Abstract
This chapter introduces the complex connections between leading scientists, government administrators, and military officers in the Cold War British state. The thesis of this book contends that at the core of the political-scientific interface there are policy networks and that we can gain a better understanding of this interaction by looking at some of the key figures, or “nodes”, in these networks. It uses the career of the NIO Director George Deacon as a source to study the historical path of British oceanography, and argues that looking at Deacon as a mediator reveals a better understanding of the dynamics and historical evolution of the policy networks he participated in.
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
Notes
- 1.
The papers presented at this symposium were reprinted in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: A, 342:1631 (15 April 1975): 439–591.
- 2.
Edward Bullard, “The Effect of World War II on the Development of Knowledge in the Physical Sciences,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A., 342:1631, (April 1975): 531.
- 3.
Ibid., comments on this paper included in the Proceedings.
- 4.
For examples of where this is not achieved see Paul Forman, “Behind Quantum Electronics: National Security as Basis for Physical Research in the United States, 1940–1960,” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, 18:1 (1987): 149–229; Stuart W. Leslie, The Cold War and American Science: The Military-Industrial-Academic Complex at MIT and Stanford (New York: Columbia University Press: 1994); David Kevles, “Cold War and Hot Physics: Science, Security, and the American State, 1945–56,” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, 20:2 (1990): 239–264.
- 5.
Throughout this book Big Science is invoked in the sense of Big Science as an Instrument rather than Big Science as Politics. For a review of the many uses of “Big Science”, see James H. Capshew and Karen A. Rader, “Big Science: Price to the Present,” Osiris 7 (1992): 8 –9, 12–15. In terms of Big Science as an Instrument, I follow Peter Galison’s point that even existing technology (in this case research ships) were exploited so as to realign scientific practice and priorities according to the engineered ethos of Big Science, especially its scientific administrators and committees. Peter Galison, “Bubble Chambers and the Experimental Workplace,” in Observation, Experiment, and Hypothesis in Modern Physical Science, ed. Peter Achinstein and Owen Hannaway (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1985): 309–373. Peter Galison, “The Many Faces of Big Science,” in Big Science: The Growth of Large-scale Research, ed. Peter Galison (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1992): 1–20. In terms of Big Science as Politics I have developed a conceptual framework sited at the level of the policy network which is outlined in section 1.2 of this introduction, rather than seeing Big Science as a rhetorical policy device in its own right.
- 6.
The following definition is adapted from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration definition of oceanography as it appears on their website, www.noaa.gov. Oceanography is a broad discipline made up of various topics, including studies of marine life, zoology and ecosystems, ocean circulation, plate tectonics and the geology of the seabed, and the chemical and physical properties of the ocean. Most oceanographic institutions, however, study these topics in a composite fashion, bringing together the skills of multiple expertise across these approaches. Four categories of scientists study these aspects, which are often grouped under four distinct sub-groups. Marine biologists, fisheries scientists, and biological oceanographers study plants and animals in the marine environment. Chemical oceanographers and marine chemists study the composition of seawater and its interaction with the atmosphere and the sea floor. Geological oceanographers, marine geologists, and geophysicists concerned with the ocean floor study sea-floor spreading, plate tectonics, and oceanic circulation; they are also interested in the volcanic processes on the seabed. Physical oceanographers, in whom this study is primarily interested, study the physical processes of the ocean, such as waves, currents, tides, and the interactions between the atmosphere and the ocean; they also examine deep currents, the transmission of light and sound through water, and the interactions between one ocean water mass and another. All of these fields can be said to be intertwined and to an extent it is often argued that oceanographers have to have an understanding of all these four branches to study the ocean. This is an abbreviated version of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration website definition of oceanography, http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceanographer.html.
- 7.
Thomas P. Hughes used the notion of separate but conjoined spheres of influence in his study of electricity in America. See Thomas P. Hughes, “The Electrification of America: The System Builders,” Technology and Culture, 20:1 (1979): 124–161.
- 8.
The traditional critique of this was provided by Herbert Butterfield in his seminar on the Whig interpretation of history; Herbert Butterfield, The Whig Interpretation of History (London: G.Bell, 1931).
- 9.
David Aubin, Charlotte Bigg, “Neither Genius nor Context Incarnate: Norman Lockyer, Jules Janssen and the Astophysical Self,” in The History and Poetics of Scientific Biography, ed. Thomas Söderqvist (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2007): 54.
