, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 169–172 | Cite as

Where the pasts and futures of science and technology studies meet

U. Felt, R. Fouché, C. A. Miller and L. Smith-Doerr (2017) The handbook of science and technology studies, fourth edition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1208pp, US$ 75 HB
  • Gábor István Bíró
Book Review

Handbooks are always out of date and ahead of their time at the same time. They are making hypothetical pasts and expected futures from perceived presents. They are, in a sense, as editors of this excellent volume point out, scenes of “reflexive landscaping.” But what is special about a STS Handbook? It must be more sensitive to its own role in the self-definition of the field than most handbooks due to certain traits of the discipline it aims to define. This requires quite a unique consciousness of making (and perhaps even killing) times. How this consciousness changed from the first edition of the handbook published in 1977 to this current, fourth one, and how it seems to be evolving further is the main message of this excellent handbook commendable to everyone having a scholarly interest in science and technology as a social enterprise.

By making comparisons with the previous editions (Spiegel-Rösing and de Solla Price 1977; Jasanoff et al. 1995; Hackett et al. 2008), one might...


  1. Felt, U., R. Fouché, C.A. Miller, and L. Smith-Doerr. 2017. The handbook of science and technology studies, 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Hackett, E.J., O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, and J. Wajcman. 2008. The handbook of science and technology studies, 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Jasanoff, S., G.E. Markle, J.C. Petersen, and T. Pinch. 1995. Handbook of science and technology studies, Revised ed. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jasanoff, S. 2004. States of knowledge: The co-production of science and the social order. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Spiegel-Rösing, I., and D. de Solla Price. 1977. Science, technology and society: A cross-disciplinal perspective. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Taylor, P. 1995. Co-construction and process: A response to Sismondo’s classification of constructivisms. Social Studies of Science 25: 348–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and History of ScienceBudapest University of Technology and EconomicsBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations