Matching Items (4)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

152625-Thumbnail Image.png

Negotiating socio-technical contracts: anticipatory governance and reproductive technologies

Description
This project develops the "socio-technical contract" concept, a notion that signifies the kinds of socio-technological assumptions and arrangements that characterize a particular domain of policy or practice. Socio-technical contracts, unlike their social contract counterparts in political theory, represent active negotiation and renegotiation of social contracts around emerging technologies, as opposed…

This project develops the "socio-technical contract" concept, a notion that signifies the kinds of socio-technological assumptions and arrangements that characterize a particular domain of policy or practice. Socio-technical contracts, unlike their social contract counterparts in political theory, represent active negotiation and renegotiation of social contracts around emerging technologies, as opposed to the tacit social contracts of thinkers such as Locke. I use the socio-technical contract concept to analyze the governance of assisted reproductive technologies in the United Kingdom. For increasing numbers of people, reproduction is happening in a fundamentally different way. Conception outside of the womb became a reality with the 1978 birth of Louise Brown, the first baby born via in-vitro fertilization. Alongside Louise Brown's birth emerged new social and governance configurations around reproductive technologies, including, in the United Kingdom, the establishment of a national regulatory agency, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. The project applies the socio-technical contract concept in order to examine how distributed governance and socio-cultural processes in the British context worked over time to renegotiate fundamental ideas about families and kinship, the boundaries of "ethical" science, rules governing release of information, the "right to an identity," the role of the state in the reproductive choices of individuals, and general approaches to how to think about the roles and relationships of the child, parents, and the state in and around the introduction of these technologies. As these changes have occurred, policies, social understandings, and legal rights have been renegotiated and new governance capacities, what I call "anticipatory capacities," have come into existence to manage and coordinate change across complex social systems. In illuminating anticipatory capacities in each context, I explore the tools deployed by government actors, scientists, stakeholders, and citizens in negotiating evolving socio-technical contracts around reproductive technologies.
ContributorsConley, Shannon (Author) / Miller, Clark A. (Thesis advisor) / Guston, David H. (Committee member) / Fisher, Erik (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
156160-Thumbnail Image.png

A biography of endocrine disruptors: the narrative surrounding the appearance and regulation of a new category of toxic substances

Description
Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that interact with the hormone system to negative effect. They ‘disrupt’ normal processes to cause diseases like vaginal cancer and obesity, reproductive issues like t-shaped uteri and infertility, and developmental abnormalities like spina bifida and cleft palate. These chemicals are ubiquitous in our daily lives, components…

Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that interact with the hormone system to negative effect. They ‘disrupt’ normal processes to cause diseases like vaginal cancer and obesity, reproductive issues like t-shaped uteri and infertility, and developmental abnormalities like spina bifida and cleft palate. These chemicals are ubiquitous in our daily lives, components in everything from toothpaste to microwave popcorn to plastic water bottles. My dissertation looks at the history, science, and regulation of these impactful substances in order to answer the question of how endocrine disruptors appeared, got interpreted by different groups, and what role science played in the process. My analysis reveals that endocrine disruptors followed a unique science policy trajectory in the US, rapidly going from their proposal in 1991 to their federal regulation in 1996, even amid intense and majority scientific disagreement over whether the substances existed at all. That trajectory resulted from the work of a small number of scientist-activists who constructed a concept and category as scientific, social, and regulatory. By playing actors from each sphere against each other and advancing a very specific scientific narrative that fit into a regulatory and social window of opportunity in the 1990s, those scientist-activists made endocrine disruptors a national issue that few could ignore. Those actions resulted in the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, a heavily-criticized and ineffective regulatory program. My dissertation tells a story of the past that informs the present. In 2018, the work of researchers, public media, and policymakers in the 1990s continues to play out, evident in the deep scientific division over endocrine disrupting effects and the inability of the European Union to settle on even a definition of endocrine disruptors for regulation purposes.
ContributorsAbboud, Alexis J (Author) / Maienschein, Jane A (Thesis advisor) / Crow, Michael M. (Committee member) / Hurlbut, J. Benjamin (Committee member) / Marchant, Gary E (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
171600-Thumbnail Image.png

Environmental Governance Amidst Conflicting Knowledge Systems: Unpacking the Science-Policy Interface in Indian Forestry

