Search

CITIZEN SCIENCE

Epistemic negotiation

Stakeholders (indigenous groups, activist, scientist, scholars, etc)

One argument presented is that public engagement in technical decisions can lead to great vigilance and confidence in emergency preparedness and that decisions governing technologies should not be left to the scientist. There is benefit in including lay people and STS scholars. This also includes public awareness about emergency response instead of one elite governing body controlling what is best for the public. Nuclear emergency responses must be transparent.

The students who complete the program receive a PhD after either 4 or 5 years, as described above

The report consists of the main article followed by a response from Andrea Binder of the Global Public Policy Institute.

The authors are Stephen J. Collier and Andrew Lakoff. They both have PhDs in anthropology and are professors are educational institutions. Collier is a professor of International Affairs at The New School and Lakoff is a professor of sociology at USC. They are professionally situated to discuss emergency response as they have done research in biosecurity and biothreats.

The organization has done research and generated fact sheets on statistics like injuries, behavior health, and environmental safety.

Information and data to create this article was pulled from numerous sources (5 pages of references), esp. The International Atomic Energy Agency, and many research articles.