Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Practice of TA; Science, Interaction, and Communication

  • Chapter
Bridges between Science, Society and Policy

Part of the book series: Wissenschaftsethik und Technikfolgenbeurteilung ((ETHICSSCI,volume 22))

Abstract

As TAMI reflects on the activities of Technology Assessment (TA) institutions and their effectiveness, the central question seems to be: which methods should TA use in order to optimise impact? Although this question sounds quite easy, this paper shows that reflecting on the impact of TA methods is a very complex endeavour. The goal of optimising impact of TA activities requires a comprehensive reflection on TA processes, TA quality criteria and, the institutionalisation and mission of TA. In this paper we strive to provide a common ground for such a broad reflection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Biesboer F et al. (1999) Clones and cloning: the Dutch debate. The Hague: Rathenau Institute; Working document 70

    Google Scholar 

  • Bröchler S, Simonis G, Sundermann K (eds) (1999) Handbuch Technikfolgenabschätzung. Edition Sigma, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Bütschi D, Mosimann F (2001) Médecine de transplantation: un débat de société, In: Revue médicale de la suisse romande, 121, pp 91–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Carius R, Renn O (2003) Partizipative Risikokommunikation. Wege zu einer risikomündigen Gesellschaft. Bundesgesundheitsblatt. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Coenen R, Grunwald A (2003) Nachhaltigkeitsprobleme in Deutschland. Analyse und Lösungsstrategien. Edition Sigma, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker M (ed) (2001) Interdisciplinarity in Technology Assessment. Implementation and its chances and limits. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker M, Grunwald A (2001) Rational Technology Assessment as Interdisciplinary Research. In: Decker ( 2001 ), pp 33–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker M, Neumann-Held E (2003) Between Expert TA and Expert Dilemma —A Plea for Expertise. In: Bechmann G, Hronsky I (eds) Expertise and its Interfaces. The tense relationship of Science and Politics. Edition sigma, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Dienel P C (1989) “Contributing to Social Decision Methodology: Citizen Reports on Technological Projects”. In: Vlek C, Cvetkovich G (eds) Social Decision Methodology for Technological Projects. Kluwer Academic Press: Dordrecht pp 133–150

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorino D J (1990) “Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms”, Science, Technology, and Human Values, 15, No.2, Spring, 226–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B (1996) “Public Values in Risk Research” In• Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Special Issue, Kunreuther H, Slovic P (eds) Challenges in Risk Assessment and Risk Management. Sage: Thousand Oaks, pp 75–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman JB (1991) Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Arguments. Foris, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gethmann C F, Sander T (1999) Rechtfertigungsdiskurse. In: Grunwald A, Saupe S (ed) Ethik in der echnikgestaltung. Praktische Relevanz und Legitimation. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Goorden L, van Gelder S et al. (2003) Genetisch gewijzigd voedsel in Vlaanderen. Retrospectieve trendanalyse van het maatschappelijk debat; Brussels, viWTA rapport nr. 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Gram S (1998) Urban Traffic — a wish for political coordination. The Danish Board of Technology, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Grin J, van de Graaf H, Hoppe R (1997) Technology Assessment through interaction: A guide. The Hague: Rathenau Institute; Working document 57

    Google Scholar 

  • Grin J, Grunwald A (eds) (2000) Vision Assessment: Shaping Technology in the 21st Century Society. Towards a Repertoire for Technology Assessment. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald A (ed) (1999) Rationale Technikfolgenbeurteilung. Konzepte und methodische Grundlagen. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald A (2002) Technikfolgenabschätzung — Eine Einführung. Edition Sigma, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald A (2000) Technik für die Gesellschaft von morgen. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen gesellschaftlicher Technikgestaltung. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Harremoës et al. (2001) Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896–2000. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency (EEA). Environmental issue report No. 22

    Google Scholar 

  • Hüsing B, Engels E M, Frietsch R, Gaisser S, Menrad K, Rubin-Lucht B, Schweizer R (2003) Menschliche Stammzellen. Bern: TA-SWISS, Report TA 44 /2003

    Google Scholar 

  • Joss S, Bellucci S (eds) (2002), Participatory Technology Assessment — European Perspectives. Centre for the Study of Democracy ( C SD) at University of Westminster in association with TA Swiss, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Joss S, Brownlea A (1998) Verfahrensgerechtigkeit in der partizipativen Technikfolgenabschätzung am Beispiel des Publiforum Strom und Gesellschaft. Konzepterarbeitung und Evaluation, TA-SWISS, TA-DT 22 /1998

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL (1996) “The Role of Values in Risk Management”. In: Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Special Issue

