PropertyValue
?:about
?:abstract
  • We argue that some of the controversies over the democratic merits of (participatory) technology assessment can be traced to conflicting assumptions about what constitutes a legitimate democratic procedure. We compare how two influential normative models of democracy – ‘representative’ and ‘direct’ – value public engagement processes according to different criteria. Criteria drawn from this analysis are used to compare a series of case studies on xenotransplantation policy-making. We show that the democratic merits of participatory technology assessments probably owe as much to the institutional context as to the precise evaluative criteria or procedural designs. This calls for a closer interaction between science and technology studies research on public engagement and comparative politics scholarship. (xsd:string)
?:contributor
?:dateModified
  • 2011 (xsd:gyear)
?:datePublished
  • 2011 (xsd:gyear)
?:doi
  • 10.3152/030234211X13092649606404 ()
?:duplicate
?:hasFulltext
  • true (xsd:boolean)
is ?:hasPart of
?:inLanguage
  • en (xsd:string)
?:isPartOf
?:issueNumber
  • 8 (xsd:string)
?:linksDOI
?:linksURN
is ?:mainEntity of
?:name
  • Democratic Theory and Citizen Participation: democracy models in the evaluation of public participation in science and technology (xsd:string)
?:provider
?:publicationType
  • Zeitschriftenartikel (xsd:string)
  • journal_article (en)
?:sourceInfo
  • GESIS-SSOAR (xsd:string)
  • In: Science and Public Policy, 38, 2011, 8, 589-598 (xsd:string)
rdf:type
?:url
?:urn
  • urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-320110 ()
?:volumeNumber
  • 38 (xsd:string)