{"title":"社会技术变革中的间质沉默——以转基因“无泪”洋葱为例","authors":"S. Edwards, S. Vallance, R. Montgomery","doi":"10.1080/09505431.2021.2019214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Genetically modified (GM) ‘tearless’ onions were developed in a New Zealand laboratory facility in 2007, but efforts to initiate a field test were unsuccessful, and by 2012 the project had been almost completely dismantled. The overall trajectory of this project was influenced by a collaboration between teams of scientists in Japan and New Zealand; commercial pressures in the New Zealand science system; different regulatory processes that must be followed for indoor versus outdoor research; and activists who detected a containment breach in a GM Brassicas field test. The combination of factors that led to the ultimate demise of GM tearless onions also reveals that some aspects of GM research are not subject to debate, but these would be missing from our analysis if we had only focused on what is present in this controversy. Hence, shifting attention to what is absent from controversy reveals ‘interstitial silences’: matters that lie beyond the boundaries of public debate, but are nevertheless part of the overall trajectory of sociotechnical change. An attention to interstitial silences contributes to an emerging literature on the ecologies of participation by complexifying understandings of what is being negotiated in these participatory spaces. Future research in this area should therefore search for interstitial silences, and also explore how understandings of spatial complexity could be used to further reimagine the wider spaces of participation through which trajectories of sociotechnical change are negotiated.","PeriodicalId":47064,"journal":{"name":"Science As Culture","volume":"31 1","pages":"212 - 234"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interstitial Silences in Sociotechnical Change: The Case of Genetically Modified ‘Tearless’ Onions\",\"authors\":\"S. Edwards, S. Vallance, R. Montgomery\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09505431.2021.2019214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Genetically modified (GM) ‘tearless’ onions were developed in a New Zealand laboratory facility in 2007, but efforts to initiate a field test were unsuccessful, and by 2012 the project had been almost completely dismantled. The overall trajectory of this project was influenced by a collaboration between teams of scientists in Japan and New Zealand; commercial pressures in the New Zealand science system; different regulatory processes that must be followed for indoor versus outdoor research; and activists who detected a containment breach in a GM Brassicas field test. The combination of factors that led to the ultimate demise of GM tearless onions also reveals that some aspects of GM research are not subject to debate, but these would be missing from our analysis if we had only focused on what is present in this controversy. Hence, shifting attention to what is absent from controversy reveals ‘interstitial silences’: matters that lie beyond the boundaries of public debate, but are nevertheless part of the overall trajectory of sociotechnical change. An attention to interstitial silences contributes to an emerging literature on the ecologies of participation by complexifying understandings of what is being negotiated in these participatory spaces. Future research in this area should therefore search for interstitial silences, and also explore how understandings of spatial complexity could be used to further reimagine the wider spaces of participation through which trajectories of sociotechnical change are negotiated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science As Culture\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"212 - 234\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-27\",\"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/10.1080/09505431.2021.2019214\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science As Culture","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2021.2019214","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Interstitial Silences in Sociotechnical Change: The Case of Genetically Modified ‘Tearless’ Onions
ABSTRACT Genetically modified (GM) ‘tearless’ onions were developed in a New Zealand laboratory facility in 2007, but efforts to initiate a field test were unsuccessful, and by 2012 the project had been almost completely dismantled. The overall trajectory of this project was influenced by a collaboration between teams of scientists in Japan and New Zealand; commercial pressures in the New Zealand science system; different regulatory processes that must be followed for indoor versus outdoor research; and activists who detected a containment breach in a GM Brassicas field test. The combination of factors that led to the ultimate demise of GM tearless onions also reveals that some aspects of GM research are not subject to debate, but these would be missing from our analysis if we had only focused on what is present in this controversy. Hence, shifting attention to what is absent from controversy reveals ‘interstitial silences’: matters that lie beyond the boundaries of public debate, but are nevertheless part of the overall trajectory of sociotechnical change. An attention to interstitial silences contributes to an emerging literature on the ecologies of participation by complexifying understandings of what is being negotiated in these participatory spaces. Future research in this area should therefore search for interstitial silences, and also explore how understandings of spatial complexity could be used to further reimagine the wider spaces of participation through which trajectories of sociotechnical change are negotiated.
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.