Akademické texty

• Beck, Ulrich. 2004. Riziková společnost: Na cestě k jiné moderně. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství.
  
  
• Bonneuil, Christophe. 2004. Les transformations des rapports entre sciences et société en France depuis la Seconde Guerre mondiale: un essai de synthèse. Pp. 15–40 in J. Le Marec, I. Babou (eds.), Science, médias et societé. Colloque, École normale supérieure Lettres et Sciences humaines, Lyon, 15.–17. 6.
  
  
• Callon, Michel, Pierre Lascoumes, Yannick Barthe. 2001. Agir dans un monde uncertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique. Paris: Seuil.
  
  
• Callon, Michel, Vololona Rabeharisoa. 2008. The Growing Engagement of Emergent Concerned Groups in Political and Economic Life. Lessons from the French Association of Neuromuscular Disease Patients. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33(2): 230–261.
  
  
• Čada, Karel, Alice Červinková, Marcela Linková, Tereza Stöckelová, Dana Řeháčková. 2006. Věda jako věc veřejná: vědní politiky a média. Sociologické texty 06:11. Praha: Sociologický ústav Akademie věd České republiky.
  
  
• Edwards, Jeanette. 2002. Taking ‘public understanding’ seriously. New Genetics and Society, 21(3): 315–325.
  
  
• Einsiedel, Edna F., Erling Jelsøe, Thomas Breck. 2001. Publics at the technology table: the consensus conference in Denmark, Canada, and Australia. Public Understanding of Science 10: 83–98.
  
  
• Goven, Joanna. 2003. Deploying the consensus conference in New Zealand: democracy and de-problematization. Public Understanding of Science 12: 423–440.
  
  
• Harremoes, Poul et al. (eds). 2001. Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896–2000. European Environment Agency: Environmental issue report No 22. Dostupné z: http://reports.eea.europa.eu/environmental_issue_report_2001_22/en.
  
  
• Irwin, Alan. 1995. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. London: Routledge. Dostupné z: http://books.google.cz/books?id=MFiuIsC5hAUC&dq=irwin+alan+citizen+science&pg=PP1&ots=1stf4crjh-&sig=RgmxsJ9LCrkY_bLeXWZxNVePKhk&hl=cs&prev=http://www.google.cz/search%3Fq%3DIrwin,%2BAlan.%2BCitizen%2BScience.%2B%26ie%3Dutf-8%26oe%3Dutf-8%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:cs:official%26client%3Dfirefox-a&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail#PPA129,M1
  
  
• Irwin, Alan. 2001. Constructing the scientific citizen: science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Understanding of Science, 10: 1–18.
  
  
• Joss, Simon, Durant, John (eds). 1995. Public participation in science: The role of consensus conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum.
  
  
• Kent, Julie. 2003. Lay experts and the politics of breast implants. Public Understanding of Science, 12: 403–421.
  
  
• Kerr, Anne, Sarah Cunningham-Burley, Richard Tutton. 2007. Shifting Subject Positions Experts and Lay People in Public Dialogue. Social Studies of Science 37(3): 385–411.
  
  
• Kim, Jongyoung. 2007. Alternative Medicine’s Encounter with Laboratory Science: The Scientific Construction of Korean Medicine in a Global Age. Social Studies of Science, 37(6): 855–880.
  
  
• Latour, Bruno. 1999. Politiques de la nature: Comment faire entrer les sciences en démocratie. Paris: La Découverte.
  
  
• Lengwiler, Martin. 2008. Origins and Current Practices in Critical Perspective Participatory. Science Technology Human Values, 33(2): 186–200.
  
  
• Lesser, Lenard I. et al. 2007. Relationship between Funding Source and Conclusion among Nutrition-Related Scientific Articles. PLOS Medicine 4(1): 1–6. Dostupné z: http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040005.
  
  
• Levidow, Les, Marris, Clare. 2001. Science and governance in Europe: lessons from the case of agricultural biotechnology. Science and Governance 28(5): 345–36.
  
  
• Lezaun, Javier, Soneryd, Linda. 2007. Consulting citizens: technologies of elicitation and the mobility of publics. Public Understanding Science (16): 279–297.
  
  
• Marris, Clare, Joly, Pierre-Benoit. 1999. Between Consensus and Citizens: Public Participation in Technology Assessment in France. Science Studies 12(2): 3–32.
  
  
• Marris, Claire, Wynne, Brian, Simmons, Peter, Weldon, Sue. 2001. Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe. Final Report of the PABE research project. Dostupné z: http://csec.lancs.ac.uk/pabe/docs/pabe_finalreport.pdf.
  
  
• McCormick, Sabrina. 2007. Democratizing Science Movements: A New Framework for Mobilization and Contestation. Social Studies of Science, 37(4): 609–623.
  
  
• Michael, Mike. 1998. Between citizen and consumer: Multiplying the meanings of the 'public understanding of science'. Public Understanding of Science, 7: 313–327.
  
  
• Nielsen, Porsborg Annika, Jesper Lassen, Peter Sandøe. 2007. Democracy at ist best? The consensus conference in a cross-national perspective. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20: 13–35.
  
  
• Nowotny, Helga. 2003. Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge. Science and Public Policy, 30(3): 151–156.
  
  
• Nowotny, Helga, Scott, Peter, Gibbons, Michael. 2001. Re-Thinking Science. Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  
  
• Rayner, Steve. 2003. Democracy in the age of assessment: reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision making. Science and Public Policy, 30(3): 163–170.
  
  
• Robins, Rosemary. 2001. Overburdening risk: policy frameworks and the public uptake of gene technology. Public Understanding of Science 10: 19–36.
  
  
• Sarewitz, Daniel. 2004. How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environmental science and policy 7: 385–403.
  
  
• Shorett, Peter, Rabinow, Paul, Billings, Paul R. 2003. The changing norms of the life science. Nature biotechnology 21(2): 123–125.
  
  
• Soneryd, Linda. 2007. Third-Generation Mobile Phones in Sweden Unsayable?: Public Protests and the Development of Deliberations. Science Technology Human Values, 32(3): 287–314. Sponsorship, authorship, and accountability. 2001. The Lancet 358: 854–856.
  
  
• Stirling, Andy. 2008. “Opening Up” and “Closing Down” Power, Participation, and Pluralism in the Social Appraisal of Technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33(2): 262–294. Wachelder, Joseph. 2003. Democratizing Science: Various Routes and Visions of Dutch Science Shops. Science, Technology & Human Values, 28(2): 244–273.
  
  
• Woodhouse, Edward J., Steve Breyman. 2005. Green Chemistry as Social Movement? Science, Technology & Human Values, 30(2): 199–222.
  
  
• Wynne, Brian. 1991. Knowledges in context. Science Technology & Human Values 16(1): 111–121.
  
  
• Wynne, Brian. 2006. Public Engagement as a Means of Restoring Public Trust in Science – Hitting the Notes, but Missing the Music? Community Genetics 9: 211–220.