MATTHEW KEARNES OPINION The power of science


Matthew Kearnes looks at how collaborations between social and physical scientists could shape social progress


I


N RECENT YEARS the scientific establishment has been through something of a theological moment. With the combined effects of continuing public disquiet about


the trajectory of technological change and a policy context that has increasingly emphasised strategic investments in research, scientists and scientific organisations have begun, perhaps like never before, to publicly defend the benefits of fundamental research and ‘basic science’. In recent months these efforts have crystallised in a series of high-profile and effective campaigns to promote the vitality of science to the future economic prosperity of the UK. Responding to similar concerns, UK research-funding bodies have launched a series of strategic and cross-disciplinary research programmes. Covering areas of research as diverse as environmental change, energy and lifelong health these initiatives encapsulate a new argument about the value of research in the UK; that interdisciplinary and collaborative research can, through careful programme design, be brought to bear on the ‘grand challenges’ of the day. But these initiatives represent a challenge


for social scientists and the broader relationship between science and society. They focus attention


research councils and other funding agencies are increasingly taking an active role in shaping new research programmes – by delineating key research terms, building agendas and working to establish a core research community in emerging fields – a set of underlying policy narratives about the power of science to produce social progress continues to shape institutional practice. The results of this research suggest that this


‘definitional work’, though often couched in technical terms, typically involves questions of fundamental societal significance. For example, the emerging field of synthetic biology is increasingly defined as the rational design of ‘biologically based parts, novel devices and systems’ and the redesign of ‘existing natural biological systems’. This definition shows the desire to make the


“


on the ways in which these grand societal challenges are defined and framed and the kinds of collaborative roles that social scientists are increasingly taking in interdisciplinary research teams. Will this strategic approach, that seeks to encourage research on cross-cutting challenges, be framed solely in technical terms, as requiring scientific rather than social innovations? Will this approach represent an opportunity to open up innovation processes to a wider array of disciplinary perspectives and diverse viewpoints? Against this backdrop, the results of a recently


completed ESRC-funded project entitled Strategic Science: Research Intermediaries and the Governance of Innovation show the gravity of this challenge. Focusing on the development of research programmes in nanotechnology and synthetic biology, the results of the project reveal that while


Scientific organisations have


begun to publicly defend the benefits of fundamental research


‘engineering of biology easier and more predictable’ and is tied to a range of expected applications in areas such as biofuels and pharmaceuticals. In turn, this definitional work has the effect of tying the field to a largely unquestioned future. The findings of the Strategic Science project suggest the challenge facing social scientists in an increasingly strategic policy context and highlight the importance of a thorough investigation of how new research programmes and questions are defined. A number of social scientists are making important steps in this direction – developing new modes of engagement and collaboration with the natural and physical scientists. For example, in the area of synthetic biology, an ESRC-funded network of social scientists (www.genomicsnetwork.ac.uk/ seminarseries) are working to build a ‘post-Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues’ approach to the life sciences that explores the ways that scientific fields are constituted and sustained. This work will be an important step in reimagining the roles that social scientists may play in critical collaboration with their natural and physical science colleagues. n


” i


Dr Matthew Kearnes, Institute of Hazard, Risk and Resilience, Department of Geography, Durham University Email m.b.kearnes@durham.ac.uk Telephone 0191 33 41873 Web www.dur.ac.uk/geography


ESRC Grant Number RES-061-25-0208 AUTUMN 2011 SOCIETY NOW 17


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32