Wikipedia

Reiner Grundmann: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (Whoop whoop pull up - 14896
GreenC bot (talk | contribs)
Bots
2,168,296 edits
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 19:
| Other academic advisors =
| notable_ideas =
| influences = {{plainlist|
* [[Niklas Luhmann]]
* [[Bruno Latour]]
* [[Karl Marx]]
}}
| doctoral_advisor = {{plainlist|
* [[Steven Lukes]] (doctorate)
Line 31 ⟶ 26:
| website = {{URL|https://nottingham.academia.edu/ReinerGrundmann}}
}}
'''Reiner Grundmann''', (born 29 September 1955 near [[Freudenstadt]]), is Professor of [[Science and Technology Studies]] (STS) at the [[University of Nottingham]] and Director of its interdisciplinary STS Research Priority Group.<ref name="STS ">{{cite web| url=http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/sciencetechnologyandsociety/index.aspx | title=STS Priority Group | access-date=29 August 2014 | author=STS}}</ref> He is a German sociologist and political scientist who has resided in the UK since 1997. Previous appointments include [[Aston University]] and the [[Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies]].
 
== Life and academic career==
Line 69 ⟶ 64:
 
=== Role of Experts ===
In their book on [[Expert|expert knowledge]] (English translation in 2011: ''Experts: The knowledge and power of expertise''),<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|url = http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gdKhaofcJeMJ:https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/CJS/article/download/11599/9022+&cd=3&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de|title = Book Review/Compte rendu: Nico Stehr and Reiner Grundmann. Experts: The Know-ledge and Power of Expertise. Key Ideas. New York: Rout-ledge, 2011, 148 pp. $110.00 hardcover (978-0-415-60803-9)|last = Young|first = Nathan|date = 2011|journal = Canadian Journal of Sociology |volume=36 |issue=3 |access-date = 2015-05-05}}</ref> Grundmann and Stehr develop a specific concept of expertise. Contrary to common definitions that stress the centrality of scientists as experts, expertise is defined as mediating between knowledge production and knowledge application. With the expansion of knowledge intensive professions, ever more persons move into positions of experts—for some issues, some of the time. The rise of the [[knowledge society]] leads to a proliferation of knowledge sources which has not been sufficiently acknowledged by some dominant theories of expertise. A review in the ''[[Canadian Journal of Sociology]]'' pointed out that the book was published as part of Routledge's "Key Ideas" series and was among the best books in this series, which attempt to both critically review the field and present arguments that reach beyond existing works.<ref name=":0" />
 