- 10.
Robert K. Merton, “Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science,” American Sociological Review, 22:6 (1957): 635–659.
- 11.
Trevor J. Pinch, “Sociology of Science,” in Reader’s Guide to the History of Science, ed. Arne Hessenbruch (London: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, 2000): 695. Central works in SSK include: Bloor, D., Knowledge and Social Imagery, (Routledge: London, 1976); Harry M. Collins, Changing Order: Replications and Induction in Scientific Practice (California: Sage, 1985); Bruno Latour, Stephen Woolgar, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986); Bruno Latour, Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987).
- 12.
Michel Callon, “The Sociology of an Actor-Network: The Case of the Electric Vehicle,” in Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology: Sociology in the Real World, ed. Michel Callon, John Law, Arne Rip (London: Macmillan, 1986): 19; Harry M. Collins, Trevor J. Pinch, Frames of Meaning: The Social Construction of Extraordinary Science (London: Routledge: 1982); Steven Shapin, “The Politics of Observation: Cerebral Anatomy and Social Interests in the Edinburgh Phrenology Disputes,” in On the Margins of Science: The Social Construction of Rejected Knowledge, ed. Roy Wallis (Keele, UK: Keele University Press, 1979): 139–178; Donald MacKenzie, “Statistical Theory and Social Interests: A Case Study,” Social Studies of Science, 8:1 (1978): 35–83.
- 13.
Steven Shapin, Simon Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985); Andrew Pickering, Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1984).
- 14.
Thomas L. Hankins, “In Defense of Biography: The Use of Biography in the History of Science,” History of Science, 17 (1979): 1–16.
- 15.
Charles Thorpe, Oppenheimer: The Tragic Intellect (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2006): 11, 13–14; and Simone Turchetti, The Pontecorvo Affair: A Cold War Defection and Nuclear Physics (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2012): 9 (and throughout the work).
- 16.
Crosbie Smith, M. Norton Wise, Energy & Empire: A biographical Study of Lord Kelvin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
- 17.
Aubin, Bigg, “Neither Genius nor Context Incarnate,” 56.
- 18.
Joan L. Richards, “Introduction: Fragmented Lives,” Isis, 97:2 (2006): 302–305.
- 19.
Theodore M. Porter, “Is the life of the Scientists a Scientific Unit?,” Isis, 97:2 (2006): 314; Mary J. Nye, “Scientific Biography: history of Science by Another Means,” Isis, 97:2 (2006): 325; Mary Terrall, “Biography as Cultural History of Science,” Isis, 97:2 (2006).
- 20.
Ron E. Doel, “Scientists as Policymakers, Advisors, and Intelligence Agents: Linking Contemporary Diplomatic History with the History of Contemporary Science,” in The Historiography of Contemporary Science and Technology, ed. Thomas Söderqvist (Reading, UK: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1997).
- 21.
Doel, “Scientists as Policymakers,” 215.
- 22.
Here I use hybrids, because I do not want to confuse the use of intersectional here with the notion of intersectionality now in use by social scientists writing since Doel’s earlier use of the term. See Patricia Hill Collins, “Intersectionality’s Definitional Dilemmas,” Annual Review of Sociology, 41 (2015): 1–20.
- 23.
Doel, “Scientists as Policymakers,” 215.
- 24.
Chandra Mukerji, A Fragile Power: Scientists and the State (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989); Gary E. Weir, An Ocean in Common: American Naval Officers, Scientists, and the Ocean Environment (College Station: Texas A&M University, 2001); Jacob D. Hamblin, Oceanographers and the Cold War: Disciples of Marine Science (Seattle: University of Washington, 2005).
- 25.
Mary J. Nye, Blackett: Physics, War, and Politics in the 20th Century (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004) and Mary J. Nye, Michael Polanyi and His Generation: Origins of the Social Construction of Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011); for a non-British example see Peder Roberts, “Intelligence and Internationalism: The Cold War Career of Anton Bruun,” Centaurus, 55:3 (2013): 243–263.
- 26.
Alexandros Oikonomou, “The Hidden Persuaders: Government Scientists and Defence in Post-war Britain,” (PhD diss., Imperial College London, 2011).
- 27.
Leslie Pearce Williams, “The Life of Science and Scientific Lives,” PHYSIS, (1991): 199–213.
- 28.
