If deliberation is the answer, what is the question? Objectives and evaluation of public participation and engagement in science and technology

References

• Altman, Dennis, and Jonathan Symons. 2016. Queer Wars: The New Global Polarization over Gay Rights. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Amirrudin, Amirah, Nicholas Harrigan, and Ijlal Naqvi. 2021. “Scaled, Citizen-Led, and Public Qualitative Research: A Framework for Citizen Social Science.” Current Sociology, 1–21. doi:10.1177/00113921211056057.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballantyne, Nathan. 2019. “Epistemic Trespassing.” Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 128 (510): 367–395. doi:10.1093/mind/fzx042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett, Julie, Kate Burningham, Gordon Walker, and Noel Cass. 2012. “Imagined Publics and Engagement around Renewable Energy Technologies in the UK.” Public Understanding of Science 21 (1): 36–50. doi:10.1177/0963662510365663.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bächtiger, Andre. 2018. “A Preface to Studying Deliberation Empirically.” In The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, by Andre Bächtiger, edited by Andre Bächtiger, John S. Dryzek, Jane Mansbridge, and Mark Warren, 656–662. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.57.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Translated by Mark Ritter. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Berg, Monika, and Rolf Lidskog. 2018. “Deliberative Democracy Meets Democratised Science: A Deliberative Systems Approach to Global Environmental Governance.” Environmental Politics 27 (1): 1–20. doi:10.1080/09644016.2017.1371919.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, Kathrin, and Sabine Könninger. 2018. “From Experiments to Ecosystems? Reviewing Public Participation, Scientific Governance and the Systemic Turn.” Public Understanding of Science 27 (6): 674–689. doi:10.1177/0963662517717375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucchi, Massimiano, and Federico Neresini. 2008. “Science and Public Participation.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd ed. edited by E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, and A. G. P. S. J. Wajcman, 449–472. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cairney, Paul. 2016. The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Callon, Michel, Pierre Lascoumes, and Yannick Barthe. 2009. Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. Translated by Graham Burchell. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Capurro, Gabriela, Holly Longstaff, Patricia Hanney, and David M. Secko. 2015. “Responsible Innovation: An Approach for Extracting Public Values Concerning Advanced Biofuels.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 2 (3): 246–265. doi:10.1080/23299460.2015.1091252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, Simone. 2018. “The Philosophic Origins of Deliberative Ideals.” In The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, by Simone Chambers, edited by Andre Bächtiger, John S. Dryzek, Jane Mansbridge, and Mark Warren, 54–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.1.
   Google Scholar
• Chilvers, Jason. 2008. “Deliberating Competence: Theoretical and Practitioner Perspectives on Effective Participatory Appraisal Practice.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 33 (3): 421–451. doi:10.1177/01622439073075941.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chilvers, Jason, and Matthew Kearnes. 2016. “Remaking Participation: Towards Reflexive Engagement.” In Remaking Participation: Science, Environment and Emergent Publics, edited by Jason Chilvers, and Matthew Kearnes, 261–288. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203797693.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, H. M., and Robert Evans. 2002. “The Third Wave of Science Studies.” Social Studies of Science 32 (2): 235–296. doi:10.1177/0306312702032002003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, Harry, and Robert Evans. 2019. “Populism and Science.” Epistemology & Philosophy of Science 56 (4): 200–218. doi:10.5840/eps201956476.
   Google Scholar
• Conley, Shannon N., and Emily York. 2020. “Public Engagement in Contested Political Contexts: Reflections on the Role of Recursive Reflexivity in Responsible Innovation.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (Suppl. 1): 1–12. doi:10.1080/23299460.2020.1848335.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, Brian R., Mike Kesby, Ioan Fazey, and Chris Spray. 2013. “The Persistence of ‘Normal’ Catchment Management Despite the Participatory Turn: Exploring the Power Effects of Competing Frames of Reference.” Social Studies of Science 43 (5): 754–779. doi:10.1177/0306312713478670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delgado, Ana, Kamilla Lein Kjølberg, and Fern Wickson. 2011. “Public Engagement Coming of Age: From Theory to Practice in STS Encounters with Nanotechnology.” Public Understanding of Science 20 (6): 826–845. doi:10.1177/0963662510363054.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewey, John. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. Athens, GA: Swallow Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dryzek, John S. 2009. “Democratization as Deliberative Capacity Building.” Comparative Political Studies 42 (11): 1379–1402. doi:10.1177/0010414009332129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, John S. 2014. “Theory, Evidence, and the Tasks of Deliberation.” In Deliberation, Participation and Democracy: Can the People Govern?, edited by Shawn W. Rosenberg, 237–250. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230591080_11.
