IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v67y2021ics0160791x2100258x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Science policy and democracy

Author

Listed:
  • Mitcham, Carl
  • Emeritus,

Abstract

Vannevar Bush's Science: The Endless Frontier (1945) continues to serve as the default statement of United States science policy and has been republished with an extended defense by Rush Holt, a research physicist, former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and recent executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Holt recognizes some challenges in Bush's conception of the science-democracy relationship but then makes his own case for a revised understanding of the relationship between science and the American regime. An unquestioned assumption of both Bush and Holt is that science benefits democracy, that democracy is even dependent on science. For Bush the dependency is strictly material, for Holt it is also procedural. Holt's particular appeal is to the value of science as providing evidence based knowledge that can increase rationality in democratic politics. This appeal is made, however, without acknowledging counter-evidence about the ways science can be socially destabilizing.

Suggested Citation

  • Mitcham, Carl & Emeritus,, 2021. "Science policy and democracy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:67:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x2100258x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101783
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X2100258X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101783?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Briggle, Adam & Mitcham, Carl, 2009. "Embedding and networking: conceptualizing experience in a technosociety," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 374-383.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ingemar Elander, 2022. "Urban Renewal, Governance and Sustainable Development: More of the Same or New Paths?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-7, January.
    2. Stefan Wallaschek & Kavyanjali Kaushik & Monika Verbalyte & Aleksandra Sojka & Giuliana Sorci & Hans-Jörg Trenz & Monika Eigmüller, 2022. "Same Same but Different? Gender Politics and (Trans-)National Value Contestation in Europe on Twitter," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 146-160.
    3. Cinzia Daraio & Simone Di Leo & Loet Leydesdorff, 2023. "A heuristic approach based on Leiden rankings to identify outliers: evidence from Italian universities in the European landscape," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 483-510, January.
    4. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2022. "Academic vs. biological age in research on academic careers: a large-scale study with implications for scientifically developing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3543-3575, June.
    5. Garbe, Lisa & Selvik, Lisa-Marie & Lemaire, Pauline, 2021. "How African countries respond to fake news and hate speech," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-1.
    6. Malte Hückstädt, 2023. "Ten reasons why research collaborations succeed—a random forest approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1923-1950, March.
    7. Manuel Goyanes & Márton Demeter & Aurea Grané & Tamás Tóth & Homero Gil Zúñiga, 2023. "Research patterns in communication (2009–2019): testing female representation and productivity differences, within the most cited authors and the field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 137-156, January.
    8. Cinzia Daraio & Simone Di Leo & Loet Leydesdorff, 2022. "Using the Leiden Rankings as a Heuristics: Evidence from Italian universities in the European landscape," LEM Papers Series 2022/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    9. Jiang, Zhuoren & Lin, Tianqianjin & Huang, Cui, 2023. "Deep representation learning of scientific paper reveals its potential scholarly impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).
    10. Michael Färber & Melissa Coutinho & Shuzhou Yuan, 2023. "Biases in scholarly recommender systems: impact, prevalence, and mitigation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2703-2736, May.
    11. Liang, Zhentao & Ba, Zhichao & Mao, Jin & Li, Gang, 2023. "Research complexity increases with scientists’ academic age: Evidence from library and information science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).
    12. Marton Gellen, 2021. "Development Through Intervention? Revisiting Criticism Of Hungarian Democracy," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 6, pages 84-102.
    13. Weihua Li & Sam Zhang & Zhiming Zheng & Skyler J. Cranmer & Aaron Clauset, 2022. "Untangling the network effects of productivity and prominence among scientists," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Liyin Zhang & Yuchen Qian & Chao Ma & Jiang Li, 2023. "Continued collaboration shortens the transition period of scientists who move to another institution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1765-1784, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:67:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x2100258x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.