Thorpe, Oppenheimer, 4.
- 29.
Recent historiography has problematised this notion; see Charles Thorpe, Steven Shapin, “Who was J. Robert Oppenheimer? Charisma and Complex Organization,” Social Studies of Science, 30:4 (2000): 545–590; see also Chapter 4, “Charisma as a ‘Career’,” in Andrew D. McCulloch, Charisma and Patronage: Reasoning with Max Weber, (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2014).
- 30.
Jenny M. Lewis, “The future of network governance research: strength in diversity and synthesis,” Public Administration, 89:4 (2011): 1224.
- 31.
Jack Morrell and Arnold Thackray, Gentlemen of Science: Early Years of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981); Dena Goodman, The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994).
- 32.
Marsh, Rhodes, Policy Networks.
- 33.
Grant Jordan, “Sub-Governments, Policy Communities, and Networks: Refilling the Old Boots,” Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2:3 (1990): 319–338.
- 34.
Gila Menahem, “Policy Paradigms, Policy Networks and Water Policy in Israel,” Journal of Public Policy, 18:3 (1998): 284.
- 35.
William D. Coleman and Grace Skogstad, “Policy Communities and Policy Networks: A Structural Approach,” in Policy Communities and Public Policy in Canada, ed. William D. Coleman and Grace Skogstad (Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman, 1990).
- 36.
Frans van Waarden, “Dimensions and types of policy networks,” European Journal of Political Research, 21:1 (1992): 29–52; Erik hans Klijn, “Analysing and Managing Policy Processes in Complex Networks: A Theoretical Examination of the Concept Policy Network and its Problems,” Administration & Society, 28:1 (1996): 90–119; Erik hans Klijn, Joop Koppenjan, “Governance Network Theory: Past, Present, Future,” Policy & Politics, 40:4 (2012): 587–606.
- 37.
Jenny M. Lewis, “The Future of Network Governance Research: Strength in Diversity and Synthesis,” Public Administration, 89:4 (2011): 1224; Klijn, Koppenjan, “Governance Network Theory,” 594.
- 38.
Waarden, “Dimensions and Types of Policy Networks,” 31; Klijn, “Policy Processes in Complex Networks,” 94; Klijn, Koppenjan, “Governance Network Theory,” 591.
- 39.
Waarden, “Dimensions and Types of Policy Networks,” 32.
- 40.
Klijn, “Policy Processes in Complex Networks,” 94.
- 41.
Heather Creech and Terri Willard, “Strategic Intentions: Managing Knowledge Networks for Sustainable Development. How to Manage a Successful Knowledge Network” (Winnipeg, Canada: International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2001): 82–88. http://www.eldis.org/go/home&id=30144&type=Document#.VKC3tAA8.
- 42.
As shown by Dominique Pestre, historians of science have rarely studied the interactions of scientists and politicians, preferring to speak of the patronage of government rather than the deals with the state. Dominique Pestre, “Science, Political Power and the State,” in Companion to Science in the Twentieth Century, ed. John Krige and Dominique Pestre (London: Routledge, 2003): 62–63, 65.
- 43.
Pestre, “Science, Political Power,” 70.
- 44.
Dominique Pestre, “Debates in Transnational and Science Studies,” British Journal for the History of Science (2012): 435.
- 45.
Anthony Laughton, John Gould, M.J. ‘Tom’ Tucker, Howard Roe, Of Seas and Ships and Scientists: The Remarkable Story of the UK’s National Institute of Oceanography (Cambridge: Lutterworth Press, 2010).
- 46.
Anna Carlsson-Hyslop, “An anatomy of storm surge science at Liverpool Tidal Institute 1919–1959: forecasting, practices of calculation and patronage,” (PhD diss., University of Manchester, 2010).
- 47.
Jacob D. Hamblin, Gary E. Weir, Helen Rozwadowski, Gary Kroll, Naomi Oreskes, Roland Rangier.
- 48.
