Legitimation problems of participatory processes in technology assessment and technology policy

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Legitimation problems of participatory processes in technology assessment and technology policy. / Saretzki, Thomas.
In: Poiesis & Praxis. International Journal of Ethics and Technology Assessment, Vol. 9, No. 1-2, 16.11.2012, p. 7-26.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{9f7d787a6b9c4abfa16f3d22c10f606c,
title = "Legitimation problems of participatory processes in technology assessment and technology policy",
abstract = "Since James Carroll (1971) made a strong case for {\textquoteleft}{\textquoteleft}participatorytechnology{\textquoteright}{\textquoteright}, scientists, engineers, policy-makers and the public at large have seenquite a number of different approaches to design and implement participatoryprocesses in technology assessment and technology policy. As these participatoryexperiments and practices spread over the last two decades, one could easily get theimpression that participation turned from a theoretical normative claim to a workingpractice that goes without saying. Looking beyond the well-known forerunners andconsidering the ambivalent experiences that have been made under different conditionsin various places, however, the {\textquoteleft}{\textquoteleft}if{\textquoteright}{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}{\textquoteleft}how{\textquoteright}{\textquoteright} of participation are stillcontested issues when questions of technology are on the agenda. Legitimationproblems indicate that attempts to justify participation in a given case have not beenentirely successful in the eyes of relevant groups among the sponsors, participants,organizers or observers. Legitimation problems of participatory processes in technologyassessment and technology policy vary considerably, and they do so not onlywith the two domains and the ways of their interrelation or the specific features ofthe participatory processes. If we ask whether or not participation is seen asproblematic in technology assessment and technology policy-making and in whatsense it is being evaluated as problematic, then we find that the answer depends alsoon the approaches and criteria that have been used to legitimize or delegitimize thecall for a specific design of participation.",
keywords = "Politics, Technikfolgenabsch{\"a}tzung",
author = "Thomas Saretzki",
year = "2012",
month = nov,
day = "16",
doi = "10.1007/s10202-012-0123-4",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "7--26",
journal = "Poiesis & Praxis. International Journal of Ethics and Technology Assessment",
issn = "1615-6609",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "1-2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Legitimation problems of participatory processes in technology assessment and technology policy

AU - Saretzki, Thomas

PY - 2012/11/16

Y1 - 2012/11/16

N2 - Since James Carroll (1971) made a strong case for ‘‘participatorytechnology’’, scientists, engineers, policy-makers and the public at large have seenquite a number of different approaches to design and implement participatoryprocesses in technology assessment and technology policy. As these participatoryexperiments and practices spread over the last two decades, one could easily get theimpression that participation turned from a theoretical normative claim to a workingpractice that goes without saying. Looking beyond the well-known forerunners andconsidering the ambivalent experiences that have been made under different conditionsin various places, however, the ‘‘if’’ and ‘‘how’’ of participation are stillcontested issues when questions of technology are on the agenda. Legitimationproblems indicate that attempts to justify participation in a given case have not beenentirely successful in the eyes of relevant groups among the sponsors, participants,organizers or observers. Legitimation problems of participatory processes in technologyassessment and technology policy vary considerably, and they do so not onlywith the two domains and the ways of their interrelation or the specific features ofthe participatory processes. If we ask whether or not participation is seen asproblematic in technology assessment and technology policy-making and in whatsense it is being evaluated as problematic, then we find that the answer depends alsoon the approaches and criteria that have been used to legitimize or delegitimize thecall for a specific design of participation.

AB - Since James Carroll (1971) made a strong case for ‘‘participatorytechnology’’, scientists, engineers, policy-makers and the public at large have seenquite a number of different approaches to design and implement participatoryprocesses in technology assessment and technology policy. As these participatoryexperiments and practices spread over the last two decades, one could easily get theimpression that participation turned from a theoretical normative claim to a workingpractice that goes without saying. Looking beyond the well-known forerunners andconsidering the ambivalent experiences that have been made under different conditionsin various places, however, the ‘‘if’’ and ‘‘how’’ of participation are stillcontested issues when questions of technology are on the agenda. Legitimationproblems indicate that attempts to justify participation in a given case have not beenentirely successful in the eyes of relevant groups among the sponsors, participants,organizers or observers. Legitimation problems of participatory processes in technologyassessment and technology policy vary considerably, and they do so not onlywith the two domains and the ways of their interrelation or the specific features ofthe participatory processes. If we ask whether or not participation is seen asproblematic in technology assessment and technology policy-making and in whatsense it is being evaluated as problematic, then we find that the answer depends alsoon the approaches and criteria that have been used to legitimize or delegitimize thecall for a specific design of participation.