   Google Scholar
• Dryzek, John S., André Bächtiger, Simone Chambers, Joshua Cohen, James N. Druckman, Andrea Felicetti, James S. Fishkin, et al. 2019. “The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation.” Science 363 (6432): 1144–1146. doi:10.1126/science.aaw2694.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, John S., Dianne Nicol, Simon Niemeyer, Sonya Pemberton, Nicole Curato, André Bächtiger, Philip Batterham, et al. 2020. “Global Citizen Deliberation on Genome Editing.” Science 369 (6510): 1435–1437. doi:10.1126/science.abb5931.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durant, Darrin. 2010. “Public Participation in the Making of Science Policy.” Perspectives on Science 18 (2): 189–225. doi:10.1162/posc.2010.18.2.189.
   Google Scholar
• Einsiedel, Edna F. 2014. “Publics and Their Participation in Science and Technology: Changing Roles, Blurring Boundaries.” In Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology, edited by Massimiano Bucchi, and Brian Trench, 125–139. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203483794-17.
   Google Scholar
• Elam, Mark, and Margareta Bertilsson. 2003. “Consuming, Engaging and Confronting Science: The Emerging Dimensions of Scientific Citizenship.” European Journal of Social Theory 6 (2): 233–251. doi:10.1177/1368431003006002005.
   Google Scholar
• Elzas, Sarah. 2021. “French Government Launches Citizen Panel on Covid Vaccines to Allay Scepticism.” RFI. Accessed 9 January 2021. https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20210109-french-government-launches-citizen-panel-on-covid-vaccines-to-allay-scepticism-participative-democracy-emmanuel-macron-climate-convention.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, Steven. 1995. “The Construction of Lay Expertise: AIDS Activism and the Forging of Credibility in the Reform of Clinical Trials.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 20 (4): 408–437. doi:10.1177/016224399502000402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein, Steven. 1996. Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. n.d.a. “Responsible Research & Innovation.” https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/responsible-research-innovation.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. n.d.b. “EU Missions & Citizen Engagement Activities.” https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/eu-missions-horizon-europe/eu-missions-citizen-engagement-activities_en.
   Google Scholar
• Farooque, M., D. C. Tomblin, and D. Sittenfeld. 2017. “Bridging the Expert and Citizen Divide: Integrating Public Deliberation to Inform NASA’s Asteroid Initiative.” AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts 42), U42A-08. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AGUFM.U42A..08F/abstract.
   Google Scholar
• Felt, Ulrike, Brian Wynne, Gonçalves Michel Callon, Sheila Jasanoff, Maria Jepsen, Pierre-Benoît Joly, et al. 2007. Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously. Luxembourg: European Commission. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/5d0e77c7-2948-4ef5-aec7-bd18efe3c442.
   Google Scholar
• Fiorino, Daniel J. 1990. “Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 15 (2): 226–243. doi:10.1177/016224399001500204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futrell, Robert. 2003. “Technical Adversarialism and Participatory Collaboration in the U.S. Chemical Weapons Disposal Program.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 28 (4): 451–482. doi:10.1177/0162243903252762.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerold, Rainer, Angela Liberatore, Mona Bjorklund, Grete Bossenmeyer, Colette Cotter, Alan Cross, Catherine Fallon, et al. 2001. Report of the Working Group ‘Democratizing Expertise and Establishing Scientific Reference Systems’. Luxembourg: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Gudowsky, Niklas, and Ulrike Bechtold. 2013. “The Role of Information in Public Participation.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy 9 (1): art. 3. doi:10.16997/jdd.152.