Roland Rainger, “Science at the Crossroads: The Navy, Bikini Atoll, and American Oceanography in the 1940s,” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Studies, 30:2 (2000): 349–371; Roland Rainger, “Patronage and Science: Roger Revelle, The U.S. Navy and Oceanography at the Scripps Institution,” Earth Sciences History, 19:1 (2000): 58–89; Gary E. Weir, An Ocean in Common: American Naval Officers, Scientists, and the Ocean Environment (College Station: Texas A&M University, 2001); Naomi Oreskes, “A Context of Motivation: US Navy Oceanographic Research and the Discovery of Sea-Floor Hydrothermal Vents,” Social Studies of Science, 33:5 (2003): 697–742; Jacob D. Hamblin, “The Navy’s ‘Sophisticated’ Pursuit of Science: Undersea Warfare, the Limits of Internationalism, and the Utility of Basic Research, 1945–1956,” Isis, 93:1 (2002): 1–27; David Van Keuren, “Cold War Science in Black and White: US Intelligence Gathering and its Scientific Cover at the Naval Research Laboratory, 1948–62,” Social Studies of Science, 31:2 (2001): 207–229.
- 49.
Paul Forman’s ‘distortionist critique’, the notion that the US military (negatively) shaped scientific research agendas, was first called this by Roger Geiger; see Roger Geiger, “Review of The Cold War and American Science: The Military-Industrial-Academic Complex at MIT and Stanford,” Technology and Culture, 34:3 (1994): 629–631; Weir, An Ocean in Common.
- 50.
Hamblin, Oceanographers and the Cold War.
- 51.
David Hounshell, “The Cold War, RAND, and the Generation of Knowledge, 1946–62,” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, 27 (1997): 239.
- 52.
David Edgeton, Warfare State: Britain, 1920–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
- 53.
Advocating the former are Paul Forman, “Behind Quantum Electronics: National Security as Basis for Physical Research in the United States, 1940–1960,” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, 18:1 (1987): 149–229; Leslie, The Cold War and American Science. A key advocate of the second position is David J. Kevles, “Cold War and Hot Physics: Science, Security, and the American State,” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 20 (1990): 239–264.
- 54.
See Simone Turchetti, Peder Roberts, The Surveillance Imperative: the Geo-Sciences and the Cold War (London: Palgrave, 2014): 9; and the work of Kai-Henrik Barth, Ronald E. Doel, Naomi Oreskes.
- 55.
Kelly Moore, Disrupting Science: Social Movements, American Scientists, and the Politics of the Military, 1945–1975 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008).
- 56.
Jacob D. Hamblin, Oceanographers and the Cold War: Disciples of Marine Science (Seattle: University of Washington, 2005).
- 57.
Helen Rozwadowski, The Sea Knows No Boundaries: A Century of Marine Science under ICES (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2004).
- 58.
John Krige, American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006) provides an account of US interest in European scientific development after 1945.
- 59.
Here I have paraphrased the list of movements and forces suggested as possible objects of transnational study by Pierre-Yves Saunier, “Entry: Transnational,” in The Palgrave Dictionary of Transnational History, ed. Akira Iriye and Pierre-Yves Suanier (New York: Palgrave, 2009): 1047–1055.
- 60.
Mark Walker, “The ‘National’ in International and Transnational Science,” British Journal for the History of Science, 45:3 (2012): 363.
- 61.
Dominique Pestre, “Debates in Transnational and Science Studies: A Defence and Illustration of the Virtues of Intellectual Tolerance,” British Journal for the History of Science 45, no. 3 (2012), 433.
- 62.
Eric Vanhaute, E., “Who is Afraid of Global History? Ambitions, Pitfalls and Limits of Learning Global History”, Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaften, 20:2 (2009): 27.
- 63.
Walker, “The ‘National’ in International and Transnational Science,”; Lewis Pyenson, “An End to National Science: The Meaning and the Extension of Local Knowledge,” History of Science (2002): 251–290.
- 64.
Walker, “The ‘National’ in International and Transnational Science,” 359.
- 65.
Naomi Oreskes and Ronald Rainger, “Science and Security before the Atomic Bomb: The Loyalty Case of Harald U. Sverdrup,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 31:3 (2000): 309–369.
- 66.
Ron Doel, “Scientists as Policymakers”, 215–222.
- 67.
See the papers in Turchetti, Roberts, “Introduction,” The Surveillance Imperative.
- 68.
John Lewis Gaddis, Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982); John Lewis Gaddis, The Cold War (London: Allen Lane, 2005); Odd Arne Westad, The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Times (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007); Melvyn P. Leffler and David S. Painter, Origins of the Cold War: An International History, (Routledge: London, 2005); Heonik Kwon, The Other Cold War (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010); Odd Arne Westad, “The Cold War and the International History of the Twentieth Century,” in The Cambridge History of the Cold War, Melvyn P. Leffler, Odd Arne Westad (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012); Jonathan Haslam, Russia’s Cold War: From the October Revolution to the Fall of the Wall (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2012).