Description
The governance of natural resources often gets implicitly or explicitly shaped by the knowledge systems that are invoked for making decisions. These knowledge systems reflect the underlying notions of how human-nature relationships are conceived and operationalized by different stakeholders in the governance system. Conflicts in the science-policy interface in environmental…

The governance of natural resources often gets implicitly or explicitly shaped by the knowledge systems that are invoked for making decisions. These knowledge systems reflect the underlying notions of how human-nature relationships are conceived and operationalized by different stakeholders in the governance system. Conflicts in the science-policy interface in environmental governance arise when specific conceptions of nature dominate over other ways of knowing, when stakeholders with representing different knowledge systems have disproportionate degrees of influence in policymaking spaces, or when certain stakeholders are deracinated from their resources and long-held knowledge traditions. This dissertation examines the epistemic conflicts that exist in the Indian forestry that have led to a situation of policy stalemate in the governance system and continue to perpetuate colonial systems of scientific forestry and marginalize local knowledge traditions. To do so, this dissertation analyzes three datasets to understand the extent and consequences of this conflict in the forestry sciences in Indian academia. First, scientific discourses on the Indian Forest Rights Act are examined to understand the normative and epistemic practices that lead to differences in perspectives and scientific positions on forest governance. Second, the forest policy literature is analyzed using bibliometrics techniques to identify the intellectual and social silos in forestry sciences in India. Third, interview data from Indian forest scientists is analyzed to understand the inequalities within the science-policy interface in Indian forestry and how these perpetuate colonial legacies of forestry science. This dissertation concludes with recommendations and future pathways for knowledge integration and policy deliberations to make more decolonial, inclusive, and sustainable policies in Indian forestry.
ContributorsBisht, Vanya (Author) / Chhetri, Nalini (Thesis advisor) / Fisher, Erik (Thesis advisor) / Berbés-Blázquez, Marta (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
154315-Thumbnail Image.png

Responsible innovation and sustainability: interventions in education and training of scientists and engineers

Description

Three dilemmas plague governance of scientific research and technological

innovation: the dilemma of orientation, the dilemma of legitimacy, and the dilemma of control. The dilemma of orientation risks innovation heedless of long-term implications. The dilemma of legitimacy grapples with delegation of authority in democracies, often at the expense of broader public…

Three dilemmas plague governance of scientific research and technological

innovation: the dilemma of orientation, the dilemma of legitimacy, and the dilemma of control. The dilemma of orientation risks innovation heedless of long-term implications. The dilemma of legitimacy grapples with delegation of authority in democracies, often at the expense of broader public interest. The dilemma of control poses that the undesirable implications of new technologies are hard to grasp, yet once grasped, all too difficult to remedy. That humanity has innovated itself into the sustainability crisis is a prime manifestation of these dilemmas.

Responsible innovation (RI), with foci on anticipation, inclusion, reflection, coordination, and adaptation, aims to mitigate dilemmas of orientation, legitimacy, and control. The aspiration of RI is to bend the processes of technology development toward more just, sustainable, and societally desirable outcomes. Despite the potential for fruitful interaction across RI’s constitutive domains—sustainability science and social studies of science and technology—most sustainability scientists under-theorize the sociopolitical dimensions of technological systems and most science and technology scholars hesitate to take a normative, solutions-oriented stance. Efforts to advance RI, although notable, entail one-off projects that do not lend themselves to comparative analysis for learning.

In this dissertation, I offer an intervention research framework to aid systematic study of intentional programs of change to advance responsible innovation. Two empirical studies demonstrate the framework in application. An evaluation of Science Outside the Lab presents a program to help early-career scientists and engineers understand the complexities of science policy. An evaluation of a Community Engagement Workshop presents a program to help engineers better look beyond technology, listen to and learn from people, and empower communities. Each program is efficacious in helping scientists and engineers more thoughtfully engage with mediators of science and technology governance dilemmas: Science Outside the Lab in revealing the dilemmas of orientation and legitimacy; Community Engagement Workshop in offering reflexive and inclusive approaches to control. As part of a larger intervention research portfolio, these and other projects hold promise for aiding governance of science and technology through responsible innovation.
ContributorsBernstein, Michael J. (Author) / Wiek, Arnim (Thesis advisor) / Wetmore, Jameson M. (Thesis advisor) / Grimm, Nancy (Committee member) / Anderies, John M (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016