IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v39y2012i4p429-438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing prospects and risk in the public promotion of ESS Scandinavia

Author

Listed:
  • Wilhelm Agrell

Abstract

The public campaign to locate the European Spallation Source (ESS) near Lund, southern Sweden is considered. The public case for ESS Scandinavia offers an opportunity to study how a large-scale investment in 'big science' is presented and marketed in a specific national setting, using 'offensive' as well as 'defensive' public relations strategies to cope with an issue where the media--public opinion interaction could be either an asset and even a precondition for success, or a powerful and unpredictable potential threat. The offensive strategy was based on a dualistic description of the nature of future science, as on the one hand incomprehensible and on the other predictable in terms of material deliveries: a mixture of mystique and instrument for future innovations. Lacking an active anti-ESS movement and a critical media campaign, the defensive strategy remained unfocused, mirroring environmental scepticism over land use as well as earlier controversies over nuclear energy. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilhelm Agrell, 2012. "Framing prospects and risk in the public promotion of ESS Scandinavia," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(4), pages 429-438, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:39:y:2012:i:4:p:429-438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scs045
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Olof Hallonsten, 2014. "How expensive is Big Science? Consequences of using simple publication counts in performance assessment of large scientific facilities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 483-496, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:scippl:v:39:y:2012:i:4:p:429-438. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.