- 69.
Akira Iriye, “Historicizing the Cold War,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War, Richard H. Immerman and Petra Goedde (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013): 15–31; also Geoffrey Warner, “The Geopolitics and the Cold War,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War, Richard H. Immerman and Petra Goedde (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013): 15–31.
- 70.
This simplistic construction was particularly prevalent during the 1980s, especially in the work of John Lewis Gaddis, David Engerman, “Ideology and the Origins of the Cold War, 1917–1962,” in Melyvn P. Leffler, Odd Arne Westad, Cambridge History of the Cold War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010); Naoko Shibusawa, “Ideology, Culture, and the Cold War,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War, Richard H. Immerman and Petra Goedde (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013).
- 71.
Odd Arne Westad, The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of our Times, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006); Heonik Kwon, The Other Cold War, (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010); Prasenjit Duara, “The Cold War as a Historical Period: An Interpretive Essay,” The Journal of Global History, 6:3 (2011): 457–480.
- 72.
Prasenjit Duara, “The Cold War as a Historical Period: An Interpretive Essay,” Journal of Global History, 6:3 (2011): 457–480; Jeffrey G. Giauque, Grand Designs and Visions of Unity: The Atlantic Powers and the Reorganization of Western Europe, 1955–1963 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002); Wilfried Loth, Europe, Cold War and Coexistence (London: Frank Cass, 2004); Geir Lundestad, The United States and Western Europe since 1945: From “Empire” by Invitation to Transatlantic Drift (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003); Marc Trachtenberg, A Constructed Peace: The making of the European Settlement, 1945–1963 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999); for science specifically, John Krige, American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006).
- 73.
Roger Jervis, “Was the Cold War a Security Dilemma,” Journal of Cold War Studies, 3 (2001): 36–60; Charles L. Glaser, “The Security Dilemma Revisited,” World Politics, 50 (1997): 171–201; Michael S. Goodman, Spying on the Nuclear Bear: Anglo-America Intelligence and the Soviet Bomb (Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press, 2007); Charles A. Ziegler, David Jacobson, Spying without Spies: Origins of America’s Nuclear Surveillance System (Conn.: Greenwood Publishing, 1995).
- 74.
Turchetti, Roberts, “Introduction”, The Surveillance Imperative, 2.
- 75.
Kristie Macrajis, “Techniphilic Hubris and Espionage Styles During the Cold War,” Isis, 101:2 (2010): 378–385.
- 76.
Turchetti, Roberts, “Introduction”, The Surveillance Imperative, 2.
- 77.
Weir, An Ocean in Common; also Oreskes, “A Context of Motivation,” 697–742.
- 78.
Hamblin, J.D., Oceanographers and the Cold War (2005); Elena Aronova, Karen S. Baker, Naomi Oreskes, “Big Science and Big Data in Biology: From the International Geophysical Year through the International Biological Program to the Long Term Ecological Research Program, 1957-present,” Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 40:2 (2012): 183–224; David Van Keuren, “Cold War Science in Black and White: US Intelligence Gathering and Its Scientific Cover at the Naval Research Laboratory, 1948–1962,” Social Studies of Science, 31 (2001): 207–229.
- 79.
Turchetti, Roberts, “Introduction”, The Surveillance Imperative, 7.
- 80.
Michael S. Goodman, The Official History of the Joint Intelligence Committee, Volume 1: From the Approach of the Second World War to the Suez Crisis (London: Routledge, 2014); Huw Dylan, Defence Intelligence and the Cold War: Britain’s Joint Intelligence Bureau 1945–1964 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).
- 81.
Bruno Latour, Science in Action: How to follow Scientists and Engineers through History (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987): 257.
References
Aronova, Elena, Karen S. Baker, Naomi Oreskes. “Big Science and Big Data in Biology: From the International Geophysical Year Through the International Biological Program to the Long Term Ecological Research Program, 1957-Present.” Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences 40, no. 2 (2012): 183–224.
Aubin, David, Charlotte Bigg. “Neither Genius nor Context Incarnate: Norman Lockyer, Jules Janssen and the Astrophysical Self.” In The History and Poetics of Scientific Biography. Edited by Thomas Söderqvist. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2007.
