Pretražite po imenu i prezimenu autora, mentora, urednika, prevoditelja

Napredna pretraga

Pregled bibliografske jedinice broj: 1076937

Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules, and the Reality: UNESCO Recommendation on the Role of Science in National Policy and Decision Making, International Cooperation and Development


Orešković, Stjepan
Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules, and the Reality: UNESCO Recommendation on the Role of Science in National Policy and Decision Making, International Cooperation and Development // The Right to Science Symposium / Porsdam, Helle (ur.).
Cambridge, UK, 2020. str. 1-29 (pozvano predavanje, međunarodna recenzija, sažetak, znanstveni)


CROSBI ID: 1076937 Za ispravke kontaktirajte CROSBI podršku putem web obrasca

Naslov
Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules, and the Reality: UNESCO Recommendation on the Role of Science in National Policy and Decision Making, International Cooperation and Development

Autori
Orešković, Stjepan

Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Sažeci sa skupova, sažetak, znanstveni

Izvornik
The Right to Science Symposium / Porsdam, Helle - , 2020, 1-29

Skup
The Right to Science Symposium

Mjesto i datum
Cambridge, UK, 07-08.10.2020

Vrsta sudjelovanja
Pozvano predavanje

Vrsta recenzije
Međunarodna recenzija

Ključne riječi
Knowledge Stocks ; Knowledge Flows ; Normative Rules

Sažetak
What we can learn from other social movements when discussing a potential for Right to Science? People are driven into movements out of a sense of deprivation or inequality, particularly in relation to others or in relation to their expectations. Leaders and participants understand that others in the social hierarchy have different status reflecting their power and economic resources. In most cases they feel dominated, oppressed, humiliated, discriminated or unequal. They gather, organize, react and fight through intellectual, social, legal and public actions until the reach the equal status in society. The model is applicable to social and labor movements, peace movements, students and ecological movements as well as modern individual, sexual, minorities and racial rights movements such as #MeToo ; #BlackLivesMatter, #NobannNoWall, #Daca. The question is why rational individuals would choose to join in collective action, like increasing their access to science, if they feel the benefits of scientific production even if they do not take any action? New drugs are reaching the market, new materials are being created, science has contributed to every aspects of our life and has become one of the basic human necessities for existence. In reality we are facing a consequences of an ideology presented as a “common sense” belief that every new scientific idea, invention and product, deemed beneficial for humanity is available and communicated around the world. We know through the results of numerous research that science is not free from politics and is not equally serving different social, racial, gender and other groups in society. The development of science and technology is, in large measure, a result of new knowledge interests are produced by social movements. People are most likely to rebel when a consistently improving situation stops and makes a turn for the worse. We will explore the potential factors that could/would influence the development of right to science globally and in particular societies while presenting the results of non-partisan, international methodologically credible public opinion surveys (Pew Research, Eurobarometer, Gallup) analyzing interest for science, public support for science as well as skepticism and distrust in science. We will also analyze a) potential of scientists’ willingness to get involved in informal science and technology (S&T) activities and engage with their fellow citizens b) activities of associations such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) c) social movements such as citizen science movements and their potential contribution to the development of RtS ideas, concepts and norms at the international and national level. What we can learn from other social movements when discussing a potential for Right to Science movement? People are driven into movements out of a sense of deprivation or inequality, particularly in relation to others or in relation to their expectations. Leaders and participants understand that others in the social hierarchy have different status reflecting their power and economic resources. In most cases they feel dominated, oppressed, humiliated, discriminated or unequal. They gather, organize, react and fight through intellectual, social, legal and public actions until the reach the equal status in society. The model is applicable to social and labor movements, peace movements, students and ecological movements as well as modern individual, sexual, minorities and racial rights movements such as #MeToo ; #BlackLivesMatter, #NobannNoWall, #Daca. The question is why rational individuals would choose to join in collective action, like increasing their access to science, if they feel the benefits of scientific production even if they do not take any action? New drugs are reaching the market, new materials are being created, science has contributed to every aspects of our life and has become one of the basic human necessities for existence. In reality we are facing a consequences of an ideology presented as a “common sense” belief that every new scientific idea, invention and product, deemed beneficial for humanity is available and communicated around the world. We know through the results of numerous research that science is not free from politics and is not equally serving different social, racial, gender and other groups in society. The development of science and technology is, in large measure, a result of new knowledge interests are produced by social movements. People are most likely to rebel when a consistently improving situation stops and makes a turn for the worse. We will explore the potential factors that could/would influence the development of right to science globally and in particular societies while presenting the results of non-partisan, international methodologically credible public opinion surveys (Pew Research, Eurobarometer, Gallup) analyzing interest for science, public support for science as well as skepticism and distrust in science. We will also analyze a) potential of scientists’ willingness to get involved in informal science and technology (S&T) activities and engage with their fellow citizens b) activities of associations such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) c) social movements such as citizen science movements and their potential contribution to the development of RtS ideas, concepts and norms at the international and national level. The post-World War II world has seen huge progress in scientific research. The generators have been large-scale projects funded by national governments, big business and global corporations, individual talent, and initiatives creating thousands of technology spin-offs and innovative start-ups. The role of organized knowledge in society has never been more important and the impact of STEM (Science, Technologies, Engineering, Mathematics) on people’s everyday lives is growing. New scientific and technological fields as diverse as biotechnology and nanotechnology, gene therapy and pharmacogenomics, membrane technology, neural computing, nanotechnology, and ICTs in general are creating a basis for a society in which the “creation, dissemination, and utilization of information and knowledge has become the most important factor of production.” Consequently, the quantity and quality of scientific inputs and outputs, as measured by the Nature Science Index, have increased. Applied science is flourishing. Its outputs are tangible and evident in the areas of science, technology development and innovation (STDI), as measured by the Global Innovation Index. IBM researchers estimate that 90% of the world’s data has been created in the last two years: more data than was created in the entire previous history of the human race. For the first time in the history of science, including the history of data science itself, we are witnessing a paramount attempt to integrate all existing and possible sources of data, information, and knowledge, to confront a single phenomenon: the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This contribution demonstrates the utility and validity of applying a human rights lens to topical and important issues in science and society through an in-depth case study of the current SARS-COVID-2 pandemic.

Izvorni jezik
Engleski

Znanstvena područja
Interdisciplinarne biotehničke znanosti, Sociologija, Interdisciplinarne društvene znanosti

Napomena
University of Cambridge CRASS



POVEZANOST RADA


Ustanove
Medicinski fakultet, Zagreb

Profili:

Avatar Url Stjepan Orešković (autor)

Citiraj ovu publikaciju

Orešković, Stjepan
Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules, and the Reality: UNESCO Recommendation on the Role of Science in National Policy and Decision Making, International Cooperation and Development // The Right to Science Symposium / Porsdam, Helle (ur.).
Cambridge, UK, 2020. str. 1-29 (pozvano predavanje, međunarodna recenzija, sažetak, znanstveni)
Orešković, S. (2020) Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules, and the Reality: UNESCO Recommendation on the Role of Science in National Policy and Decision Making, International Cooperation and Development. U: Porsdam, H. (ur.)The Right to Science Symposium.
@article{article, author = {Ore\v{s}kovi\'{c}, S.}, editor = {Porsdam, H.}, year = {2020}, pages = {1-29}, keywords = {Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules}, title = {Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules, and the Reality: UNESCO Recommendation on the Role of Science in National Policy and Decision Making, International Cooperation and Development}, keyword = {Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows, Normative Rules}, publisherplace = {Cambridge, UK} }




Contrast
Increase Font
Decrease Font
Dyslexic Font