Harry Rothman

The Editors and Authors of Economics Journals: a Case of Institutional Oligopoly?

This paper examines data on the institutional backgrounds of editors and authors of the top thirty economics journals, identified by their 1995 citation impact. It is revealed, for example, that 70.8 percent of the journal editors were located in the United States and twelve U.S. universities accounted for the location of more than 38.9 percent. Concerning journal article authors, 65.7 percent were located in U.S. institutions and twelve U.S. universities accounted for 21.8 percent. Arguably, the degree of institutional and geographical concentration of editors and authors may be unhealthy for innovative research in economics.

New genetics, new ethics? Globalisation and its discontents

The paper discusses the rapid and significant development of new genetic technologies (in health, food and agriculture) in the theoretical context of the globalisation debate. We show how the studies on the ethical, legal and social implications of biotechnological innovation have themselves emerged as an important factor in the technological innovation and product development process. Ethical considerations are becoming integral to attempts to understand techno-scientific developments in late modernity. However, ethical studies have so far been more focused on the medical rather than the overall commercial application of genomics. Their relevance to this wider context of the globalised commodification of new genetics needs to be explored. Of special significance is the introduction of ethical considerations into the debates on globalised risk, which we will explore in relation to increasing disparities between the global North and South.

Does familiarity breed concern? Bench scientists and the Human Genome Mapping Project

A survey of 1000 users of the UK Human Genome Project (HGP) Resource Centre in Cambridge, UK found that many respondents concerned with mapping and sequencing genetic material felt strongly that attempts to patent the results of the HGP would impede the future development of diagnostics and therapeutics, and that current attempts to commercialise the results were premature. Contrary to the views of some senior scientists, the majority felt that the HGP posed new ethical issues for society. This paper suggests some explanations for these apparent discrepancies of view, in the context of research into the public understanding of science. It focuses on the various social worlds of those close to the laboratory bench in contrast to those more instrumental in influencing S&T policy. The current turn towards recognising the complexity of both scientific and lay views concerning the new genetic technologies is welcome. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Science studies: a guide for strategic management

The paper describes and discusses the current state of science studies research and its linkages to other fields, such as applied policy and management. It is argued that science studies is differentiated into science and technology studies, and science and technology policy research; and that these are twin interdisciplinary area of research in which a whole range of social scientists, as well as historians and philosophers are involved. The high degree of interdisciplinarity makes the field peculiarly difficult to categorize simply. Nevertheless, it is suufficiently mature and focused to be an established academic field in its own right; it possesses its own journal structure, specialized institutions, national and international professional associations, and teaching programmes. Research in science studies is potentially applicable-especially in the longer term-for policy-makers in the public and private sectors, as well as for public interest groups. However, the need to bridge a perched gap between a...

Practitioners' forum perestroika and soviet biotechnology

This article summarizes the findings of a UK Department of Trade and Industry ‘Overseas Science and Technology Expert Mission’ on Biotechnology to the USSR, made over the period 15-24 September 1989. The mission visited some of the most important basic research institutes working in biotechnmology in the Moscow region, including the ‘Biocity’ of Poushchino, and Kiev in the Ukrainian SSR. These institutes ranged from primarily basic research to ones which had strong links with industrial production. We report on the scientific and technical level of some of the most advanced Soviet centres, such as the Shemyakin Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry, the most important and prominent biotechnology institute in the USSR. The peculiar problems which best Soviet research in the field are described in the context of perestroika, the current restruing of Soviet society.

Obituary Joseph F. Coates 1929–2014

Joe Coates was a member of the Editorial Board for Technology Analysis & Strategic Management from its inception in 1989. He was an outstanding consultant futurologist, trained initially as a chemist, who wrote over 300 articles, and several books, about the future of technology, government and industry. He played a significant role in the establishment of the US Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) as an objective authoritative centre of analysis for a wide range of developing technologies and emerging problem areas in the 1970s and 1980s; he saw its closure in 1995, for political reasons, as reprehensible. Joe’s analyses were always sharp, and often provocative; although he was invariably kind and fair he did not suffer fools gladly, and he could have a sharp edge to his views. For example, take his views on economists and ethicists. “Economics is not one of the helping professions”; “Ethics, as a vogue, has all the earmarks of becoming a plague, much the way lawyers and lawyering have become a blight. . . ” However, Joe had great faith in the potential for good in education, science and technology. In his Editorial for our first issue in 1989 he wrote, “The pressing need is for prospective analysis: what technologies are coming forward, how might they influence our world, how do we anticipate impacts and consequences, how do we discharge or reduce the uncertainty intrinsic to the future, and finally, how do we make better choices now on the basis of prospective analysis [furthermore]. . . an overwhelming number of our fellow citizens . . . are ignorant of the role of science and technology in our society, in our collective affairs, and in our individual lives. Consequently the central need is education of publics, of legislatures, and curiously enough, even of businessmen, as to what science and technology are about and how to make technology even more effective and our benign servant.” (Technology Analysis & Strategic Management V. 1, pp 5–6, 1989.)