Science studies has shown us why science and technology cannot always solve technical problems in the public domain. In particular, the speed of political decision-making is faster than the speed of scientific consensus formation. A predominant motif over recent years has been the need to extend the domain of technical decision-making beyond the technically qualified elite, so as to enhance political legitimacy. We argue, however, that the `Problem of Legitimacy' has been replaced by the `Problem of Extension' - that is, by a tendency to dissolve the boundary between experts and the public so that there are no longer any grounds for limiting the indefinite extension of technical decision-making rights. We argue that a Third Wave of Science Studies - Studies of Expertise and Experience (SEE) - is needed to solve the Problem of Extension. SEE will include a normative theory of expertise, and will disentangle expertise from political rights in technical decision-making. The theory builds categories of expertise, starting with the key distinction between interactive expertise and contributory expertise. A new categorization of types of science is also needed. We illustrate the potential of the approach by re-examining existing case studies, including Brian Wynne's study of Cumbrian sheep farmers. Sometimes the new theory argues for more public involvement, sometimes for less. An Appendix describes existing contributions to the problem of technical decision-making in the public domain.

The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience

The convergence of newly interactive Web-based technologies with growing practices of user-generated content disseminated on the Internet is generating a remarkable new form of geographic information. Citizens are using handheld devices to collect geographic information and contribute it to crowd-sourced data sets, using Web-based mapping interfaces to mark and annotate geographic features, or adding geographic location to photographs, text, and other media shared online. These phenomena, which generate what we refer to collectively as volunteered geographic information (VGI), represent a paradigmatic shift in how geographic information is created and shared and by whom, as well as its content and characteristics. This article, which draws on our recently completed inventory of VGI initiatives, is intended to frame the crucial dimensions of VGI for geography and geographers, with an eye toward identifying its potential in our field, as well as the most pressing research needed to realize this potential. D...

Researching Volunteered Geographic Information: Spatial Data, Geographic Research, and New Social Practice

If approximately 80% of the public in the UK support wind energy, why is only a quarter of contracted wind power capacity actually commissioned? One common answer is that this is an example of the ‘not in my backyard’ (Nimby) syndrome: yes, wind power is a good idea as long as it is not in my backyard. However, the Nimby claim that there is an attitude–behaviour gap has been rightly criticised. This article distinguishes between two kinds of gap that might be confused, namely the ‘social gap’ – between the high public support for wind energy expressed in opinion surveys and the low success rate achieved in planning applications for wind power developments – and the ‘individual gap’, which exists when an individual person has a positive attitude to wind power in general but actively opposes a particular wind power development. Three different explanations of the social gap are distinguished, only one of which depends upon the individual gap. In the second section of the article the relevance of our three e...

/pdf/the-social-gap-in-wind-farm-siting-decisions-explanations-2xigmwajlr.pdf

The ‘Social Gap’ in Wind Farm Siting Decisions: Explanations and Policy Responses

https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/downloads/1831cm56h

The eBird enterprise: An integrated approach to development and application of citizen science

The widespread adoption of bottom‐up participation as opposed to top‐down modernisation approaches has opened up challenging opportunities for anthropology in development. The new focus on indigenous knowledge augurs the next revolution in anthropological method, informants becoming collaborators and their communities participating user‐groups, and touches upon such contemporary issues as the crisis of representation, ethnography's status with regard to intellectual property rights, and interdisciplinary cooperation between natural and social scientists. Indigenous‐knowledge studies are challenging not only because of difficulties in cross‐cultural communication and understanding but also because of their inevitable political dimensions. Contributing to development which intervenes in people's lives, these studies engage with them in novel ways.

/pdf/the-development-of-indigenous-knowledge-a-new-applied-1no6dyznra.pdf

The development of indigenous knowledge: A new applied anthropology.

/pdf/citizen-science-a-study-of-people-expertise-and-sustainable-3po1jwi9qc.pdf

Michael R. Edelstein

Papers

Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development