   Google Scholar
• Hackett, Edward J., Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch, and Judy Wajcman. 2008. “Introduction.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd ed. edited by Edward J. Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch, and Judy Wajcman, 1–7. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, Sarah, Warren Pearce, and Alasdair Taylor. 2017. “Against the Tide of Depoliticisation: The Politics of Research Governance.” Policy & Politics 45 (3): 361–377. doi:10.1332/030557316X14681503832036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herring, Ronald, and Robert Paarlberg. 2016. “The Political Economy of Biotechnology.” Annual Review of Resource Economics 8 (1): 397–416. doi:10.1146/annurev-resource-100815-095506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hess, David J. 2011. “To Tell the Truth: On Scientific Counterpublics.” Public Understanding of Science 20 (5): 627–641. doi:10.1177/0963662509359988.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irwin, Alan. 1995. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203202395.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2003. “Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science.” Minerva 41 (3): 223–244. doi:10.1023/a:1025557512320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2007. “Technologies of Humility.” Nature 450 (7166): 33–33. doi:10.1038/450033a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2011. “Constitutional Moments in Governing Science and Technology.” Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4): 621–638. doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9302-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2017. “A Field of its Own: The Emergence of Science and Technology Studies.” In The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity, 2nd ed. edited by Robert Frodeman, 173–187. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198733522.013.15.
   Google Scholar
• Karpowitz, Christopher F., Chad Raphael, and Allen S. Hammond. 2009. “Deliberative Democracy and Inequality: Two Cheers for Enclave Deliberation Among the Disempowered.” Politics & Society 37 (4): 576–615. doi:10.1177/0032329209349226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, Eric B. 2019. “Why They’ve Immersed: A Framework for Understanding and Attending to Motivational Differences Among Interactional Experts.” In The Third Wave in Science and Technology Studies : Future Research Directions on Expertise and Experience, edited by David S. Caudill, Shannon N. Conley, Michael E. Gorman, and Martin Weinel, 217–234. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-14335-0_12.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinman, Daniel Lee, ed. 2000. Science, Technology, and Democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press. Science, Technology, and Democracy.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinman, Daniel Lee. 2020. ““From Sideline to Frontline: STS in the Trump Era.” Engaging Science.” Technology, and Society 6 (January): 45–48. doi:10.17351/ests2020.385.
   Google Scholar
• Landemore, Hélène. 2017. “Beyond the Fact of Disagreement? The Epistemic Turn in Deliberative Democracy.” Social Epistemology 31 (3): 277–295. doi:10.1080/02691728.2017.1317868.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larson, Heidi J., Alexandre de Figueiredo, Zhao Xiahong, William S. Schulz, Pierre Verger, Iain G. Johnston, Alex R. Cook, and Nick S. Jones. 2016. “The State of Vaccine Confidence 2016: Global Insights Through a 67-Country Survey.” EBioMedicine 12 (October): 295–301. doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.08.042.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee, Caroline W. 2014. Do-It-Yourself Democracy: The Rise of the Public Engagement Industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199987269.001.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Lengwiler, Martin. 2008. “Participatory Approaches in Science and Technology: Historical Origins and Current Practices in Critical Perspective.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 33 (2): 186–200. doi:10.1177/0162243907311262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lippmann, Walter. 1922. Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Low, Sean, and Holly Jean Buck. 2020. “The Practice of Responsible Research and Innovation in ‘Climate Engineering’.” WIREs Climate Change 11 (3): art. e644. doi:10.1002/wcc.644.
