTS). Community-building as an ethic characterizes all aspects of our EC’s work: from editorial practices to infrastructural development, and from content publication to the broader initiatives that we undertake. In a context where the role of scholarly journals is increasingly instrumentalized through corporate-led valuation systems that effectively also render them largely inaccessible, we see this as an especially important value to affirm in and through strengthening open access publication.
{"title":"Building Community with ESTS","authors":"A. Khandekar, Noela Invernizzi, Duygu Kaşdoğan, Alison Kenner, Angela Okune, G. Otsuki, S. Raman, A. Windle, Emily York","doi":"10.17351/ests2022.1671","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.1671","url":null,"abstract":"This editorial describes the crucial role of building transnationally diverse STS communities that our Editorial Collective (EC) has imagined and sought to implement for Engaging Science, Technology, and Society (ESTS). Community-building as an ethic characterizes all aspects of our EC’s work: from editorial practices to infrastructural development, and from content publication to the broader initiatives that we undertake. In a context where the role of scholarly journals is increasingly instrumentalized through corporate-led valuation systems that effectively also render them largely inaccessible, we see this as an especially important value to affirm in and through strengthening open access publication. \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44782789","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The governance and monitoring of environmental hazards—and of air pollution in particular—is often dominated by technical expertise and scientific knowledge. Approaches of this kind remove the issue from the public debate and democratic deliberation: citizens are de facto excluded from related decision-making and their knowledge about the problem is barely taken into account. This article explores the potential and limits of citizen science to challenge unfair frameworks of environmental monitoring and governance, inasmuch as it empowers citizens, by enabling three critical processes: gaining knowledge, gaining epistemic recognition, and building transdisciplinary coalitions. Empirically, this study is based on AirCasting Brussels, a Citizen Science project that unrolled in Brussels in the context of a mobilization for cleaner air to which it contributed. The analysis shows that citizen science has increased the ability of participating communities to scrutinize air pollution policy and to contribute to and influence public discussion about it, albeit with certain limits. Overall, as a counterpart to their fundamental right to participate in democracy, Citizen Science proves effective to strengthen citizens’ capabilities to do so in a meaningful manner.
{"title":"The Empowering Virtues of Citizen Science: Claiming Clean Air in Brussels","authors":"Nicola da Schio","doi":"10.17351/ests2022.795","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.795","url":null,"abstract":"The governance and monitoring of environmental hazards—and of air pollution in particular—is often dominated by technical expertise and scientific knowledge. Approaches of this kind remove the issue from the public debate and democratic deliberation: citizens are de facto excluded from related decision-making and their knowledge about the problem is barely taken into account. This article explores the potential and limits of citizen science to challenge unfair frameworks of environmental monitoring and governance, inasmuch as it empowers citizens, by enabling three critical processes: gaining knowledge, gaining epistemic recognition, and building transdisciplinary coalitions. Empirically, this study is based on AirCasting Brussels, a Citizen Science project that unrolled in Brussels in the context of a mobilization for cleaner air to which it contributed. The analysis shows that citizen science has increased the ability of participating communities to scrutinize air pollution policy and to contribute to and influence public discussion about it, albeit with certain limits. Overall, as a counterpart to their fundamental right to participate in democracy, Citizen Science proves effective to strengthen citizens’ capabilities to do so in a meaningful manner.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45802119","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Contemporary health research is becoming increasingly data intensive with a dependency on more data, of different types, and on more people. Multiple measures are therefore taken to ensure a variety of data, for example by re-appropriating data collected for purposes other than research. In genetic research, there is a general aim of more personalized diagnostics and treatments. Personalization in many ways depends on access to a universal data pool to gain statistical strength when identifying rare variants affecting unique individuals. If the aim of identifying the unique depends on access to the universal, how are we then to understand the dialectic between these two concepts? Further, if data-intensive research thrives on repurposing data, how does the repurposing affect the interests of the people from whom the data derive? In this article, we explore these questions by comparing two Danish initiatives aimed at making more data available for research through repurposing: one from a screening program of newborns at the beginning of life; and the other through an educational program collecting bodies after death. They both involve reinventing the original collection practices and they illustrate how regulatory frameworks, researchers and research participants reason differently about what can be considered as unique and as universal, as well as the risks and benefits involved in participating in data-intensive research.
