IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v34y2007i2p85-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Distributive justice in science and technology policy

Author

Listed:
  • Susan E Cozzens

Abstract

This article examines the principles of distributive justice that underlie common rationales and goals in science and technology policy, treating four traditions in political philosophy: libertarian; utilitarian; contractarian; and communitarian. All four approaches play some role in current S&T policies: in market orientation; in the effort to maximize public benefit; in programs targeted to disadvantaged groups; and in programs that build community through involvement in research. This variety gives national policy-makers options to mix, match, and grow these elements in their national systems. Making conscious decisions about the mix is important to achieving public goals in science and technology. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan E Cozzens, 2007. "Distributive justice in science and technology policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 85-94, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:34:y:2007:i:2:p:85-94
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234207X193619
    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. Woodson, Thomas S. & Hoffmann, Elina & Boutilier, Sophia, 2021. "Evaluating the NSF broader impacts with the Inclusion-Immediacy Criterion: A retrospective analysis of nanotechnology grants," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    2. Mario Pansera & Fabien Martinez, 2017. "Innovation for development and poverty reduction: an integrative literature review," Post-Print hal-02887777, HAL.
    3. Pansera, Mario & Owen, Richard, 2015. "Framing resource-constrained innovation at the ‘bottom of the pyramid’: Insights from an ethnographic case study in rural Bangladesh," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 300-311.
    4. Antony Millner, 2012. "Climate prediction for adaptation: Who needs what?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 143-167, January.
    5. Niinikoski, Marja-Liisa & Moisander, Johanna, 2014. "Serial and comparative analysis of innovation policy change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 69-80.
    6. Fulvio Castellacci, 2021. "Innovation and social welfare: A new research agenda," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20210705, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    7. Theo Papaioannou, 2016. "Marx and Sen on incentives and justice: Implications for innovation and development," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 16(4), pages 297-313, October.
    8. Irwin Feller, 2022. "Assessing the societal impact of publicly funded research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 632-650, June.
    9. Theo Papaioannou, 2011. "Technological innovation, global justice and politics of development," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 11(4), pages 321-338, July.
    10. Barry Bozeman & Catherine Slade & Paul Hirsch, 2011. "Inequity in the distribution of science and technology outcomes: a conceptual model," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(3), pages 231-248, September.

    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:34:y:2007:i:2:p:85-94. 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.