Rune Nydal

We have never been ELSI researchers - there is no need for a post-ELSI shift.

This article criticizes recent suggestions that the current ELSI research field should accommodate a new direction towards a ‘post-ELSI’ agenda. Post-ELSI research seeks to avoid the modernist division of responsibility for technical and social issues said to characterize ELSI research. Collaboration and integration are consequently the key terms of post-ELSI strategies that are to distinguish it from ELSI strategies. We argue that this call for a new direction relies on an inadequate generalized analysis of ELSI research as modern that will affect the construal of post-ELSI strategies. We are concerned that the call for post-ELSI shift will exclude imaginative proposals and intellectual freedom by narrowing down the scope and methodologies of ELSI and thereby missing opportunities to play a critical and constructive normative role. Instead of framing current trends in ELSI research as a radical and progressive shift from ELSI to post-ELSI, we suggest an alternative story of expansion and diversification described in terms of a drift from ELSA 1 to ELSA 2, pertaining to acronyms in use in Europe. ELSI research has never been modern. It has been experimenting from the very start on ways to mesh the works of humanist, social and natural scientist in order to bridge and build alignments of emerging scientific and societal goals and matters of concern. The development from ELSA 1 to ELSA 2 expands in our account the range of intellectual and methodological capacities of analysis and engagement of complex and dynamic science-society relationships. We present three areas of ELSA expertise to illustrate that the expertise within the field builds on scholarly achievements within the humanities, social sciences as well as the natural sciences. The plurality of disciplinary background of ELSA researchers represents a valuable diversity that enables mutual criticism and formulations of complementary approaches that together constitute a viable ELSA field.

Centre and Periphery of Nano—A Norwegian Context

This work describes the nano field in Norway as currently emerging in the dynamics between two forms of nano research activities described along a centre-periphery axis. 1) There are strategic research initiatives committed to redeem the envisioned potential of the field by means of social and material reorganisation of existing research activities. This activity is seen as central as it is one of our premises that the standard circulating nano vision implies such a work of reorganisation. The fact that nano is often taken as a paradigmatic example of the shift from Mode-1 to Mode-2 research, supports this assumption. 2) In parallel to this activity, a wide variety of research projects pursuing nano strategies are being funded. We regard such research activity as peripheral in so far as the activity is not marked by being committed to the circulating nano vision, as may often be the case. In the process of reorganising, this article argues, the research activity at the periphery provides a crucial arena for discussing and validating what is to be achieved through the work of reorganisation that takes place at the centre. Our analysis is informed by two Norwegian cases. We examine a major nano research initiative at a Norwegian university as a centre and a research project utilising nanoparticles in fish vaccines as a periphery.

Vitenskapelig (u)redelighet

Siden 1980-ara har det vaert en markert okning i antall avsloringer av fusk i forskning. Slike saker svekker ikke bare tilliten til forskning i samfunnet, de bidrar ogsa til at selve forskningen blir svekket. Forskningsetikk handler imidlertid om mye mer enn gransking av uredelighet. Hvordan kan vi fremme god vitenskapelig praksis? Hva innebaerer det at forskning er redelig? Hvilke grasoner finnes, og nar gar man over grensen til uredelighet? Hvordan bor vi handtere mistanker om uredelighet? Hvilke konsekvenser far fusk i forskning, og hvilke sanksjoner bor folge? I denne antologien presenteres ulike perspektiver pa vitenskapelig redelighet og uredelighet gjennom bidrag fra norske forskere pa feltet. Formalet er ikke a gi entydige eller endelige svar pa hva vitenskapelig uredelighet er, men a formidle et mangfold av posisjoner og perspektiver. Noen av disse er overlappende, andre motstridende – og dette speiler ogsa feltet internasjonalt. Antologien vil vaere en viktig ressurs for studenter og forskere, ikke minst i undervisning og opplaering, men ogsa for andre som er involvert i arbeidet med a forebygge uredelighet og fremme god vitenskapelig praksis. Abstract Since the 1980’s, there has been a marked increase in disclosures of fraud in research. Cases of scientific fraud and misconduct do not only damage society’s confidence in research, they also contribute to reduce the trustworthiness in research in itself. Research ethics, however, involve much more than investigations of misconduct. How can we encourage good scientific practice? What does honest research entail? Which gray areas exist, and when is the limit to misconduct crossed? How should allegations of misconduct be handled? What are the consequences of fraud, and what sanctions should follow? In this anthology, Norwegian researches contribute to the discussion of various perspectives on scientific integrity and misconduct. The purpose of this book is not to give unequivocal or definitive answers to what scientific misconduct is, but to convey a diversity of positions and perspectives. Some of these are overlapping, others contradictory - which also reflects the field internationally. This anthology is an important resource for students and researchers, particularly in education and training. In addition, it will also provide insights for others involved in the prevention of misconduct and the promotion of good scientific practice.

Normative Crossover: The Ethos of Socio-technological Systems

This chapter investigates normative dimensions of technologies based on an understanding of technologies as socio-technological systems. As such systems display technologies as both technical and social, they call for a corresponding clarification of the relationship between epistemic and ethico-political activities. The notion of the ethos of socio-technological systems is suggested to denote the immanent worth of the system. Analysis of the formation of the ethos brings forward how normative concerns we recognise respectively as epistemic and ethico-political are intertwined. The notion of the ethos of socio-technical systems is presented and discussed with reference to a Norwegian controversy on the ultrasound screening programme for pregnant women.