Despite a dramatic growth in interest in technology over the last two decades, this has not resulted in a clear understanding of either the nature of technological change or the basis for its regulation. Part of the problem is the ambiguous heritage of science, technology and society studies which rose to prominence in the 1970s. This paper seeks to provide a theoretical scheme for categorising the commonly used models of technological change: to outline the limitations of ‘technocratic’ and ‘technophobic’ approaches to technology and social development and argue for the superiority of an explicitly ‘technochoice’ approach; and to discuss the dominant models for the public control of technology.

PAGES
288 – 305
DOI
All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Issues
Also in this issue:
-
Agnes Horvath, Magic and the Will to Science: A Political Anthropology of Liminal Technicality
-
Gibson Burrell, Ronald Hartz, David Harvie, Geoff Lightfoot, Simon Lilley and Friends, Shaping for Mediocrity: The Cancellation of Critical Thinking at our Universities
-
Bas de Boer, How Scientific Instruments Speak: Postphenomenology and Technological Mediations in Neuroscientific Practice
-
Bjørn Lomborg, False Alarm
-
How does innovation arise in the bicycle sector? The users’ role and their betrayal in the case of the ‘gravel bike’
TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLIC CHOICE: STRATEGIES FOR TECHNOLOGICAL CONTROL AND THE SELECTION OF TECHNOLOGIES
Original Articles