Bloor, David. Knowledge and Social Imagery. London: Routledge, 1976.
Bullard, Edward. “The Effect of World War II on the Development of Knowledge in the Physical Sciences.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A 342, no. 1631 (1975): 519–536.
Butterfield, Herbert. The Whig Interpretation of History. London: G.Bell, 1931.
Callon, Michel. “The Sociology of an Actor-Network: The Case of the Electric Vehicle.” In Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology: Sociology in the Real World. Edited by Michel Callon, John Law, Arne Rip. London: Macmillan, 1986.
Capshew, James H., Karen A. Rader. “Big Science: Price to the Present.” Osiris 7 (1992): 3–25.
Carlsson-Hyslop, Anna. “An Anatomy of Storm Surge Science at Liverpool Tidal Institute 1919–1959: Forecasting, Practices of Calculation and Patronage.” PhD diss., University of Manchester, 2010. British Library EthOS (uk.bl.ethos.538271).
Coleman, William D., Grace Skogstad. “Policy Communities and Policy Networks: A Structural Approach.” In Policy Communities and Public Policy in Canada. Edited by William D. Coleman and Grace Skogstad. Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman, 1990.
Collins, Harry M. Changing Order: Replications and Induction in Scientific Practice. California: Sage, 1985.
Collins, Harry M., Trevor J. Pinch. Frames of Meaning: The Social Construction of Extraordinary Science. London: Routledge, 1982.
Collins, Patricia Hill. “Intersectionality’s Definitional Dilemmas.” Annual Review of Sociology 41 (2015): 1–20.
Doel, Ron E. “Scientists as Policymakers, Advisors, and Intelligence Agents: Linking Contemporary Diplomatic History with the History of Contemporary Science.” In The Historiography of Contemporary Science and Technology. Edited by Thomas Söderqvist. Reading, UK: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1997.
Duara, Prasenjit. “The Cold War as a Historical Period: An Interpretive Essay.” The Journal of Global History 6 (2011): 457–480.
Dylan, Huw. Defence Intelligence and the Cold War: Britain’s Joint Intelligence Bureau 1945–1964. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
Edgeton, David. Warfare State: Britain, 1920–1970. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Engerman, David. “Ideology and the Origins of the Cold War, 1917–1962.” In Cambridge History of the Cold War. Edited by Melyvn P. Leffler, Odd Arne Westad. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Forman, Paul. “Behind Quantum Electronics: National Security as Basis for Physical Research in the United States, 1940–1960.” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 18 (1987): 149–229.
Gaddis, John Lewis. Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982.
Gaddis, John Lewis. The Cold War. London: Allen Lane, 2005.
Galison, Peter. “Bubble Chambers and the Experimental Workplace.” In Observation, Experiment, and Hypothesis in Modern Physical Science. Edited by Peter Achinstein, Owen Hannaway. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1985.
Galison, Peter. “The Many Faces of Big Science.” In Big Science: The Growth of Large-scale Research. Edited by Peter Galison. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1992.
Geiger, Roger. “Review of The Cold War and American Science: The Military-Industrial-Academic Complex at MIT and Stanford.” Technology and Culture 34 (1994): 629–631.
Giauque, Jeffrey G. Grand Designs and Visions of Unity: The Atlantic Powers and the Reorganization of Western Europe, 1955–1963. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002.
Glaser, Charles L. “The Security Dilemma Revisited.” World Politics 50 (1997): 171–201.
Goodman, Dena. The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994.
Goodman, Michael S. Spying on the Nuclear Bear: Anglo-America Intelligence and the Soviet Bomb. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press, 2007.
Goodman, Michael S. The Official History of the Joint Intelligence Committee, Volume 1: From the Approach of the Second World War to the Suez Crisis. London: Routledge, 2014.
Hamblin, Jacob D. “The Navy’s ‘Sophisticated’ Pursuit of Science: Undersea Warfare, the Limits of Internationalism, and the Utility of Basic Research, 1945–1956.” Isis 93, no. 1 (2002): 1–27.
Hamblin, Jacob D. Oceanographers and the Cold War: Disciples of Marine Science. Seattle: University of Washington, 2005.
Hankins, Thomas L. “In Defense of Biography: The Use of Biography in the History of Science.” History of Science 17 (1979): 1–16.
