Helge Torgersen
Biographic Data
| ID | 4258286 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Helge Torgersen |
| GIVEN NAMES | Helge |
| FAMILY NAME | Torgersen |
| SIGNATURE | TORGERSEN H |
| AFFILIATIONS | Institute of Technology Assessment |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 15 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 12 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 12 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 3 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1997 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2020 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Die neutrale Normativität der Technikfolgenabschätzung: Konzeptionelle Auseinandersetzung und praktischer Umgang
Technology assessment (TA) is committed to impartial expertise as well as basic democratic values. And beyond that? What is the normative framework within which TA operates? Is it always the same or does it differ depending on the topic, societal task or country and political culture? How should TA deal with both normative claims from outside and those that originate from within TA itself? In what ways can it identify and process normative claims…
Technology assessment as a myth buster: Deconstructing myths around emerging technologies
Responsible Research and Innovation requires the debating of emerging technologies ‘upstream’. In discussions on radically novel technologies, comparisons with older technologies are often drawn. This leads to a transfer of assigned properties in the creation of rhetoric so that the new technology appears as a derivative of the older. Sometimes, several comparator technologies are at hand which may give the new technology a different image. Depen…
Different ways of problematising biotechnology – and what it means for technology governance
To understand controversies over technologies better, we propose the concept of ‘problematisation’. Drawing on Foucault’s idea of problematisation and on the concept of frames in media research, we identify characteristic forms of problematising biotechnology in pertaining controversies, typically emphasising ethical, risk or economic aspects. They provide a common basis for disputes and allow participants to argue effectively. The different form…
Frames and comparators: How might a debate on synthetic biology evolve
A stimulated early public debate is frequently advocated when introducing an emerging technology like synthetic biology (SB). To debate a still quite abstract technology, participants functionally need a frame that determines which arguments are legitimate and which issues are relevant. Often, such frames are based on previous debates over other novel technologies. Three technologies currently provide frames for discussing SB: (green) biotechnolo…
Calling controversy: Assessing synthetic biology’s conflict potential
Will synthetic biology elicit controversies similar to those of genetically modified crops before? Maybe, but where exactly are the analogies, and how can we gain substantial insights rather than mere guesses? We argue that as well as the intrinsic properties of the technologies at stake, the context of their implementation is decisive. To assess mechanisms of past and potential controversies, an investigative tool is presented. The Gate Resonanc…
Knowing Differently—Over Time
An Epistemology of the Concrete—Twentieth-Century Histories of Life, by Hans-Jorg Rheinberger, with a foreword by Tim Lenoir, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010, 330 pp., £16.99 (paper). When
Inter- und Transdisziplinarität im Wandel: Neue Perspektiven auf problemorientierte Forschung und Politikberatung
Inter- und Transdisziplinarität – Eine anhaltend aktuelle Debatte
Fuzzy Genes: Epistemic Tensions in Genomics
Genomics contributed to making modern biology a prolific multi-disciplinary field leading to new approaches such as systems biology. Reporting in the media reflects the high stakes involved in these changes, but such reporting often appears inconsistent as contradictory claims are made about new applications contrasting with uncertainties from new insights. Such inconsistent claims might relate to different disciplines involved in the field. New …
Wozu Experten: Ambivalenzen der Beziehung von Wissenschaft und Politik
Wissenschaftliche Expertise ist nach wie vor die wichtigste Ressource fÃ1⁄4r die Politik, wenn es um riskante und kontroverse Entscheidungen geht aller modernen Wissenschafts- und Expertenskepsis zum Trotz. WidersprÃ1⁄4chliche Expertenmeinungen und der oft unklare Stellenwert von Expertise in der Entscheidungsfindung lassen wissenschaftliche Politikberatung selbst zum Politikum werden. Als Kristallisationspunkt eines sich wandelnden Verhältniss…
GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception
