IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ita/itaman/01_03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Gate-Resonance Model - The interface of policy, media and the public in technology conflicts

Author

Listed:
  • Helge Torgersen
  • Jürgen Hampel

Abstract

The gate/resonance model provides an analytical frame for the description of technology conflicts. It offers an analytical scheme to conceptualise the interaction between public opinion, interest representing organisations, the media and the political system. The model distinguishes structural elements, functional elements and processes. Structural elements are the public with sub-publics and representational fields, the regulatory system with its institutions, intermediary organisations representing interests and bridging the gap between the public(s) and the regulatory system, the regulatory space and the media that mirror and participate in interest conflicts. Functional elements are resources, which enable intermediary organisations to convey interests to regulation, and filters that prevent information overflow within regulatory institutions: the gate as a formal function selects information according to statutory criteria, detectors according to usefulness for the institution. Processes described are the movement of issue fields due to re-interpretation; resonance, the tuning-in on issue interpretation among different actors; mobilisation, the generation of political pressure through resonance; and policy change through the abol-ishment of established interest and actor equilibrium due to mobilisation and ensuing gate failure. The model is applied to the example of biotechnology conflicts.

Suggested Citation

  • Helge Torgersen & Jürgen Hampel, 2001. "The Gate-Resonance Model - The interface of policy, media and the public in technology conflicts," ITA manu:scripts 01_03, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ita:itaman:01_03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://epub.oeaw.ac.at/ita/ita-manuscript/ita_01_03.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Georg Aichholzer, 2002. "Das ExpertInnen-Delphi: methodische Grundlagen und Anwendungsfeld ‘Technology Foresight‘ (The Expert Delphi: Methodology and Application in 'Technology Foresight')," ITA manu:scripts 02_01, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    2. HelgeFranz Torgersen, & Franz Seifert, 2000. "Austria: precautionary blockage of agricultural biotechnology," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 209-217, July.
    3. Georg Aichholzer, 2001. "Delphi Austria - An Example of Tailoring Foresight to the Needs of a Small Country," ITA manu:scripts 01_02, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    4. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1993. "Positive und negative Koordination in Verhandlungssystemen," MPIfG Discussion Paper 93/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gunther Tichy, 2002. "Informationsgesellschaft und flexiblere Arbeitsmärkte [Information society and flexible labour markets]," ITA manu:scripts 02_03, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    2. Andreas Diekmann, 2002. "Diagnose von Fehlerquellen und methodische Qualität in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung [Sources of Bias and Quality of Data in Social Science Research]," ITA manu:scripts 02_04, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    3. Jörg Flecker & Sabine Kirschenhofer, 2003. "IT verleiht Flügel? Aktuelle Tendenzen der räumlichen Verlagerung von Arbeit [Do information technologies (IT) give wings? Tendencies of the spatial relocation of work]," ITA manu:scripts 03_01, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    4. Gunther Tichy, 2002. "Over-optimism Among Experts in Assessment and Foresight," ITA manu:scripts 02_05, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    5. Graber, Petra, 2006. "Ein Subsidiaritätstest – Die Errichtung gentechnikfreier Regionen in Österreich zwischen Anspruch und Wirklichkeit," ITA manu:scripts 05_02, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    6. Hilmar Westholm, 2002. "Mit eDemocracy zu deliberativer Politik? Zur Praxis und Anschlussfähigkeit eines neuen Mediums ]Is eDemocracy leading to a deliberative policy? On practice and connectivity of a new medium]," ITA manu:scripts 02_06, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    7. Michael Nentwich, 2003. "Neue Kommunikationstechnologien und Wissenschaft – Veränderungspotentiale und Handlungsoptionen auf dem Weg zur Cyber-Wissenschaft [New communication technologies and science and research -- potential," ITA manu:scripts 03_03, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    8. Walter Peissl, 2002. "Surveillance and security - a dodgy relationship," ITA manu:scripts 02_02, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    9. Weiss, Gerhard, 2000. "Evaluation of policy instruments for protective forest management in Austria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 243-255, December.
    10. Millstone, Erik, 2009. "Science, risk and governance: Radical rhetorics and the realities of reform in food safety governance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 624-636, May.
    11. Aschemann-Witzel, Jessica & Perez-Cueto, Federico J.A. & Niedzwiedzka, Barbara & Verbeke, Wim & Bech-Larsen, Tino, 2012. "Transferability of private food marketing success factors to public food and health policy: An expert Delphi survey," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 650-660.
    12. Zahlner, Kristina, 2002. "Structural changes in the defence industry - opportunity or risk for regional governance capacities?," ERSA conference papers ersa02p089, European Regional Science Association.
    13. Voitleithner, Johannes, 2002. "The National Forest Programme in the light of Austria's law and political culture," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 313-322, December.
    14. Bahn, Christopher, 2002. "Die Bedeutung der lokalen Regulationssysteme in Berlin für den Strukturwandel im Einzelhandel: Ein Untersuchungsdesign," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Organization and Employment FS I 02-103, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    15. Michael Arndt & Thomas Gawron & Petra Jahnke, 2000. "Regional Policy through Co-operation: From Urban Forum to Urban Network," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 37(11), pages 1903-1923, October.
    16. Wendt, Claus & Rothgang, Heinz, 2007. "Gesundheitssystemtypen im Vergleich: konzeptionelle Überlegungen zur vergleichenden Analyse von Gesundheitssystemen," TranState Working Papers 61, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    17. Reihlen, Markus, 1998. "Die Heterarchie als postbürokratisches Organisationsmodell der Zukunft," Working Paper Series 96, University of Cologne, Department of Business Policy and Logistics.
    18. Dose, Nicolai, 2015. "Ansiedelung von Einzelhandelsgroßprojekten aus governance-analytischer Perspektive: Nutzungskonflikte, institutionelle Lösungen und deren Blockadeanfälligkeit," Forschungsberichte der ARL: Aufsätze, in: Karl, Helmut (ed.), Koordination raumwirksamer Politik: Mehr Effizienz und Wirksamkeit von Politik durch abgestimmte Arbeitsteilung, volume 4, pages 174-192, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft.
    19. Thomas Risse‐kappen, 1996. "Exploring the Nature of the Beast: International Relations Theory and Comparative Policy Analysis Meet the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 53-80, March.
    20. Dienel, Hans-Liudger & Geissel, Brigitte & Krüger, Sabine & Walk, Heike, 2001. "Politische Regulierungsformen, Government, Governance und Netzwerkstrukturen auf der globalen, europäischen und nationalen Ebene: Überblicksstudie," Arbeitspapiere 47, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    theoretical framework; technology conflict; interest representation; public mobilisation; resources;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ita:itaman:01_03. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Werner Kabelka (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ioeawat.html .

    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.