''Experts: The knowledge and power of expertise'' got positive reviews e.g. in socialnet.de.<ref>Thorsten Benkel University of Passau) 10.15.2010 review of: Nico Stehr, Reiner Grundmann: Expertenwissen. Velbrück Wissenschaft (Weilerswist) 2010. In: socialnet Rezensionen, ISSN 2190-9245, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensionen/10190.php, access 09.05.2015.</ref> [[Perlentaucher]] mentioned e.g. a positive review of [[:de:Alexander Kissler|Alexander Kissler]] in [[Süddeutsche Zeitung]], stating Stehr and Grundmann would have successfully started ''to plough a new field''.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Reiner Grundmann / Nico Stehr: Expertenwissen. Die Kultur und die Macht von Experten, Beratern und Ratgebern - Perlentaucher|url = https://www.perlentaucher.de/buch/reiner-grundmann-nico-stehr/expertenwissen.html|website = www.perlentaucher.de|access-date = 2015-05-09}}</ref> Climate change is a prominent current case which highlights the question about knowledge and decision making. Grundmann thinks that there exists a mistaken belief that the presence of a [[scientific consensus]] will enable ambitious climate policies. He considers that a much praised study overstates the case for scientific consensus.<ref>Cook et al., [[Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature]] [http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article]</ref> Grundmann is in line with main STS scholars view that science hardly determines policy outcomes.<ref>{{citation |periodical=Social Studies of Science |title=The Third Wave of Science Studies Studies of Expertise and Experience |volume=32 |issue=2 |pages=235–296 |issn=0306-3127|date=1 April 2002 |language=de |doi=10.1177/0306312702032002003 |last1=Collins |first1=H.M. |last2=Evans |first2=Robert|s2cid=145135881 }}</ref> Examples such [[acid rain]],<ref>Maarten A. Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process, 1995. {{ISBN|9780198293330}}</ref> [[smoking ban|smoking regulations]],<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Grundmann | first1 = Reiner | year = 2013 | title = Debunking sceptical propaganda - Book review | journal = BioSocieties | volume = 8 | issue = 3| pages = 370–374 | doi = 10.1057/biosoc.2013.15 | s2cid = 145249396 }}</ref> [[ozone depleting]] substances, [[genetically modified foods]]<ref>Susan Wright, Molecular Politics: Developing American and British Regulatory Policy for Genetic Engineering, 1972-1982 (1994). {{ISBN|9780226910659}}</ref> show how cultural, economic and political issues exercised a strong influence. Conversely, the presence of an international science consensus (through the IPCC) has led to different national policies, none of which is on track to achieving the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions that the [[IPCC Summary for Policymakers]] postulate as necessary.<ref>Reiner Grundmann (2005) Ozone and Climate: Scientific consensus and leadership, Science, Technology, and Human Values 31(1): 73-101.</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url = http://www.ipcc14.de/berichte-1/ipcc-arbeitsgruppe-3/145-arbeitsgruppe-drei-veroeffentlicht-ergebnisse|title = IPCC Working group III|last = Schwarz|first = Susanne|date = 13 April 2014|access-date = 29 August 2014|archive-date = 3 May 2014|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20140503190458/http://www.ipcc14.de/berichte-1/ipcc-arbeitsgruppe-3/145-arbeitsgruppe-drei-veroeffentlicht-ergebnisse|url-status = dead}}</ref>
 
=== Climate change ===
He wrote about the legacy of the [[Climatic Research Unit email controversy]] and whether it revitalized or undermined climate science and climate policy.<ref>{{Cite journal|title = The legacy of climategate: revitalizing or undermining climate science and policy? |journal = Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change|doi=10.1002/wcc.166|volume=3|issue = 3|pages=281–288|year = 2012|last1 = Grundmann|first1 = Reiner| s2cid=142862122 |doi-access = free}}</ref> His own experiences with peer review of another paper about the issue are described in an interview with [[Hans von Storch]] on Storch's Klimazwiebel blog.<ref name="hvSint">[http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/interview-reiner-grundmann.html Tuesday, May 29, 2012 Interview with Reiner Grundmann by Hans von Storch]</ref> According von Storch's intro, Grundmann's paper ''Climategate and The Scientific Ethos''<ref name="CSG">{{Cite journal|title = Climategate and the Scientific Ethos|last = Grundmann|first = Reiner|date = 2012|journal = Science, Technology, & Human Values|volume = 38|pages = 67–93|doi = 10.1177/0162243911432318|s2cid = 146731260}}</ref> faced severe resistance from social science journals before it was published in ''[[Science, Technology, & Human Values]]''.<ref name="hvSint" />
 
Grundmann and Stehr had themselves a controversy in the peer reviewed literature, when they clashed with Constance Lever-Tracy about the role of sociology in climate affairs. Grundmann stated a ''politicization of climate science'' which makes [[science, technology and society]] (STS) scholars feel uncomfortable with the topic of climate change.<ref name="rgclt" /> Grundmann identifies a problematic approach of climate scientists who believe to have a prerogative to make political suggestions in the field "which society at large should take up because scientists always know best"<ref name="hvSint" /> combined with a basic lack of actual<ref name="rgclt">{{cite journal | title=Climate Change: What role for Sociology? A Response to Constance Lever-Tracy' | author=Reiner Grundmann and Nico Stehr | journal=[[Current Sociology]] | year=2010 | volume=58 | issue=6 | pages=897–910 | doi=10.1177/0011392110376031| s2cid=143371210 }}</ref> feasible solution proposals.<ref name="hvSint" /> He sees climate change as a long term issue requiring more public involvement and debate, not less<ref name="hvSint" /> and asks social scientists to study the interaction between climate and society, Lever-Tracy was more about letting the climatologists having the lead.<ref name="rgclt" />
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiner_Grundmann"