Public opposition to genetically modified (GM) food and crops is widely interpreted as the result of the public's misperception of the risks. With scientific assessment pointing to no unique risks from GM crops and foods, a strategy of accurate risk communication from trusted sources has been advocated. This is based on the assumption that the benefits of GM crops and foods are self‐evident. Informed by the interpretation of some qualitative inte…
Austria and the Transatlantic Agricultural Biotechnology Divide
In contrast to shifts in other European countries in the late 1990s, the Austrian position on agricultural biotechnology has remained constant over the past decade. Although Austria's position was initially considered restrictive in comparison, developments elsewhere narrowed the gap, and the European Commission adopted measures that Austria had endorsed for a long time. Taking Austria as an example, this article considers some frequent explanati…
Biotechnology and the European public
How to keep out what we don't want: An assessment of `Sozialverträglichkeit' under the Austrian Genetic Engineering Act
National regulations for new science and engineering projects are often drawn up on foundations that refer to the current `state of the art'. However, this approach suffers from the fundamental problem, among others, that science progresses quickly, and models for the development of science have only limited predictive ability. Assessing the risk associated with a project therefore becomes a complex problem; and so non-scientific criteria can not…
Aversion preceding rejection: Results of the Eurobarometer Survey 39.1 on biotechnology and genetic engineering in Austria
In late 1994, we performed a representative survey on attitudes to biotechnology and genetic engineering in Austria using the questionnaire applied in the Eurobarometer survey 39.1 of 1993. The results showed that support for genetic engineering in Austria was low compared to support in the rest of Europe. However, risks were perceived as being comparatively low, and the demand for government control was below average. Together with the very low …
Frames and comparators: How might a debate on synthetic biology evolve
A stimulated early public debate is frequently advocated when introducing an emerging technology like synthetic biology (SB). To debate a still quite abstract technology, participants functionally need a frame that determines which arguments are legitimate and which issues are relevant. Often, such frames are based on previous debates over other novel technologies. Three technologies currently provide frames for discussing SB: (green) biotechnolo…
Fuzzy Genes: Epistemic Tensions in Genomics
Genomics contributed to making modern biology a prolific multi-disciplinary field leading to new approaches such as systems biology. Reporting in the media reflects the high stakes involved in these changes, but such reporting often appears inconsistent as contradictory claims are made about new applications contrasting with uncertainties from new insights. Such inconsistent claims might relate to different disciplines involved in the field. New …
Austria and the Transatlantic Agricultural Biotechnology Divide
In contrast to shifts in other European countries in the late 1990s, the Austrian position on agricultural biotechnology has remained constant over the past decade. Although Austria's position was initially considered restrictive in comparison, developments elsewhere narrowed the gap, and the European Commission adopted measures that Austria had endorsed for a long time. Taking Austria as an example, this article considers some frequent explanati…
How to keep out what we don't want: An assessment of `Sozialverträglichkeit' under the Austrian Genetic Engineering Act
National regulations for new science and engineering projects are often drawn up on foundations that refer to the current `state of the art'. However, this approach suffers from the fundamental problem, among others, that science progresses quickly, and models for the development of science have only limited predictive ability. Assessing the risk associated with a project therefore becomes a complex problem; and so non-scientific criteria can not…
Aversion preceding rejection: Results of the Eurobarometer Survey 39.1 on biotechnology and genetic engineering in Austria
In late 1994, we performed a representative survey on attitudes to biotechnology and genetic engineering in Austria using the questionnaire applied in the Eurobarometer survey 39.1 of 1993. The results showed that support for genetic engineering in Austria was low compared to support in the rest of Europe. However, risks were perceived as being comparatively low, and the demand for government control was below average. Together with the very low …
Biotechnology and the European public
Austria and the Transatlantic Agricultural Biotechnology Divide
In contrast to shifts in other European countries in the late 1990s, the Austrian position on agricultural biotechnology has remained constant over the past decade. Although Austria's position was initially considered restrictive in comparison, developments elsewhere narrowed the gap, and the European Commission adopted measures that Austria had endorsed for a long time. Taking Austria as an example, this article considers some frequent explanati…
GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception
Public opposition to genetically modified (GM) food and crops is widely interpreted as the result of the public's misperception of the risks. With scientific assessment pointing to no unique risks from GM crops and foods, a strategy of accurate risk communication from trusted sources has been advocated. This is based on the assumption that the benefits of GM crops and foods are self‐evident. Informed by the interpretation of some qualitative inte…
Wozu Experten: Ambivalenzen der Beziehung von Wissenschaft und Politik
Wissenschaftliche Expertise ist nach wie vor die wichtigste Ressource fÃ1⁄4r die Politik, wenn es um riskante und kontroverse Entscheidungen geht aller modernen Wissenschafts- und Expertenskepsis zum Trotz. WidersprÃ1⁄4chliche Expertenmeinungen und der oft unklare Stellenwert von Expertise in der Entscheidungsfindung lassen wissenschaftliche Politikberatung selbst zum Politikum werden. Als Kristallisationspunkt eines sich wandelnden Verhältniss…
Inter- und Transdisziplinarität – Eine anhaltend aktuelle Debatte
Fuzzy Genes: Epistemic Tensions in Genomics
Genomics contributed to making modern biology a prolific multi-disciplinary field leading to new approaches such as systems biology. Reporting in the media reflects the high stakes involved in these changes, but such reporting often appears inconsistent as contradictory claims are made about new applications contrasting with uncertainties from new insights. Such inconsistent claims might relate to different disciplines involved in the field. New …
Inter- und Transdisziplinarität im Wandel: Neue Perspektiven auf problemorientierte Forschung und Politikberatung
Calling controversy: Assessing synthetic biology’s conflict potential
Will synthetic biology elicit controversies similar to those of genetically modified crops before? Maybe, but where exactly are the analogies, and how can we gain substantial insights rather than mere guesses? We argue that as well as the intrinsic properties of the technologies at stake, the context of their implementation is decisive. To assess mechanisms of past and potential controversies, an investigative tool is presented. The Gate Resonanc…
Knowing Differently—Over Time
An Epistemology of the Concrete—Twentieth-Century Histories of Life, by Hans-Jorg Rheinberger, with a foreword by Tim Lenoir, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010, 330 pp., £16.99 (paper). When
Frames and comparators: How might a debate on synthetic biology evolve
A stimulated early public debate is frequently advocated when introducing an emerging technology like synthetic biology (SB). To debate a still quite abstract technology, participants functionally need a frame that determines which arguments are legitimate and which issues are relevant. Often, such frames are based on previous debates over other novel technologies. Three technologies currently provide frames for discussing SB: (green) biotechnolo…
Different ways of problematising biotechnology – and what it means for technology governance
To understand controversies over technologies better, we propose the concept of ‘problematisation’. Drawing on Foucault’s idea of problematisation and on the concept of frames in media research, we identify characteristic forms of problematising biotechnology in pertaining controversies, typically emphasising ethical, risk or economic aspects. They provide a common basis for disputes and allow participants to argue effectively. The different form…
Technology assessment as a myth buster: Deconstructing myths around emerging technologies
Responsible Research and Innovation requires the debating of emerging technologies ‘upstream’. In discussions on radically novel technologies, comparisons with older technologies are often drawn. This leads to a transfer of assigned properties in the creation of rhetoric so that the new technology appears as a derivative of the older. Sometimes, several comparator technologies are at hand which may give the new technology a different image. Depen…
Die neutrale Normativität der Technikfolgenabschätzung: Konzeptionelle Auseinandersetzung und praktischer Umgang
Technology assessment (TA) is committed to impartial expertise as well as basic democratic values. And beyond that? What is the normative framework within which TA operates? Is it always the same or does it differ depending on the topic, societal task or country and political culture? How should TA deal with both normative claims from outside and those that originate from within TA itself? In what ways can it identify and process normative claims…
Political science (12 works) · Genetically Modified Organisms Research (7 works) · Law (7 works) · Sociology (7 works) · Biology (6 works) · CRISPR and Genetic Engineering (6 works) · Economics (6 works) · Computer Science (5 works) · Engineering (5 works) · Engineering ethics (5 works)