Abstract
Since the Enlightenment, we have tended to think of scientific and technological progress as linear and cumulative. In the high-level debate over “the knowledge society,” this is still the way these crucial issues are treated in worldwide governance. Technology policy is routinely described as indiscriminately “pro-innovation” and its critics labelled generally “anti-technology.” Scope may be conceded for debates over risk, or the distribution of costs and benefits. But the main challenge is seen as a competitive race along a pre-ordained track. As a key feature of the “knowledge society” and a founding theme of the Enlightenment, it is a remarkable fact that this linear understanding is just plain wrong. This paper will explore some implications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Beck, U. 1992. The Risk Society. London: Sage.
Broers, A. 2005. The Triumph of Technology: Lecture 1 of the 2005 Reith Lectures. BBC, London. Transcript (16/7/6) at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2005/lecture1.shtml
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). 2003. GM Nation: Findings of a Public Debate. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. At: [16/12/2008] at: http://www.gmnation.org.uk
Farman, J. 2001. “Halocarbons, the Ozone Layer and the Precautionary Principle.” European Environment Agency, at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/environmental_issue_report_2001_22/issue-22-part-07.pdf
Habermas, J. 1984. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity.
Jasanoff, S. 2007. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Millenium Development Declaration. 2000. United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/55/2, 18th September 2000. At [30/3/6]: http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.pdf
Ministerial Declaration. 1995. Fourth International Conference on the Protection of the North Sea. Esbjerg: Denmark, 8–9 June.
Modan, B. and S. Billharz (eds.). 1997. “Sustainability Indicators: Report of the Project on Indicators of Sustainable Development.” United Nations Environment Programme. Chichester: John Wiley.
Obama, B. 2009. Technology. Section of “the Agenda” posted on Whitehouse Website. At [4/9]: http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/technology/
OSPAR. 1992. Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic. At: http://www.ospar.org/eng/html/welcome.html
Stirling, A. 2008. “Opening Up and Closing Down: Power, Participation and Pluralism in the Social Appraisal of Technology.” Science Technology and Human Values 33(2):262–294, March. At: http://sth.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/2/262
—. 2009. “The Precautionary Principle.” In J-K. Olsen, S. Pedersen, V. Hendricks (eds.), Blackwell Companion to the Philosophy of Technology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2010 Augusto López-Claros
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stirling, A. (2010). From Enlightenment to Enablement: Opening Up Choices for Innovation. In: The Innovation for Development Report 2009–2010. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230285477_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230285477_10
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-230-23966-1
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-28547-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Business & Management CollectionBusiness and Management (R0)