IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v33y2006i2p103-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific independence as a constitutive part of parliamentary technology assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Armin Grunwald

Abstract

Recent discussions on governance, on science and technology policy and on adequate advice types motivate reconsidering some constitutive issues of technology assessment (TA). To these belong the frequently demanded scientific independence of a TA institution and of TA projects. The semantics of the term ‘scientific independenc’ comprise related or partially synonymously used terms, such as autonomy, unprejudicedness, value-neutrality, rationality, objectivity, impartiality, or equity. In this paper we will — after a general discussion of those facets — focus on parliamentary TA, using the Office for Technology Assessment at the German Bundestag as an example, identifying strengths and limitations of the postulate for scientific independent TA. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Armin Grunwald, 2006. "Scientific independence as a constitutive part of parliamentary technology assessment," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(2), pages 103-113, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:33:y:2006:i:2:p:103-113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154306781779073
    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

    RePEc Biblio mentions

    As found on the RePEc Biblio, the curated bibliography for Economics:
    1. > Economic Development Technological Change, and Growth > Technological Change: Choices and Consequences > Technology Assessment

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christoph Kehl & Steffen Albrecht & Pauline Riousset & Arnold Sauter, 2021. "Goodbye Expert-Based Policy Advice? Challenges in Advising Governmental Institutions in Times of Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Karaulova, Maria & Edler, Jakob, 2023. "Bringing research into policy: Understanding context-specific requirements for productive knowledge brokering in legislatures," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 77, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    3. Rose, Gloria & Gazsó, André, 2019. "Governing nanosafety in Austria – Striving for neutrality in the NanoTrust project," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 23-31.
    4. Delvenne, Pierre & Fallon, Catherine & Brunet, Sébastien, 2011. "Parliamentary technology assessment institutions as indications of reflexive modernization," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 36-43.
    5. Gaunand, A. & Hocdé, A. & Lemarié, S. & Matt, M. & Turckheim, E.de, 2015. "How does public agricultural research impact society? A characterization of various patterns," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 849-861.

    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:33:y:2006:i:2:p:103-113. 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.