{"title":"Expectations of Genomic Selection for Forestry: Expert Narratives of Anticipation and Legitimation","authors":"Gwendolyn Blue, D. Davidson, K. Myles","doi":"10.1080/09505431.2022.2025773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Discourses of expectation shape technology development and uptake in subtle and profound ways. While STS research tends to view discourses of expectation in aggregate, disarticulating expectation into distinct narratives of anticipation and legitimation offers insights into the contradictory symbolic forces that inform novel technological applications. Interviews with forest science experts discussing the adoption of genomic selection as a response to climate change offers evidence of the rhetorical work performed by anticipatory and legitimatory narratives. Findings show that proclamations of novelty – consistent with discourses of anticipation – exist alongside efforts to secure legitimacy by establishing continuity between genomic selection and traditional breeding techniques, which would appear to defeat the rhetorical work done by the former. Reflective of previous public conflicts over biotechnology, legitimatory narratives also include assertions that genomic selection is distinct from genetic modification, when such distinctions are anything but clear. Ascription to these narratives, particularly legitimatory narratives that seek to distinguish genomic selection from more contentious biotechnology applications, justifies restrictions on public engagement that could offer valuable insights for management and decision-making. Other implications include restricting social scientific interventions to strategic communication intended to steer publics toward acceptance of genomic selection. Further research is warranted to examine how the dynamics of anticipation and legitimation play out across other sectors which expect benefits from novel biotechnological applications.","PeriodicalId":47064,"journal":{"name":"Science As Culture","volume":"31 1","pages":"256 - 275"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science As Culture","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2022.2025773","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT Discourses of expectation shape technology development and uptake in subtle and profound ways. While STS research tends to view discourses of expectation in aggregate, disarticulating expectation into distinct narratives of anticipation and legitimation offers insights into the contradictory symbolic forces that inform novel technological applications. Interviews with forest science experts discussing the adoption of genomic selection as a response to climate change offers evidence of the rhetorical work performed by anticipatory and legitimatory narratives. Findings show that proclamations of novelty – consistent with discourses of anticipation – exist alongside efforts to secure legitimacy by establishing continuity between genomic selection and traditional breeding techniques, which would appear to defeat the rhetorical work done by the former. Reflective of previous public conflicts over biotechnology, legitimatory narratives also include assertions that genomic selection is distinct from genetic modification, when such distinctions are anything but clear. Ascription to these narratives, particularly legitimatory narratives that seek to distinguish genomic selection from more contentious biotechnology applications, justifies restrictions on public engagement that could offer valuable insights for management and decision-making. Other implications include restricting social scientific interventions to strategic communication intended to steer publics toward acceptance of genomic selection. Further research is warranted to examine how the dynamics of anticipation and legitimation play out across other sectors which expect benefits from novel biotechnological applications.
期刊介绍:
Our culture is a scientific one, defining what is natural and what is rational. Its values can be seen in what are sought out as facts and made as artefacts, what are designed as processes and products, and what are forged as weapons and filmed as wonders. In our daily experience, power is exercised through expertise, e.g. in science, technology and medicine. Science as Culture explores how all these shape the values which contend for influence over the wider society. Science mediates our cultural experience. It increasingly defines what it is to be a person, through genetics, medicine and information technology. Its values get embodied and naturalized in concepts, techniques, research priorities, gadgets and advertising. Many films, artworks and novels express popular concerns about these developments. In a society where icons of progress are drawn from science, technology and medicine, they are either celebrated or demonised. Often their progress is feared as ’unnatural’, while their critics are labelled ’irrational’. Public concerns are rebuffed by ostensibly value-neutral experts and positivist polemics. Yet the culture of science is open to study like any other culture. Cultural studies analyses the role of expertise throughout society. Many journals address the history, philosophy and social studies of science, its popularisation, and the public understanding of society.