References
- Abels, G. (2007). Citizen involvement in public policy-making: Does it improve democratic legitimacy and accountability? The case of pTA. Interdiscip Inf Sci, 13, 103–116.
- Delvenne, P., Fallon, C., & Brunet, S. (2011). Parliamentary technology assessment institutions as indications of reflexive modernization. Technology in Society, 33, 36–43.
- Diemand- Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2011). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized): Effects of disfluency on retention. Cognition, 118, 111–115.
- Glicken, J. (2000). Getting stakeholder participation ‘right’: A discussion of participatory processes and possible pitfalls. Environmental Science and Policy, 3(6), 305–310.
- Goldstein, D., & Gigerenzer, G. (2009). Fast and frugal forecasting. Int J Forecast, 25, 760–772.
- Irvin, R., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort? Public Administration Review., 64, 55–65.
- Jasanoff, S. (2012). Science and public reason. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Lengwiler, M. (2008). Participatory approaches in science and technology: Historical origins and current practices in critical perspective. Sci Technol Human Values, 33:186–200
- Lessig, L. (2001). The future of ideas: The fate of the commons in a networked world. New York, NY: Vintage.
- March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1976). Ambiguity and choice in organisations (p. 37). Bergen: Universitetsforlaget.
- March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
- Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principles of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853–886.
- Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: Technology, solutionism, and the urge to fix problems that don’t exist. UK: Penguin.
- Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39, 751–760.
- Rask and Damianova. (2009). Citizen visions – preliminary content report, 9.
- Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42, 1568–1580.
- Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations. New York, NY: Doubleday.
- Taleb, N. M. (2010). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable fragility, Vol. 2. New York, NY: Random House.
- Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. (2006). Wikinomics: How mass communication changes everything. London: Penguin Group.
- Van der Helm, R. (2014). The vision phenomenon: Towards a theoretical underpinning of visions of the future and the process of envisioning. Futures, 41, 96–104.
- Von Schomberg, R. (Ed.). (2011). Towards responsible research and innovation in the information and communication technologies and security technologies fields. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union & lt.
- Warnke, P., & Heimeriks, G. (2008). Technology foresight as innovation policy instrument: Learning from science and technology studies. In C. Cagnin, M. Cagnin, R. Johnston, F. Scapolo, & R. Barre (Eds.). Future-oriented technology analysis. Strategic intelligence for an innovative economy (pp. 71−87). London: Springer