Minerva最新文献

In recent years, British science policy has seen a significant shift 'from deficit to dialogue' in conceptualizing the relationship between science and the public. Academics in the interdisciplinary field of Science and Technology Studies (STS) have been influential as advocates of the new public engagement agenda. However, this participatory agenda has deeper roots in the political ideology of the Third Way. A framing of participation as a politics suited to post-Fordist conditions was put forward in the magazine Marxism Today in the late 1980s, developed in the Demos thinktank in the 1990s, and influenced policy of the New Labour government. The encouragement of public participation and deliberation in relation to science and technology has been part of a broader implementation of participatory mechanisms under New Labour. This participatory program has been explicitly oriented toward producing forms of social consciousness and activity seen as essential to a viable knowledge economy and consumer society. STS arguments for public engagement in science have gained influence insofar as they have intersected with the Third Way politics of post-Fordism.

As public research organisations are increasingly driven by their national and regional governments to engage in knowledge transfer, they have started to support the creation of companies. These research based spin-off companies (RBSOs) often keep contacts with the research institutes they originate from. In this paper we present the results of a study of four research institutes within two universities and two non-university public research organisations (PROs) in the Netherlands. We show that research organisations have distinct motivations to support the creation of spin-off companies. In terms of resources RBSOs contribute, mostly in a modest way, to research activities by providing information, equipment and monetary resources. In particular, RBSOs are helpful for researchers competing for research grants that demand participation of industry. Furthermore, RBSOs may be seen as a proactive response by Dutch public research organisations to demands of economic relevance from their institutional environment. RBSOs enhance the prestige of their parent organisations and create legitimacy for public funds invested in PROs. At the same time, most RBSOs do not have a significant impact on the direction of the research conducted at the PROs.

This article aims to open up the biographical black box of three experts working in the boundary zone between science, policy and public debate. A biographical-narrative approach is used to analyse the roles played by the virologists Albert Osterhaus, Roel Coutinho and Jaap Goudsmit in policy and public debate. These figures were among the few leading virologists visibly active in the Netherlands during the revival of infectious diseases in the 1980s. Osterhaus and Coutinho in particular are still the key figures today, as demonstrated during the outbreak of novel influenza A (H1N1). This article studies the various political and communicative challenges and dilemmas encountered by these three virologists, and discusses the way in which, strategically or not, they handled those challenges and dilemmas during the various stages of the field's recent history. Important in this respect is their pursuit of a public role that is both effective and credible. We will conclude with a reflection on the H1N1 pandemic, and the historical and biographical ties between emerging governance arrangements and the experts involved in the development of such arrangements.

One of the unintended consequences of the New Public Management (NPM) in universities is often feared to be a division between elite institutions focused on research and large institutions with teaching missions. However, institutional isomorphisms provide counter-incentives. For example, university rankings focus on certain output parameters such as publications, but not on others (e.g., patents). In this study, we apply Gini coefficients to university rankings in order to assess whether universities are becoming more unequal, at the level of both the world and individual nations. Our results do not support the thesis that universities are becoming more unequal. If anything, we predominantly find homogenisation, both at the level of the global comparisons and nationally. In a more restricted dataset (using only publications in the natural and life sciences), we find increasing inequality for those countries, which used NPM during the 1990s, but not during the 2000s. Our findings suggest that increased output steering from the policy side leads to a global conformation to performance standards.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the nature of bureaucratization within public research bodies and its relationship to scientific performance, focusing on an Italian case-study. The main finding is that the bureaucratization of the research sector has two dimensions: public research labs have academic bureaucratization since researchers spend an increasing part of their time in administrative matters (i.e., preparing grant applications, managing grants/projects, and so on); whereas universities mainly have administrative bureaucratization generated by the increase over time of administrative staff in comparison with researchers and faculty. In addition, I show that research units with higher bureaucratization have lower scientific performance.

The paper provides a brief introduction to the biotechnology revolution and its impact upon biological research relevant to military uses. It describes the status of biological weapon today, and current efforts to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention with a legally binding compliance protocol. Specific modifications of micro-organisms that may be of military use are discussed. There examples of dual-use research activities are then used to highlight issues and dilemmas in ethical decision making.

This article presents historical cases in which British scientists, principally scientific advisors, have attempted to defend research on biological weapons. Although the historical record is scant, there is a degree of continuity in their justifications, and a number of themes can be identified. It was argued, that biological weapons research is morally justified because it produces humane weapons; that it is no different from medical or other research; and that is being performed for defensive purposes. It is argued that this defence is directed primarily towards other scientists working on germ warfare, and was formed part of the 'moral economy' of that secret community.

This paper provides a short account of the South African Defence Force's chemical and biological warfare programme during apartheid, specifically during the period 1980 to 1994. It examines the circumstances of recruitment of the scientists and physicians and their retention in the programme; details the 'scientific efforts' of the programme and its aberrations; and explores ethical issues in relation to the involvement of scientists in the programme.

This paper examines the role of ethics in research with potential applicability to chemical and biological warfare. If focuses upon biological warfare research, and examines the ethical dilemmas faced by those working with dual-use potential technologies. It discusses the normative, legal and ethical prohibitions against participation in chemical and biological warfare programmes from a Western perspective. It examines the motivations of individuals participating in CBW research and concludes with recommendations for increasing awareness about ethical and normative prohibitions. An appendix lists the results of a survey of ethical codes in relevant scientific disciplines conducted via the Internet.