Haslam, Jonathan J. Russia’s Cold War: From the October Revolution to the Fall of the Wall. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2012.
Hounshell, David. “The Cold War, RAND, and the Generation of Knowledge, 1946–62.” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 27, no. 2 (1997): 237–267.
Hughes, Thomas P. “The Electrification of America: The System Builders.” Technology and Culture 20 (1979): 124–161.
Iriye, Akira. “Historicizing the Cold War.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War. Edited by Richard H. Immerman, Petra Goedde. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Jervis, Roger. “Was the Cold War a Security Dilemma.” Journal of Cold War Studies 3 (2001): 36–60.
Jordan, Grant. “Sub-Governments, Policy Communities, and Networks: Refilling the Old Boots.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 2, no. 3 (1990): 319–338.
Keuren, David K. van. “Cold War Science in Black and White: US Intelligence Gathering and Its Scientific Cover at the Naval Research Laboratory, 1948–62.” Social Studies of Science 31, no. 2 (2001): 207–229.
Kevles, David J. “Cold War and Hot Physics: Science, Security, and the American State.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 20 (1990): 239–264.
Klijn, Erik hans. “Analysing and Managing Policy Processes in Complex Networks: A Theoretical Examination of the Concept Policy Network and Its Problems.” Administration & Society 28, no. 1 (1996): 90–119.
Klijn, Erik hans, Joop Koppenjan. “Governance Network Theory: Past, Present, Future.” Policy & Politics 40, no. 4 (2012): 587–606.
Krige, John. American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006.
Kwon, Heonik. The Other Cold War. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010.
Latour, Bruno. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987.
Latour, Bruno, Stephen Woolgar. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986.
Laughton, Anthony, John Gould, M.J. ‘Tom’ Tucker, Howard Roe. Of Seas and Ships and Scientists: The Remarkable Story of the UK’s National Institute of Oceanography. Cambridge: Lutterworth Press, 2010.
Leffler, Melvyn P., David S. Painter. Origins of the Cold War: An International History. London: Routledge, 2005.
Leslie, Stuart W. The Cold War and American Science: The Military-Industrial-Academic Complex at MIT and Stanford. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.
Lewis, Jenny M. “The Future of Network Governance Research: Strength in Diversity and Synthesis.” Public Administration 89 (2011): 1221–1234.
Loth, William. Europe, Cold War and Coexistence. London: Frank Cass, 2004.
Lundestad, Geir. The United States and Western Europe Since 1945: From “Empire” by Invitation to Transatlantic Drift. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
MacKenzie, Donald. “Statistical Theory and Social Interests: A Case Study.” Social Studies of Science 8, no. 1 (1978): 35–83.
Macrajis, Kristie. “Techniphilic Hubris and Espionage Styles During the Cold War.” Isis 101 (2010): 378–385.
McCulloch, Andrew D. Charisma and Patronage: Reasoning with Max Weber. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2014.
Menahem, Gila. “Policy Paradigms, Policy Networks and Water Policy in Israel.” Journal of Public Policy 18, no. 3 (1998): 283–310.
Merton, Robert K. “Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science.” American Sociological Review 22 (1957): 635–659.
Moore, Kelly. Disrupting Science: Social Movements, American Scientists, and the Politics of the Military, 1945–1975. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008.
Morrell, Jack, Arnold Thackray. Gentlemen of Science: Early Years of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981.
Mukerji, Chandra. A Fragile Power: Scientists and the State. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989.
Nye, Mary J. Blackett: Physics, War, and Politics in the 20th Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004.
Nye, Mary J. “Scientific Biography: History of Science by Another Means.” Isis 97 (2006): 322–329.
Nye, Mary J. Michael Polanyi and His Generation: Origins of the Social Construction of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011.
Oikonomou, Alexandros-Panagiotis. “The Hidden Persuaders: Government Scientists and Defence in Post-war Britain.” PhD diss., Imperial College London, 2011. British Library EthOS (uk.bl.ethos.537242).
Oreskes, Naomi. “A Context of Motivation: US Navy Oceanographic Research and the Discovery of Sea-Floor Hydrothermal Vents.” Social Studies of Science 33 (2003): 697–742.
Oreskes, Naomi, Ronald Rainger. “Science and Security Before the Atomic Bomb: The Loyalty Case of Harald U. Sverdrup.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 31 (2000): 309–369.
