生物计量学,现在,未来:科学-社会秩序的想象政治

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Science and Public Policy Pub Date : 2023-11-04 DOI:10.1093/scipol/scad071
Christopher Lawless
{"title":"生物计量学,现在,未来:科学-社会秩序的想象政治","authors":"Christopher Lawless","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Biometric technology encompasses a proliferating array of data forms, applications, and stakeholders but has raised numerous social and ethical concerns. This article examines contending perceptions of biometrics by developing a three-way framework of science–society orderings, drawn from social studies of biometrics and wider science studies literature. By analysing documentary sources and participant observation data through this framework, the article identifies a series of distinct normative interpretations or imaginaries of biometrics. It is argued that these imaginaries, described, respectively, as ‘public good’, ‘collective control’, and ‘societal risks’, project contending normative framings of science–society relations. These imaginaries were also however found to reflexively encompass perceived challenges, giving rise to practices that I term imaginative politics. These findings raise the need for science policy studies to consider the distinction between imagining and realizing in greater depth and to consider more profoundly the politics of science–society co-production.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biometrics, presents, futures: the imaginative politics of science–society orderings\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Lawless\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/scipol/scad071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Biometric technology encompasses a proliferating array of data forms, applications, and stakeholders but has raised numerous social and ethical concerns. This article examines contending perceptions of biometrics by developing a three-way framework of science–society orderings, drawn from social studies of biometrics and wider science studies literature. By analysing documentary sources and participant observation data through this framework, the article identifies a series of distinct normative interpretations or imaginaries of biometrics. It is argued that these imaginaries, described, respectively, as ‘public good’, ‘collective control’, and ‘societal risks’, project contending normative framings of science–society relations. These imaginaries were also however found to reflexively encompass perceived challenges, giving rise to practices that I term imaginative politics. These findings raise the need for science policy studies to consider the distinction between imagining and realizing in greater depth and to consider more profoundly the politics of science–society co-production.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad071\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad071","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生物识别技术包含了大量的数据形式、应用和利益相关者,但也引起了许多社会和伦理问题。本文从生物识别的社会研究和更广泛的科学研究文献中,通过开发一个科学-社会秩序的三方框架,研究了生物识别的争议观念。通过这一框架分析文献来源和参与者观察数据,本文确定了一系列不同的规范解释或生物识别的想象。有人认为,这些想象分别被描述为“公共利益”、“集体控制”和“社会风险”,它们描绘了科学与社会关系的规范性框架。然而,这些想象也被发现反射性地包含了感知到的挑战,产生了我称之为想象政治的实践。这些发现表明,科学政策研究需要更深入地考虑想象和实现之间的区别,并更深刻地考虑科学与社会共同生产的政治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Biometrics, presents, futures: the imaginative politics of science–society orderings
Abstract Biometric technology encompasses a proliferating array of data forms, applications, and stakeholders but has raised numerous social and ethical concerns. This article examines contending perceptions of biometrics by developing a three-way framework of science–society orderings, drawn from social studies of biometrics and wider science studies literature. By analysing documentary sources and participant observation data through this framework, the article identifies a series of distinct normative interpretations or imaginaries of biometrics. It is argued that these imaginaries, described, respectively, as ‘public good’, ‘collective control’, and ‘societal risks’, project contending normative framings of science–society relations. These imaginaries were also however found to reflexively encompass perceived challenges, giving rise to practices that I term imaginative politics. These findings raise the need for science policy studies to consider the distinction between imagining and realizing in greater depth and to consider more profoundly the politics of science–society co-production.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Science and Public Policy is a leading refereed, international journal on public policies for science, technology and innovation, and on their implications for other public policies. It covers basic, applied, high, low, and any other types of S&T, and rich or poorer countries. It is read in around 70 countries, in universities (teaching and research), government ministries and agencies, consultancies, industry and elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
Diversity and directionality: friends or foes in sustainability transitions? Morality policy at the frontier of science: legislators’ views on germline engineering Regulatory agencies as innovation enablers: a conceptualization The impact of winning funding on researcher productivity, results from a randomized trial Operation warp speed: Harbinger of American industrial innovation policies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1