KW - Politics

KW - Technikfolgenabschätzung

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84870710701&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10202-012-0123-4

DO - 10.1007/s10202-012-0123-4

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 23204993

VL - 9

SP - 7

EP - 26

JO - Poiesis & Praxis. International Journal of Ethics and Technology Assessment

JF - Poiesis & Praxis. International Journal of Ethics and Technology Assessment

SN - 1615-6609

IS - 1-2

ER -

Recently viewed

Activities

  1. Digital Media and Organization
  2. Negotiating normativity: discourses of (non) belonging and (non) coincidences in the context of transnational adoption
  3. Analysing Improvement Processes in the Context of School Inspection
  4. HyperKult XXIII – Bring your own... 2014
  5. Robots versus Machines
  6. Schreiben digital = Schreiben ohne Regeln?
  7. Conference presentation: The Relationship between the Internal Audit Function and the Audit Committee. An empirical analysis for the One- and Two Tier-System
  8. Navigating cognition biases in the search of sustainability
  9. Fostering Oral Skills Through the Use of Participatory Web 2.0 Technologies in the Project-based EFL Classroom
  10. Effects of an Internet-based guided self-help intervention for college women with eating disorders: Long-term results from a large randomized controlled trial.
  11. 15th Internation Conference on Renewable Resources and Biorefineries
  12. Journal of the Writing Research (Zeitschrift)
  13. Criteria and Strategies of Student Teachers to Deal with Teaching Material from the Internet about Refugees
  14. Zootechnologies. A Media History of Swarm Intelligence
  15. A Geometric Approach for the Model Parameter Estimation in a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor
  16. Working and learning from home post-covid
  17. Doing space: Atmospheres of teaching
  18. Advances in large scale production of mircoalgae and mussels (Mytilus edulis)
  19. International Conference on E-Health Networking, Application and Services 2017
  20. Exploring the potential role of priority effects for ecological restoration
  21. International Relations (Fachzeitschrift)
  22. Where tasks, technology, and textbooks meet: Intelligent tutoring systems on the task-based language teacher's horizon (SLTED, Universität Wien)
  23. Humboldt Universität zu Berlin

Publications

  1. Multi-view hidden markov perceptrons
  2. Diffusion of the Balanced Scorecard
  3. Perceptron and SVM learning with generalized cost models
  4. Interplay of formative assessment and instructional quality—interactive effects on students’ mathematics achievement
  5. Properties of some overlapping self-similar and some self-affine measures
  6. Non-identity – So what? A political scientist’s perspective on a curious but somehow arbitrary problem
  7. Application of friction surfacing for solid state additive manufacturing of cylindrical shell structures
  8. Control oriented modeling of DCDC converters
  9. Prothesen, Aufschreibesysteme, Cyborgs
  10. Land use affects dung beetle communities and their ecosystem service in forests and grasslands
  11. Collaboration and Open Science Initiatives in Primate Research
  12. Developmentalities and donor-NGO relations
  13. Relative wage positions and quit behavior
  14. Fast, curvature-based prediction of rolling forces for porous media based on a series of detailed simulations
  15. Quality and Adoption of COVID-19 Tracing Apps and Recommendations for Development
  16. 3D Simulation of Electric Arcing and Pressure increase in an Automotive HVDC Relay During a Short Circuit Situation
  17. Tschick
  18. Influences of yttrium content on microstructure and mechanical properties of as-cast Mg–Ca–Y–Zr alloys
  19. Digital technology in game-based approaches
  20. Planning for Sea Spaces I: Processes, Practices and Future Perspectives
  21. Modeling Bolt Load Retention of Ca modified AS41 using compliance-creep method
  22. Beyond Structural Adjustment
  23. Time-varying persistence in real oil prices and its determinant