Pestre, Dominique. “Science, Political Power and the State.” In Companion to Science in the Twentieth Century. Edited by John Krige, Dominique Pestre. London: Routledge, 2003.
Pestre, Dominique. “Debates in Transnational and Science Studies: A Defence and Illustration of the Virtues of Intellectual Tolerance.” British Journal for the History of Science 45, no. 3 (2012): 425–442.
Pickering, Andrew. Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1984.
Pinch, Trevor J. “Sociology of Science.” In Reader’s Guide to the History of Science. Edited by Arne Hessenbruch. London: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, 2000.
Porter, Theodore M. “Is the Life of the Scientists a Scientific Unit?.” Isis 97 (2006): 314–321.
Pyenson, Lewis. “An End to National Science: The Meaning and the Extension of Local Knowledge.” History of Science 40 (2002): 251–290.
Rainger, Roland. “Patronage and Science: Roger Revelle, The U.S. Navy and Oceanography at the Scripps Institution.” Earth Sciences History 19 (2000a): 58–89.
Rainger, Roland. “Science at the Crossroads: The Navy, Bikini Atoll, and American Oceanography in the 1940s.” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Studies 30 (2000b): 349–371.
Richards, Joan L. “Introduction: Fragmented Lives.” Isis 97 (2006): 302–305.
Roberts, Peder. “Intelligence and Internationalism: The Cold War Career of Anton Bruun.” Centaurus 55 (2013): 243–263.
Rozwadowski, Helen. The Sea Knows No Boundaries: A Century of Marine Science Under ICES. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2004.
Saunier, Pierre-Yves. “Entry: Transnational.” In The Palgrave Dictionary of Transnational History. Edited by Akira Iriye, Pierre-Yves Suanier. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
Shapin, Steven, “The Politics of Observation: Cerebral Anatomy and Social Interests in the Edinburgh Phrenology Disputes.” In On the Margins of Science: The Social Construction of Rejected Knowledge. Edited by Roy Wallis. Keele, UK: Keele University Press, 1979: 139–178.
Shapin, Steven, Simon Schaffer. Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985.
Shibusawa, Naoko. “Ideology, Culture, and the Cold War.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War. Edited by Richard H. Immerman, Petra Goedde. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Smith, Crosbie, M. Norton Wise. Energy & Empire: A Biographical Study of Lord Kelvin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Terrall, Mary. “Biography as Cultural History of Science.” Isis 97 (2006): 306–313.
Thorpe, Charles. Oppenheimer: The Tragic Intellect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006.
Thorpe, Charles, Steven Shapin. “Who Was J. Robert Oppenheimer? Charisma and Complex Organization.” Social Studies of Science 30, no. 4 (2000): 545–590.
Trachtenberg, Marc. A Constructed Peace: The making of the European Settlement, 1945–1963. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.
Turchetti, Simone. The Pontecorvo Affair: A Cold War Defection and Nuclear Physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012.
Turchetti, Simone, Peder Roberts. The Surveillance Imperative: GeoSciences During the Cold War and Beyond. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.
Vanhaute, Eric E. “Who Is Afraid of Global History? Ambitions, Pitfalls and Limits of Learning Global History.” Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaften 20, no. 2 (2009): 22–39.
Waarden, Frans van. “Dimensions and Types of Policy Networks.” European Journal of Political Research 21, no. 1 (1992): 29–52.
Walker, Mark. “The ‘National’ in International and Transnational Science.” British Journal for the History of Science 45 (2012): 359–376.
Warner, Geoffrey. “The Geopolitics and the Cold War.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War. Edited by Richard H. Immerman, Petra Goedde. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Weir, Gary E. An Ocean in Common: American Naval Officers, Scientists, and the Ocean Environment. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 2001.
Westad, Odd Arne. The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Westad, Odd Arne. “The Cold War and the International History of the Twentieth Century.” In The Cambridge History of the Cold War. Melvyn P. Leffler, Odd Arne Westad. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Williams, L. Pearce. “The Life of Science and Scientific Lives.” Physis 28 (1991): 199–213.
Ziegler, Charles A., David Jacobson. Spying Without Spies: Origins of America’s Nuclear Surveillance System. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1995.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Robinson, S.A. (2018). Ocean Science and the British Cold War State. In: Ocean Science and the British Cold War State. Palgrave Studies in the History of Science and Technology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73096-7_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73096-7_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73095-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73096-7
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)