   Google Scholar
• Lövbrand, Eva, Roger Pielke, and Silke Beck. 2011. “A Democracy Paradox in Studies of Science and Technology.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 36 (4): 474–496. doi:10.1177/0162243910366154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch, Michael. 2016. “Social Constructivism in Science and Technology Studies.” Human Studies 39 (1): 101–112. doi:10.1007/s10746-016-9385-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch, Michael. 2020. “We Have Never Been Anti-Science: Reflections on Science Wars and Post-Truth.” Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 6 (January): 49. doi:10.17351/ests2020.309.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Terry, and Kate Macdonald. 2020. “Towards a ‘Pluralist’ World Order: Creative Agency and Legitimacy in Global Institutions.” European Journal of International Relations 26 (2): 518–544. doi:10.1177/1354066119873134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macnaghten, Phil. 2020. The Making of Responsible Innovation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108871044.
   Google Scholar
• Macnaghten, Phil, and Julia S. Guivant. 2020. “Narrative as a Resource for Inclusive Governance: A UK–Brazil Comparison of Public Responses to Nanotechnology.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (Suppl. 1): 13–33. doi:10.1080/23299460.2020.1842643.
   Google Scholar
• Monaghan, Elizabeth. 2007. “Civil Society, Democratic Legitimacy and the European Union: Democratic Linkage and the Debate on the Future of the EU.” (PhD dissertation). University of Nottingham. http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/id/eprint/10558.
   Google Scholar
• Mouffe, Chantal. 1999. “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?” Social Research 66 (3): 745–758. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40971349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, Richard, Phil Macnaghten, and Jack Stilgoe. 2012. “Responsible Research and Innovation: From Science in Society to Science for Society, with Society.” Science and Public Policy 39 (6): 751–760. doi:10.1093/scipol/scs093.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, David, and Graham Smith. 2015. “Survey Article: Deliberation, Democracy, and the Systemic Turn: Survey Article: Deliberation & the Systemic Turn.” Journal of Political Philosophy 23 (2): 213–234. doi:10.1111/jopp.12054.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellizzoni, Luigi. 2003. “Uncertainty and Participatory Democracy.” Environmental Values 12 (2): 195–224. doi:10.3197/096327103129341298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reber, Bernard. 2018. “RRI as the Inheritor of Deliberative Democracy and the Precautionary Principle.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (1): 38–64. doi:10.1080/23299460.2017.1331097.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiss, Dorit Rubinstein, and Barbara S. Romzek. 2020. “When Public Participation is Public Theatre: Misuse of Public Comment Opportunities by Anti-Vaccine Activists.” Stanford Law Review Online 73: 1–10. https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/when-public-participation-is-public-theatre/.
   Google Scholar
• Reynolds, J. L. 2019. The Governance of Solar Geoengineering: Managing Climate change in the Anthropocene. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316676790.
   Google Scholar
• Rowe, Gene, and Lynn J. Frewer. 2004. “Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 29 (4): 512–556. doi:10.1177/0162243903259197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, Gene, and Lynn J. Frewer. 2005. “A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 30 (2): 251–290. doi:10.1177/0162243904271724.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SCoPEx Advisory Committee. 2021. “Proposed Engagement Process for SCoPEx (Final Version).” SCoPEx Advisory Committee. Accessed 8 January 2021. https://scopexac.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/FINAL-SCoPEx-Societal-Engagement-Outline-1_8_2021.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Sismondo, Sergio. 2017. “Post-Truth?” Social Studies of Science 47 (1): 3–6. doi:10.1177/0306312717692076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, Jack, Simon J. Lock, and James Wilsdon. 2014. “Why should we Promote Public Engagement with Science?” Public Understanding of Science 23 (1): 4–15. doi:10.1177/0963662513518154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andrew. 2006. “Analysis, Participation and Power: Justification and Closure in Participatory Multi-Criteria Analysis.” Land Use Policy 23 (1): 95–107. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strong, Aaron, Sallie Chisholm, Charles Miller, and John Cullen. 2009. “Ocean Fertilization: Time to Move On.” Nature 461 (7262): 347–348. doi:10.1038/461347a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Symons, Jonathan. 2019. Ecomodernism: Technology, Politics and the Climate Crisis. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Teem, John L., Aggrey Ambali, Barbara Glover, Jeremy Ouedraogo, Diran Makinde, and Andrew Roberts. 2019. “Problem Formulation for Gene Drive Mosquitoes Designed to Reduce Malaria Transmission in Africa: Results from Four Regional Consultations 2016–2018.” Malaria Journal 18 (December): art. 347. doi:10.1186/s12936-019-2978-5.
