具体描述
In their expanding roles as advisers, scientists have emerged as a fifth branch of government. But even though the growing dependence of regulatory agencies on scientific and technical information has granted scientists a greater influence on public policy, opinions differ as to how those contributions should be balanced against other policy concerns. Merging legal and institutional analysis with social studies of science, Jasanoff presents a strong case for procedural reforms. In so doing, she articulates a social-construction model that is intended to buttress the effectiveness of the fifth branch.
作者简介
目录信息
读后感
The oscillation between deference and skepticism towards experts, or in other terms, the oscillation between technocratic and social democratic model of scientific advisory in regulation, had persisted. Jasanoff, by drawing on historical case studies of EPA...
The oscillation between deference and skepticism towards experts, or in other terms, the oscillation between technocratic and social democratic model of scientific advisory in regulation, had persisted. Jasanoff, by drawing on historical case studies of EPA...
The oscillation between deference and skepticism towards experts, or in other terms, the oscillation between technocratic and social democratic model of scientific advisory in regulation, had persisted. Jasanoff, by drawing on historical case studies of EPA...
The oscillation between deference and skepticism towards experts, or in other terms, the oscillation between technocratic and social democratic model of scientific advisory in regulation, had persisted. Jasanoff, by drawing on historical case studies of EPA...
The oscillation between deference and skepticism towards experts, or in other terms, the oscillation between technocratic and social democratic model of scientific advisory in regulation, had persisted. Jasanoff, by drawing on historical case studies of EPA...
用户评价
science in policy
science in policy
science in policy
science in policy
science in policy