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunreuther H, Slovic P (eds) Challenges in Risk Assessment and Risk Management, Sage: Thousand Oaks, pp 126–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Nennen HU, Garbe D (1996) Das Expertendilemma: Zur Rolle wissenschaftlicher Gutachter in der öffentlichen Meinungsbildung. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Paschen H, Vig N (eds) (1999) Parliaments and Technology Assessment. The Development of Technology Assessment in Europe. State University of New York Press, Albany

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Webler T (1998) Der kooperative Diskurs — Theoretische Grundlagen, Anforderungen, Möglichkeiten. In: Renn O, Kastenholz H, Schild P, Wilhelm U (eds) Abfallpolitik im kooperativen Diskurs. Vdf ETH Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Webler T (1994) Konfliktbewältigung durch Kooperation in der Umweltpolitik. Theoretische Grundlagen und Handlungsvorschläge. In: OIKOS, Umweltökonomische Studenteninitiative an der HSG (ed) Kooperationen für die Umwelt. Im Dialog zum Handeln, Rüegger, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Webler T, Rakel H, Dienel P C, Johnson B (1993) Public Participation in Decision Making: A Three-Step-Procedure. Policy Sciences, 26, 189–214

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Webler T, Wiedemann P (eds) (1995) Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Schrimpf M, Büttner Th, Carius R, Köberle S, Oppermann B, Schneider E, Zöller K (1999) Abfallwirtschaft 2005. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Ropohl G (1979/1999) Allgemeine Technologie. Eine Systemtheorie der Technik. Hanser, München. Older version: Eine Systemtheorie der Technik. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Slocum N, Beyne C, Steyaert S (eds) (2003) Participatory Methods Toolkit. A practitioner’s manual. Brussels, viWTA — KBS

    Google Scholar 

  • Steyaert S, Weyns W (eds) (2003) Public Forum. New impulses for the debate on genetically modified food (final report of the public panel). Brussels, viWTA rapport nr. 2, p 42

    Google Scholar 

  • TA-SWISS (2003) TA-SWISS Portät. Akteure und Abläufe bei Projekten des Zentrum für Technologiefolgen-Abschätzung, Bern, TA-SWISS, TA-DT 30 /2003

    Google Scholar 

  • TATuP (2003) Special Issue 1/2003 of “Technikfolgenabschätzung —Theorie und Praxis” on Technology Foresight, edited by Knud Böhle and Michael Rader

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin S (1958) The uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandenabeele J, Goorden L (2001) Leken en experten uitgedaagd? Evaluatie van door VIB georganiseerde debatavonden over biotechnologie in landbouw en voeding. Antwerpen, Zwijnaarde, UA — VIB, p 52

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandenabeele J, Goorden L (2002) Biotechnologie en het debat anno 2002. Een vooruitblik. Antwerpen, Zwijnaarde, UA — VIB, p 55

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Est R, Hanssen L, Crapels O (eds) (2003) Genes for your food — Food for your genes. Societal issues and dilemmas in food genomics. The Hague: Rathenau Institute, Working document 92

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Est R et al. (2002) “The Netherlands: Seeking to involve wider publics in Technology Assessment”. In: Joss S, Bellucci S (eds) Participatory Technology Assessment: European perspectives. Centre for the Study of Democracy, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Rooy P, Sterrenberg L (2002) Het blauwe goud verzilveren. Aanzet voor kennisfusie voor intergraal waterbeheer. The Hague: Rathenau Institute, internal report

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner-Döbler R (1989) Das Dilemma der Technikkontrolle. Edition Sigma, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Webler Th, Levine D, Rakel, H, Renn 0 (1991) The Group Delphi: A Novel Attempt at Reducing Uncertainty, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 39, No. 3, pp 253–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisbord MR, Janoff S (1995) Future Search and action guide to finding common ground in organizations and communities. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Danielle Bütschi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rainer Carius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Decker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Søren Gram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Armin Grunwald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Petr Machleidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Stef Steyaert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rinie van Est
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Technikfolgenabschätzung und Systemanalyse (Institute for Technology Assessment and System Analysis), Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, P.O. box 36 40, 76021, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Michael Decker

  2. Europäische Akademie GmbH, Wilhelmstraße 56, 53474, Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, Germany

    Miltos Ladikas , Susanne Stephan  & Friederike Wütscher ,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bütschi, D. et al. (2004). The Practice of TA; Science, Interaction, and Communication. In: Decker, M., Ladikas, M., Stephan, S., Wütscher, F. (eds) Bridges between Science, Society and Policy. Wissenschaftsethik und Technikfolgenbeurteilung, vol 22. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-06171-8_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-06171-8_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-05960-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-06171-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation