Technology assessment as a myth buster: deconstructing myths around emerging technologies

References

• Andrianantoandro, E., S. Basu, D. K. Karig, and R. Weiss. 2006. “Synthetic Biology: New Engineering Rules for an Emerging Discipline.” Molecular and Systems Biology 2: 1–14. doi: 10.1038/msb4100073
   Google Scholar
• Barthes, R. 1973. Mythologies. London: Jonathan Cape (1.ed. 1957, Paris: Seuil).
   Google Scholar
• Bauer, M. W., and G. Gaskell. 1999. “Towards a Paradigm for Research on Social Representations.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 29 (2): 163–186. doi: 10.1111/1468-5914.00096
   Google Scholar
• Blumenberg, H. 2014. Präfiguration. Arbeit am politischen Mythos. Berlin: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Bogner, A., and H. Torgersen. 2015. “Different Ways of Problematising Biotechnology – and What it Means for Technology Governance.” Public Understanding of Science 24: 516–532. doi: 10.1177/0963662514539074
   Google Scholar
• Boon, W., and E. Moors. 2008. “Exploring Emerging Technologies Using Metaphors – A Study of Orphan Drugs and Pharmacogenetics.” Social Science and Medicine 66: 1915–1927. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.01.012
   Google Scholar
• Bottici, C., and B. Challand. 2006. “Rethinking Political Myth: The Clash of Civilizations as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.” European Journal of Social Theory 9 (3): 315–336. doi: 10.1177/1368431006065715
   Google Scholar
• Brune, C. 2003. Roland Barthes: Literatursemiologie und Literarisches Schreiben. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
   Google Scholar
• Collingridge, D. 1980. The Social Control of Technology. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• de Lorenzo, V., and A. Danchin. 2008. “Synthetic Biology: Discovering New Worlds and New Words.” EMBO Report 9 (9): 822–827. doi: 10.1038/embor.2008.159
   Google Scholar
• Dierkes, M., U. Hoffmann, and L. Marz. 1992. Leitbild und Technik: zur Entstehung und Steuerung technischer Innovationen. Berlin: Edition Sigma.
   Google Scholar
• Döring, M., I. Petersen, A. Brüninghaus, and R. Kollek. 2015. Contextualizing Systems Biology: Presuppositions and Implications of a New Approach in Biology. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Döring, M., and H. Torgersen. 2012. “Foundational ‘Mythologies’ of Systems Biology: Narratives of an Emerging Discipline in the Biosciences.” ESRC Genomics Network Conference 2012, 23–24 April, London.
   Google Scholar
• ETC Group. 2007. Extreme Genetic Engineering: An Introduction to Synthetic Biology. Ottawa: ETC Group.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrari, A., C. Coenen, and A. Grunwald. 2012. “Visions and Ethics in Current Discourse on Human Enhancement.” Nanoethics 6 (3): 215–229. doi: 10.1007/s11569-012-0155-1
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, E., R. J. Mahajan, and C. Mitcham. 2006. “Midstream Modulation of Technology: Governance from Within.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 26 (6): 485–496. doi: 10.1177/0270467606295402
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, E., M. O’Rourke, R. Evans, E. B. Kennedy, M. E. Gorman, and T. P. Seager. 2015. “Mapping the Integrative Field: Taking Stock of Socio-technical Collaborations.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 2 (1): 39–61. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2014.1001671
   Google Scholar
• Grin, J., and A. Grunwald, eds. 2000. Vision Assessment: Shaping Technology in 21st Century Society. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Grunwald, A. 2013a. “Techno-visionary Sciences. Challenges to Policy Advice.” Science, Technology & Innovation Studies 9 (2): 21–38.
   Google Scholar
• Grunwald, A. 2013b. “Are We Heading Towards an ‘Enhancement Society’?” In Cognitive Enhancement, edited by E. Hildt and A. G. Franke, 201–216. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Grunwald, A. 2014. “The Hermeneutic Side of Responsible Research and Innovation.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (3): 274–291. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2014.968437
   Google Scholar
• Gudowsky, N., and M. Sotoudeh. 2017. “Into Blue Skies – Transdisciplinary Foresight and Co-creation as Socially Robust Tools for Visioneering Socio-technical Change.” NanoEthics. doi:10.1007/s11569-017-0284-7.
   Google Scholar
• Guston, D. H., and D. Sarewitz. 2001. “Real-time Technology Assessment.” Technology in Society 24 (1): 93–109.
   Google Scholar
• Heinemann, M., and S. Panke. 2006. “Synthetic Biology-putting Engineering into Biology.” Bioinformatics 22: 2790–2799. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl469
   Google Scholar
• Hildt, E., and A. G. Franke, eds. 2013. Cognitive Enhancement. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Hopkins, M. M., P. A. Martin, P. Nightingale, A. Kraft, and S. Mahdi. 2007. “The Myth of the Biotech Revolution: An Assessment of Technological, Clinical and Organisational Change.” Research Policy 36 (4): 566–589. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.02.013
   Google Scholar
• Jamme, Ch., and S. Matuschek. 2014. Handbuch der Mythologie. Darmstadt: Philipp von Zaubern.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., and S. H. Kim. 2009. “Containing the Atom: Socio-technical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea.” Minerva 47: 119–146. doi: 10.1007/s11024-009-9124-4
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., and S. H. Kim. 2015. Dreamscapes of Modernity. Socio-technical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Joss, S., and J. Durant, eds. 1995. Public Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kastenhofer, K. 2009. “Debating the Risks and Ethics of Emerging Technosciences.” Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 22 (1): 77–103.
