Documents science policy 18 results

"Mythique METI ou MITI ! Et si l'économie n'était que la guerre continuée par d'autres moyens? En devenant le Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, l'ancien Ministry of International Trade and Industry n'a pas dérogé à la mission qui lui avait été fixée en 1949 : faire en sorte que le Japon redevienne une puissance mondiale en gagnant la bataille du Marché. Articulant l'industrie et la recherche, l'usine et l'université, le négoce et la communication, encadrant les multinationales comme les petits commerces, élaborant dus stratégies communes à la fonction publique et à la classe politique, au patronat et aux syndicats, assurant une veille sur les marchés étrangers et les nouvelles technologies, surveillant les échanges extérieurs et intérieurs, favorisant le développement des technopôles, cet organisme tient lieu de chef d'orchestre de la croissance japonaise. Par quel paradoxe une telle planification libérale explique-t-elle le " miracle japonais " ? Cette étude sans précédent, qui est une brève histoire du Miracle économique japonais depuis la guerre, réunit les meilleurs spécialistes de la question et en donne ici toutes les clés. La science et la technologie (ou plutôt comme le disent les Japonais " la sciencetechnologie " en un seul mot tant les deux sont indissociables pour eux) sont au cœur de cette bataille des neurones. Un livre d'une actualité aiguë."

"A growing problem of interest in the field of science and technology policy is that the next generation of innovations is arriving at an accelerating rate, and the governance system is struggling to catch up. Current approaches and institutions for effective technology assessment are ill suited and poorly designed to proactively address the multidimensional, interconnected societal impacts of science and technology advancements that are already taking place and expected to continue over the course of the 21st century. This book offers tangible insights into the strategies deployed by well-known, high-profile organizations involved in anticipating the various societal and policy implications of nanotechnology and synthetic biology. It focuses predominantly on an examination of the practices adopted by the often-cited and uniquely positioned Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies in the United States, as well as being informed by comparisons with a range of institutions also interested in embedding forward-looking perspectives in their respective area of innovation. The book lays out one of the first actionable roadmaps that other interested stakeholders can follow when working toward institutionalizing anticipatory governance practices throughout the policymaking process."

"The OSHA ergonomics standard issued in 2000 was repealed within four months through a Congressional resolution that limits future ergonomics rulemaking. This section continues the conversation initiated in Part I, documenting a legacy of struggle for an ergonomics standard through the voices of eight labor, academic, and government key informants. Part I summarized important components of the standard; described the convergence of labor activism, research, and government action that laid the foundation for a standard; and highlighted the debates that characterized the rulemaking process. Part II explores the anti-regulatory political landscape of the 1990s, as well as the key opponents, power dynamics, and legal maneuvers that led to repeal of the standard. This section also describes the impact of the ergonomics struggle beyond the standard itself and ends with a discussion of creative state-level policy initiatives and coalition approaches to prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) in today's sociopolitical context."

"Recent revelations have raised concerns on how conflicts of interest may involve even leading scientists and prestigious institutions and lead to bias in reporting and assessing scientific evidence. These have highlighted the need for action to safeguard scientific integrity and public health. The Italian Epidemiology Association has declared that the "biased and deliberately tailored use of the scientific evidence" by scientists with a conflict of interest serves to delay needed measures to prevent harm to public health from a polluting Italian steel plant's continuing chemical emissions. In France, unresolved concerns over conflict of interest forced the Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Public Health to cancel its imminent appointment of a prominent scientist as its Director. These negative events demonstrate the necessity for scientific institutions and journals to implement rigorous measures regarding conflict of interest and the safeguarding of scientific integrity and public health."

"In spite of decades of research on toxicants, along with the growing role of scientific expertise in public policy and the unprecedented rise in the number of national and international institutions dealing with environmental health issues, problems surrounding contaminants and their effects on health have never appeared so important, sometimes to the point of appearing insurmountable. This calls for a reconsideration of the roles of scientific knowledge and expertise in the definition and management of toxic issues, which this book seeks to do. It looks at complex historical, social, and political dynamics, made up of public controversies, environmental and health crises, economic interests, and political responses, and demonstrates how and to what extent scientific knowledge about toxicants has been caught between scientific, economic, and political imperatives."

"The precautionary principle has become, in European regulation of science and technology, a general principle for the protection of the health of human beings, animals, plants, and the environment. It requires that “[w]here there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”.
By focusing on situations of scientific uncertainty where data are lacking, insufficient, or inconclusive, the principle introduced a shift from a neutral legal attitude towards science to a bias in favor of safety, and a shift from the paradigm of science certain and objective to the awareness that the legal regulation of science involves decisions about values and interests. Implementation of the precautionary principle is highly variable. A crucial question still needs to be answered regarding the assumption that scientific certainty is a ‘normal' characteristic of scientific knowledge. The relationship between technoscience and society has moved into a situation where uncertain knowledge is the rule. From this perspective, a more general framework for a democratic governance of science is needed. In democratic society, science may still have a special authoritative voice, but it cannot be the ultimate word on decisions that only the broader society may make. Therefore, the precautionary model of scientific regulation needs to be informed by an ‘extended participatory model' of the relationship between science and society."

"The 2013 Late lessons from early warnings report is the second of its type produced by the European Environment Agency (EEA) in collaboration with a broad range of external authors and peer reviewers. The case studies across both volumes of Late lessons from early warnings cover a diverse range of chemical and technological innovations, and highlight a number of systemic problems. The 'Late Lessons Project' illustrates how damaging and costly the misuse or neglect of the precautionary principle can be, using case studies and a synthesis of the lessons to be learned and applied to maximising innovations whilst minimising harms."

"De récents scandales dans l'industrie du médicament ou l'agro-alimentaire ont montré les risques d'un détournement de la recherche scientifique. L'objet de ce livre est de mieux comprendre les ressorts de la crise qui s'installe ainsi entre science et société et de proposer des solutions respectant aussi bien l'indépendance de la recherche que le besoin de démocratie, très largement à inventer au demeurant, dans les choix de politique scientifique.

Il s'adresse aux scientifiques comme aux citoyens. Il analyse la manière dont le capitalisme néolibéral tente de mettre la science et les techniques au service de la compétitivité et des profits.

Il s'appuie sur les résistances à cette politique pour montrer que la démocratie scientifique ne se résume pas à la question des choix technologiques ou de la gestion des risques et ne concerne pas la seule communauté scientifique.

Il veut ouvrir des pistes pour mettre la connaissance scientifique et le développement technique au service des besoins humains (y compris le besoin de connaissances), ce qui appelle de nouvelles formes d'investissement citoyen et de pluralisme scientifique."