{"title":"The Unique and the Universal: Analyzing the Interplay Between Regulatory Frameworks, Researchers and Research Participants in Data Making","authors":"Francisca Nordfalk, Maria Olejaz, K. Høyer","doi":"10.17351/ests2022.929","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.929","url":null,"abstract":"Contemporary health research is becoming increasingly data intensive with a dependency on more data, of different types, and on more people. Multiple measures are therefore taken to ensure a variety of data, for example by re-appropriating data collected for purposes other than research. In genetic research, there is a general aim of more personalized diagnostics and treatments. Personalization in many ways depends on access to a universal data pool to gain statistical strength when identifying rare variants affecting unique individuals. If the aim of identifying the unique depends on access to the universal, how are we then to understand the dialectic between these two concepts? Further, if data-intensive research thrives on repurposing data, how does the repurposing affect the interests of the people from whom the data derive? In this article, we explore these questions by comparing two Danish initiatives aimed at making more data available for research through repurposing: one from a screening program of newborns at the beginning of life; and the other through an educational program collecting bodies after death. They both involve reinventing the original collection practices and they illustrate how regulatory frameworks, researchers and research participants reason differently about what can be considered as unique and as universal, as well as the risks and benefits involved in participating in data-intensive research.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47609708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ESTS Editorial Collective, A. Khandekar, Noela Invernizzi, Duygu Kaşdoğan, Alison Kenner, Angela Okune, G. Otsuki, S. Raman, A. Windle, Emily York
In our previous editorial (Khandekar et al. 2021), we noted the blackboxing of scholarly publication infrastructure that we encountered when we assumed editorship of the journal. We outlined several aspects of infrastructuring that we have undertaken since, with an explicit goal of supporting transnational workflows and participation in ESTS. In this editorial, we continue describing our infrastructural work, highlighting especially the work of content production at ESTS. We also discuss the relevance of our infrastructural work for open access (OA) scholarly publishing.
在我们之前的社论(Khandekar et al. 2021)中，我们注意到我们担任期刊编辑时遇到的学术出版基础设施的黑盒。我们概述了自那时以来我们进行的基础设施建设的几个方面，其明确目标是支持跨国工作流程和参与无害环境技术。在这篇社论中，我们将继续描述我们的基础设施工作，特别强调ESTS的内容制作工作。我们还讨论了我们的基础设施工作与开放获取(OA)学术出版的相关性。
{"title":"Publishing ESTS","authors":"ESTS Editorial Collective, A. Khandekar, Noela Invernizzi, Duygu Kaşdoğan, Alison Kenner, Angela Okune, G. Otsuki, S. Raman, A. Windle, Emily York","doi":"10.17351/ests2021.1407","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2021.1407","url":null,"abstract":"In our previous editorial (Khandekar et al. 2021), we noted the blackboxing of scholarly publication infrastructure that we encountered when we assumed editorship of the journal. We outlined several aspects of infrastructuring that we have undertaken since, with an explicit goal of supporting transnational workflows and participation in ESTS. In this editorial, we continue describing our infrastructural work, highlighting especially the work of content production at ESTS. We also discuss the relevance of our infrastructural work for open access (OA) scholarly publishing.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41482699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the 2020 Prague Virtual Conference of the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S), Sharon Traweek was awarded the society’s John D. Bernal Prize jointly with Langdon Winner. The Bernal Prize is awarded annually to individuals who have made distinguished contributions to the field of STS. Prize recipients include founders of the field of STS, along with outstanding scholars who have devoted their careers to the understanding of the social dimensions of science and technology. In this essay responding to Traweek's Bernal lecture, Sørensen draws on her critical understanding of academic disciplines to discuss how STS may develop the field’s understanding of disciplines, interdisciplinarity, and itself.
{"title":"STS as a Lens to Study Disciplines and Interdisciplinarity","authors":"Knut H. Sørensen","doi":"10.17351/ests2021.857","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2021.857","url":null,"abstract":"In the 2020 Prague Virtual Conference of the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S), Sharon Traweek was awarded the society’s John D. Bernal Prize jointly with Langdon Winner. The Bernal Prize is awarded annually to individuals who have made distinguished contributions to the field of STS. Prize recipients include founders of the field of STS, along with outstanding scholars who have devoted their careers to the understanding of the social dimensions of science and technology. In this essay responding to Traweek's Bernal lecture, Sørensen draws on her critical understanding of academic disciplines to discuss how STS may develop the field’s understanding of disciplines, interdisciplinarity, and itself.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45922518","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the 2020 Prague Virtual Conference of the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S), Sharon Traweek was awarded the society’s John D. Bernal Prize jointly with Langdon Winner. The Bernal Prize is awarded annually to individuals who have made distinguished contributions to the field of STS. Prize recipients include founders of the field of STS, along with outstanding scholars who have devoted their careers to the understanding of the social dimensions of science and technology. This is a reflection on Traweek’s work on epistemic authority in relation to Kaleidos—Center for Interdisciplinary Ethnography in Ecuador.
{"title":"A “Middle Voice” from the South","authors":"Jorge Núñez, Maka Suarez","doi":"10.17351/ests2021.815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2021.815","url":null,"abstract":"In the 2020 Prague Virtual Conference of the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S), Sharon Traweek was awarded the society’s John D. Bernal Prize jointly with Langdon Winner. The Bernal Prize is awarded annually to individuals who have made distinguished contributions to the field of STS. Prize recipients include founders of the field of STS, along with outstanding scholars who have devoted their careers to the understanding of the social dimensions of science and technology. This is a reflection on Traweek’s work on epistemic authority in relation to Kaleidos—Center for Interdisciplinary Ethnography in Ecuador.","PeriodicalId":44976,"journal":{"name":"Engaging Science Technology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49495241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：