   Google Scholar
• Thorpe, Charles. 2008. “Political Theory in Science and Technology Studies.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd ed. edited by Edward J. Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch, and Judy Wajcman, 63–82. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tomblin, David, Zachary Pirtle, Mahmud Farooque, David Sittenfeld, Erin Mahoney, Rick Worthington, Gretchen Gano, et al. 2017. “Integrating Public Deliberation Into Engineering Systems: Participatory Technology Assessment of NASA’s Asteroid Redirect Mission.” Astropolitics 15 (2): 141–166. doi:10.1080/14777622.2017.1340823.
   Google Scholar
• Tomblin, David, Rick Worthington, Gretchen Gano, Mahmud Farooque, David Sittenfeld, David Guston, Jason Lloyd, et al. 2015. “Participatory Technology Assessment of NASA’s Asteroid Redirect Mission.” In 66th International Astronautical Congress 2015, IAC 2015: Space—The Gateway for Mankind’s Future, 10307–10319. New Orleans: International Astronautical Federation, IAF. https://asu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/participatory-technology-assessment-of-nasas-asteroid-redirect-mi.
   Google Scholar
• Tomblin, David, Richard Worthington, Gretchen Gano, Mahmud Farooque, David Sittenfeld, and Jason Lloyd. 2015. Informing Nasa’s Asteroid Initiative: A Citizen’s Forum. Expert and Citizen Assessment of Science and Technology Network. https://ecastnetwork.org/research/informing-nasas-asteroid-initiative-a-citizens-forum/.
   Google Scholar
• Torres, Christopher George. 2021. “Technology, Public Participation, and the American Bureaucracy: Participatory Technology Assessment in United States Federal Agencies.” (PhD dissertation). Boise State University. https://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/td/1845/.
   Google Scholar
• Van Bouwel, Jeroen, and Michiel Van Oudheusden. 2017. “Participation Beyond Consensus? Technology Assessments, Consensus Conferences and Democratic Modulation.” Social Epistemology 31 (6): 497–513. doi:10.1080/02691728.2017.1352624.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vig, Norman J., and Herbert Paschen. 2000. Parliaments and Technology: The Development of Technology Assessment in Europe. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Voß, Jan-Peter, and Nina Amelung. 2016. “Innovating Public Participation Methods: Technoscientization and Reflexive Engagement.” Social Studies of Science 46 (5): 749–772. doi:10.1177/0306312716641350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wehling, Peter. 2012. “From Invited to Uninvited Participation (and Back?): Rethinking Civil Society Engagement in Technology Assessment and Development.” Poiesis & Praxis 9 (1–2): 43–60. doi:10.1007/s10202-012-0125-2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Working Group on Readying Populations for COVID-19 Vaccines. 2020. The Public’s Role in Covid-19 Vaccination: Planning Recommendations Informed by Design Thinking and the Social, Behavioral, and Communication Sciences. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/publications/the-publics-role-in-covid-19-vaccination.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, Brian. 1989. “Sheepfarming after Chernobyl: A Case Study in Communicating Scientific Information.” Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 31 (2): 10–39. doi:10.1080/00139157.1989.9928930.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, Brian. 2002. “Risk and Environment as Legitimatory Discourses of Technology: Reflexivity Inside Out?” Current Sociology 50 (3): 459–477. doi:10.1177/0011392102050003010.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, Brian. 2007. “Public Participation in Science and Technology: Performing and Obscuring a Political–Conceptual Category Mistake.” East Asian Science, Technology and Society 1 (1): 99–110. doi:10.1215/s12280-007-9004-7.
   Google Scholar
• Young, Iris Marion. 2001. “Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy.” Political Theory 29 (5): 670–690. doi:10.1177/0090591701029005004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar