Bibliography for HPSCGA49: Science Policy in an Era of Risk and Uncertainty BETA

Andrea J. Nightingale (2003) ‘A Feminist in the Forest: Situated Knowledges and Mixing Methods in Natural Resource Management’, ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 2(1), pp. 77–90. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1842/1405.

Andrew, Stirling (2007) ‘Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. Talking point on the precautionary principle’, EMBO reports, 8(4), pp. 309–315. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400953.

Arnoldi, J. (2009) Risk: an introduction. Cambridge: Polity.

Bammer, G. and Smithson, M. (2008) Uncertainty and risk: multidisciplinary perspectives. London: Earthscan.

Bruno, Latour (1996) ‘On actor-network theory: A few clarifications’, Soziale Welt, 47(4), pp. 369–381. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40878163.

Burgess, A., Alemanno, A. and Zinn, J. (2016) Routledge Handbook of Risk Studies. Florence: Taylor and Francis.

C. J. Fearnley et al. (2012) ‘Standardisation of the USGS Volcano Alert Level System (VALS): analysis and ramifications’, Bulletin of Volcanology, 74(9), pp. 2023–2036. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-012-0645-6.

Carolina Garcia and Carina J. Fearnley (2012) ‘Evaluating critical links in early warning systems for natural hazards’, Environmental Hazards, 11(2), pp. 123–137. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2011.609877.

Culture, Media, Language (1980). Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203381182.

D. J. Spiegelhalter and H. Riesch (2011) ‘Don’t know, can’t know: embracing deeper uncertainties when analysing risks’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 369(1956), pp. 4730–4750. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2011.0163.

D. Jamieson (1996) ‘Scientific Uncertainty and the Political Process’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 545(1), pp. 35–43. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716296545001004.

Day, S. and Fearnley, C. (2015) ‘A classification of mitigation strategies for natural hazards: implications for the understanding of interactions between mitigation strategies’, Natural Hazards, 79(2), pp. 1219–1238. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1899-z.

Deborah Dixon, Harriet Hawkins, and Mrill Ingram (2011) ‘Art: Blurring the boundaries’, Nature, 472(7344), pp. 417–417. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/472417a.

Deborah Trumbull et al. (no date) ‘Thinking scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project’, Science education, 84(2), pp. 265–275. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200003)84:2%3C265::AID-SCE7%3E3.0.CO;2-5/abstract.

Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A.B. (1982) Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt7zw3mr.

G. A. Bradshaw and Jeffrey G. Borchers (2000) ‘Uncertainty as Information: Narrowing the Science-policy Gap’, Conservation Ecology, 4(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00174-040107.

G. Rowe (2005) ‘A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms’, Science, Technology & Human Values, 30(2), pp. 251–290. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243904271724.

George E. Marcus (1995) ‘Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, pp. 95–117. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155931.

Gibbons, M. et al. (1994) The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE Publications. Available at: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucl/detail.action?docID=1024114.

Gigerenzer, G. (2014) Risk savvy: how to make good decisions. New York: Viking.

Gilberto C. Gallopin et al. (2001) ‘Science for the Twenty-First Century: From Social Contract to the Scientific Core’, International Social Science Journal, 53(168), pp. 219–229. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451.00311.

H. Nowotny (2005) ‘The Increase of Complexity and its Reduction: Emergent Interfaces between the Natural Sciences, Humanities and Social Sciences’, Theory, Culture & Society, 22(5), pp. 15–31. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276405057189.

H.M. Collins and Robert, Evans (2002) ‘The Third Wave of Science Studies’, Social Studies of Science, 32(2), pp. 235–296. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312702032002003.

J. Burgess et al. (2007a) ‘Deliberative mapping: a novel analytic-deliberative methodology to support contested science-policy decisions’, Public Understanding of Science, 16(3), pp. 299–322. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507077510.

J. Burgess et al. (2007b) ‘Deliberative mapping: a novel analytic-deliberative methodology to support contested science-policy decisions’, Public Understanding of Science, 16(3), pp. 299–322. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507077510.

J. Urry (2005) ‘The Complexity Turn’, Theory, Culture & Society, 22(5), pp. 1–14. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276405057188.

Jasanoff, S. (2004) States of knowledge: the co-production of science and social order. London: Routledge.

Jasanoff, S. (2005a) Designs on nature: science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Jasanoff, S. (2005b) Designs on nature: science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Available at: https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/j.ctt7spkz.

Jerome R Ravetz and Ziauddin Sardar (1997) ‘Rethinking science’, Futures:The journal of policy, planning and futures studies, 29(6), pp. 467–470. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(97)00023-2.

John R. Durant, Geoffrey A. Evans, and Geoffrey P. Thomas (1989) ‘The public understanding of science’, Nature, 340(6228), pp. 11–14. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/340011a0.

J.R. Ravetz (1999) ‘What is Post-Normal Science’, Futures:The journal of policy, planning and futures studies, 31(7), pp. 647–653. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(99)00024-5.

Knight, F.H. (2015) Risk, uncertainty and profit. London: Forgotten Books.

Lash, S., Szerszynski, B. and Wynne, B. (1996) Risk, environment and modernity: towards a new ecology. London: Sage. Available at: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucl/detail.action?docID=1023984.

Lupton, D. (2013) Risk. Second edition. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781135090326.

Mayo, D.G. (1996) Error and the growth of experimental knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Available at: https://www.vlebooks.com/Vleweb/Product/Index/467948?page=0.

Michael S. Carolan (2006) ‘Science, Expertise, and the Democratization of the Decision-Making Process’, Society & Natural Resources, 19(7), pp. 661–668. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920600742443.

Mileti, D.S. (1999) Disasters by design: a reassessment of natural hazards in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press.

Mitchell, M. (2009) Complexity: a guided tour [electronic resource]. New York: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UCL/detail.action?pq-origsite=primo&docID=472328.

N. Pidgeon and M. O’Leary (2000) ‘Man-made disasters: why technology and organizations (sometimes) fail’, Safety Science, 34(1), pp. 15–30. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00004-7.

Nowotny, H. (2016) The cunning of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity.

Paul, Slovic, Baruch, Fischhoff, and Sarah, Lichtenstein (1982) ‘Why Study Risk Perception?’, Risk Analysis, 2(2), pp. 83–93. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1982.tb01369.x.

Peter, Adey and Ben, Anderson (2011) ‘Event and anticipation: UK Civil Contingencies and the space – times of decision’, Environment and Planning A, 43(12), pp. 2878–2899. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1068/a43576.

S. Shackley and B. Wynne (1996) ‘Representing Uncertainty in Global Climate Change Science and Policy: Boundary-Ordering Devices and Authority’, Science, Technology & Human Values, 21(3), pp. 275–302. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399602100302.

Shane J. Cronin et al. (2004) ‘Participatory methods of incorporating scientific with traditional knowledge for volcanic hazard management on Ambae Island, Vanuatu’, Bulletin of Volcanology, 66(7), pp. 652–668. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-004-0347-9.

Slovic, P. (2000) The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.

Stirling, A. (2007) ‘Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. Talking point on the precautionary principle’, EMBO reports, 8(4), pp. 309–315. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400953.

Taylor, P.J. (2005) Unruly complexity: ecology, interpretation, engagement. Chicago, [Ill.]: University of Chicago Press. Available at: http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780226790398.

Thomas F. Gieryn (1983) ‘Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists’, American Sociological Review, 48(6), pp. 781–795. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095325.

Ulrich Beck (1992) Risk society: towards a new modernity. London: Sage.

Vaughan, D. and American Council of Learned Societies (1996) The Challenger launch decision: risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb.01159.

Wisner, B. (ed.) (2014) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability, and disasters. Second edition. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203714775.

Ziauddin Sardar and Jerome R. Ravetz (1994) ‘Complexity: Fad or future?’, Futures, 26(6), pp. 563–567. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(94)90028-0.