Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Public Understanding of Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (10)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goven, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Deploying the Consensus Conference in New Zealand: Democracy and De-Problematization

Joanna Goven

New Zealand Institute of Gene Ecology, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealandjoanna.goven{at}canterbury.ac.nz

The turn toward public participation in technology assessment points to a link between democratization and the problematization of dominant assumptions, explanations, and justifications. Here, I evaluate whether the use of the consensus conference in New Zealand facilitated such problematization. After a brief outline of the Danish model, I discuss the ways in which the New Zealand conference differed from that model and demonstrate how strategies for managing the resulting bias undermined the possibility of problematization. Further, I argue that participants’ attempts to problematize were subsumed into the dominant scientific and economic rationalities through processes I call assimilation, resignation, and externalization. I argue that the effect of the conference process was to assimilate some concerns into the deficit model, produce a sense of resignation to the "inevitable" with regard to other concerns, and externalize those remaining onto the indigenous population.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 12, No. 4, 423-440 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0963662503124006
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Science CommunicationHome page
M. S. Schafer
From Public Understanding to Public Engagement: An Empirical Assessment of Changes in Science Coverage
Science Communication, June 1, 2009; 30(4): 475 - 505.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Science Technology Human ValuesHome page
M. Harvey
Drama, Talk, and Emotion: Omitted Aspects of Public Participation
Science Technology Human Values, March 1, 2009; 34(2): 139 - 161.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
J. Burgess, A. Stirling, J. Clark, G. Davies, M. Eames, K. Staley, and S. Williamson
Deliberative mapping: a novel analytic-deliberative methodology to support contested science-policy decisions
Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2007; 16(3): 299 - 322.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Social Studies of ScienceHome page
A. Kerr, S. Cunningham-Burley, and R. Tutton
Shifting Subject Positions: Experts and Lay People in Public Dialogue
Social Studies of Science, June 1, 2007; 37(3): 385 - 411.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
A. Blok
Experts on public trial: on democratizing expertise through a Danish consensus conference
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2007; 16(2): 163 - 182.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
R. Schibeci and J. Harwood
Stimulating authentic community involvement in biotechnology policy in Australia
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2007; 16(2): 245 - 255.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 GerontologistHome page
M. Sabir, R. Breckman, R. Meador, E. Wethington, M. C. Reid, and K. Pillemer
The CITRA Research-Practice Consensus-Workshop Model: Exploring a New Method of Research Translation in Aging
Gerontologist, December 1, 2006; 46(6): 833 - 839.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Science Technology Human ValuesHome page
J. Goven
Processes of Inclusion, Cultures of Calculation, Structures of Power: Scientific Citizenship and the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification
Science Technology Human Values, September 1, 2006; 31(5): 565 - 598.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
J. Macoubrie
Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in government
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 221 - 241.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Theory Culture SocietyHome page
M. Greco
The Politics of Indeterminacy and the Right to Health
Theory Culture Society, December 1, 2004; 21(6): 1 - 22.
[Abstract] [PDF]