   Google Scholar
• Körte, M., and A.-K. Reulecke. 2014. “Einleitung: Intellektuelle Korrespondenzen.” In Mythen des Alltags – Mythologies, edited by M. Körte and A.-K. Reulecke, 7–22. Berlin: Kadmos.
   Google Scholar
• Kronberger, N., P. Holtz, and W. Wagner. 2012. “Consequences of Media Information Uptake and Deliberation: Focus Groups’ Symbolic Coping with Synthetic Biology.” Public Understanding of Science 21: 174–187. doi: 10.1177/0963662511400331
   Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G., and M. Johnsen. 2003. Metaphors We Live By. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lévi-Strauss, C. 1955. “The Structural Study of Myths.” The Journal of American Folklore 68 (270): 428–444 (article published in French 1958/1967 and in German 1971). doi: 10.2307/536768
   Google Scholar
• Lévi-Strauss, C. 1978 (1968). The Origin of Table Manners. Introduction to a Science of Mythology. Vol. 3. London: Jonathan Cape.
   Google Scholar
• Lösch, A. 2006. “Means of Communicating Innovations. A Case Study for the Analysis and Assessment of Nanotechnology’s Futuristic Visions.” Science, Technology & Innovation Studies 2: 103–125.
   Google Scholar
• Maasen, S. 2000. “Metaphors in the Social Sciences: Making Use and Making Sense of Them.” In Metaphor and Analogy in the Sciences, edited by Fernand Hallyn, 199–244. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Moscovici, S., and G. Duveen, eds. 2000. Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• NERRI (Neuroenhancement and Responsible Research and Innovation). 2016. Deliverable 4.4: Draft Briefing Papers for a NERRI White Paper, March 2016. Accessed 23 March 2017. http://www.nerri.eu/eng/deliverables.aspx.
   Google Scholar
• Nowotny, H., P. B. Scott, and M. T. Gibbons. 2001. Re-thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Hoboken: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Nuffield Council. 2013. Novel Neurotechnologies – Intervening in the Brain. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, R., P. Macnaghten, and J. Stilgoe. 2012. “Responsible Research and Innovation: From Science in Society to Science for Society, with Society.” Science and Public Policy 39 (6): 751–760. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scs093
   Google Scholar
• Pielke, R. 2015. “Technology Assessment as Political Myth, Keynote Lecture, The Next Horizon of Technology Assessment.” 2nd European PACITA Conference, 25–27 February, Berlin.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, S. 2010. “Interview, Life After the Synthetic Cell.” Nature 465 (7297): 422–424. doi: 10.1038/465422a
   Google Scholar
• Rip, A. 2006. “Folk Theories of Nanotechnologists.” Science as Culture 15 (4): 349–365. doi: 10.1080/09505430601022676
   Google Scholar
• Sauter, A., S. Albrecht, D. van Doren, H. König, T. Reiß, R. Trojok, and S. Elsbach. 2015. Synthetische Biologie – die nächste Stufe der Bio- und Gentechnologie. Berlin: Büro für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung beim Deutschen Bundestag, TAB-Arbeitsbericht Nr. 164.
   Google Scholar
• Savulescu, J., and N. Bostrom, eds. 2009. Human Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schelle, K. J., N. Faulmüller, L. Caviola, and M. Hewstone. 2014. “Attitudes Toward Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement – A Review.” Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience. 17 April 2014. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00053.
   Google Scholar
• Schot, J. W., and A. Rip. 1997. “The Past and Future of Constructive Technology Assessment.” Technological Forecasting & Social Change 54: 251–268. doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00180-1
   Google Scholar
• Selin, C. 2008. “The Sociology of the Future: Tracing Stories of Technology and Time.” Sociology Compass 2 (6): 1878–1895. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00147.x
   Google Scholar
• Torgersen, H., and M. Schmidt. 2013. “Frames and Comparators: How Might a Debate on Synthetic Biology Evolve?” Futures 48: 44–54. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2013.02.002
   Google Scholar
• Van Eijndhoven, J. C. M. 1997. “Technology Assessment: Product or Process?” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 54 (2–3): 269–286. doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00210-7
   Google Scholar
• Von Schomberg, R. 2012. “Prospects for Technology Assessment in a Framework of Responsible Research and Innovation.” In Technikfolgen Abschätzen Lehren. Bildungspotenziale Transdisziplinärer Methoden, edited by M. Dusseldorp and R. Beecroft, 39–62. Wiesbaden: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, W., and N. Hayes. 2005. Everyday Discourse and Common-sense: The Theory of Social Representation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar