Biochemistry in Wartime: The Life and Lessons of Adolf Butenandt, 1936–1946

This essay discusses the wartime work of one of the world’s leading biochemists, the Nobel Prize winner, Adolf Butenandt. It describes the influence of the war on Butenandt’s Institute, and considers his role as a representative figure in the collusion of science, government, and the military in Nazi Germany.Achim Trunk is a biologist and historian who specializes in the history of the life sciences. He studied at the University of Cologne, and now works at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science, where he is editing the scientific and medical papers of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Between 2001 and 2004, he was a member of the Berlin team that studied the history of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society during National Socialism. As part of that work, he coordinated the working party on Adolf Butenandt.     

The Rise and Demise of the International Council for Science Policy Studies (ICSPS) as a Cold War Bridging Organization

When the journal Minerva was founded in 1962, science and higher educational issues were high on the agenda, lending impetus to the interdisciplinary field of “Science Studies” qua “Science Policy Studies.” As government expenditures for promoting various branches of science increased dramatically on both sides of the East-West Cold War divide, some common issues regarding research management also emerged and with it an interest in closer academic interaction in the areas of history and policy of science. Through a close reading of many early issues of Minerva but also of its later competitor journal Science Studies (now called Social Studies of Science) the paper traces the initial optimism of an academically based Science Studies dialogue across the Cold War divide and the creation in 1971 of the International Commission for Science Policy Studies as a bridging forum, one that Minerva strangely chose to ignore. In this light, attention is drawn to aspects of the often forgotten history of Science Studies in the former Soviet Union and the Eastern European block. Reviewed also are several early discussions that are still relevant today: e.g., regarding differing concepts of Big Science, science and democracy, autonomy in higher education and what conditions are necessary to sustain academic freedom and scientific integrity (some of Edward Shils’ primary concerns). Finally, it is noted how the question of quantitative methods to measure scientific productivity lay at the heart of a “Science of Science” movement of the 1960s has re-emerged in a new form integral to the notion of a “Science of Science Policy.”     

A History of Universalism: Conceptions of the Internationality of Science from the Enlightenment to the Cold War

That science is fundamentally universal has been proclaimed innumerable times. But the precise geographical meaning of this universality has changed historically. This article examines conceptions of scientific internationalism from the Enlightenment to the Cold War, and their varying relations to cosmopolitanism, nationalism, socialism, and ‘the West’. These views are confronted with recent tendencies to cast science as a uniquely European product.

Science indicators as reliable evidence

Science indicators are increasingly used in policy-making. However, failure to relate interpretations of specific measures to the historical development of science can lead to errors in assessing past investments and in prioritizing future investments. This article outlines some of these sources of error, and argues for the more systematic use of historical evidence in the formulation of science policy. Irwin Feller, an economist, is a Senior Visiting Scientist at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. His research includes studies of the economics of academic R&D, the assessment of interdisciplinary research, and the relationship between performance measurement and science and technology policies. George Gamota, a physicist, is President of STMA, LLC. He has written extensively on technology assessment and forecasting, emerging technologies, and science policy. Recently, he led a review of New Zealand’s New Economy Research Fund (NERF), and is a foreign reviewer of the Japanese Science & Technology (JST) Corporation’s research programmes.     

Occurrence of organic biocides in the air and dust at the Natural History Museum of Rouen,France

Using over 100 years of biocides for preservation of collections of natural history museums has led to significant pollution of specimens and the environment of museums. Staff may be exposed to these substances as well by skin contact or by breathing dust and volatiles compounds. In this work, we present the results of a screening of volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds in the air and dust from the Natural History Museum of Rouen (Normandy, France). It is shown that the concentration in the air of the different substances is acceptable and below regulatory limits. Nevertheless, concentrations in dust especially for DDT and DDD are high and require special precautions and a regular dusting.     

Value-Laden Science: Jan Burgers and Scientific Politics in the Netherlands

The political engagement of scientists is not necessarily left-wing, and even when it is, it can take widely varying forms. This is illustrated by the specific character of Dutch scientific activism in the 1930s and 40s, which took shape in a society where ‘pillarized’ social divisions were more important than horizontal class structure. This paper examines how, within this context, the Delft physicist Jan Burgers developed a version of scientific politics, built on a philosophy of value-laden science.

百年印社 鸿儒来栖——饶宗颐当选西泠印社第七任社长

20世纪初的粤东古城潮州,站立在现代文明和传统意识形态交汇的前沿,风起云涌,巍巍大观。特殊的时代孕育特殊的人才,学坛巨擘从那里走出来。他就是饶宗颐。有人誉称＂北钱（锺书）南饶＂＂北季（羡林）南饶＂,饶宗颐稳镇南国,蜚声海外,演绎出一个将近百年的文化传奇。当今之世,     

Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea

STS research has devoted relatively little attention to the promotion and reception of science and technology by non-scientific actors and institutions. One consequence is that the relationship of science and technology to political power has tended to remain undertheorized. This article aims to fill that gap by introducing the concept of “sociotechnical imaginaries.” Through a comparative examination of the development and regulation of nuclear power in the US and South Korea, the article demonstrates the analytic potential of the imaginaries concept. Although nuclear power and nationhood have long been imagined together in both countries, the nature of those imaginations has remained strikingly different. In the US, the state’s central move was to present itself as a responsible regulator of a potentially runaway technology that demands effective “containment.” In South Korea, the dominant imaginary was of “atoms for development” which the state not only imported but incorporated into its scientific, technological and political practices. In turn, these disparate imaginaries have underwritten very different responses to a variety of nuclear shocks and challenges, such as Three Mile Island (TMI), Chernobyl, and the spread of the anti-nuclear movement.

Congressmen and scientists in the making of science policy: The Allison Commission, 1884–1886

Conclusion The Allison Commission focused attention on the administration of the scientific bureaux and its relation to the jurisdictional system in the Congress. The commission also had a more considerable influence on congressional policy towards the scientific bureaux than was previously thought. Legislative recommendations offered by the Allison Commission became law, even if they avoided the notice of congressional opponents through the strategic manipulation of the appropriations process. Hilary Herbert was not a crude enemy of science, but a staunch defender of the obligations of Congress to scrutinise the expenditure of funds it allocated.This detailed political history of the Allison Commission is a necessary part of any history of American science policy. William Boyd Allison and Hilary Herbert were, no less than scientists like Powell, initiators of a tradition which has continued to be important in American governmental science policy.The form of the special committee devoted to scientific issues was initiated by the Allison Commission. It prefigured more recent and familiar congressional inquiries like the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, the Government Operations Committee under Representative Fountain, the House Science Policy Task Force, and the Energy and Commerce Committee under Representative Dingell. The attentiveness to details like pay, printing, food and morale—as small but manageable parts of the larger enterprise—foreshadows more contemporary inquiries into the details of the procedures for awarding grants and contracts and the assurances of financial and scientific integrity. The mechanisms of control applied to governmental science by the Allison Commission—particularly itemised appropriations, but also control over personnel through promotions and control of bureaucratic organisation by virtue of congressional rather than disciplinary organisation—stand as early examples of how Congress may continue to exert its constitutional authority to scrutinise an innovative and entrepreneurial scientific community.     

The Complementarity Between the Collective and the Individual

Besides his activities as a theoretical physicist, the Belgian Léon Rosenfeld cultivated and showed a lively concern for history of science since his student years. This paper is a study of his publications, correspondence and other endeavours in history of science, mainly during the early Cold War period, in order to explore his essentially Marxist views on science and society and how they differed from those of other Marxists scholars, most notably John D. Bernal and Boris Hessen.     

Disciplinary Networks and Bounding: Scientific Communication Between Science and Technology Studies and the History of Science

This article examines the communication networks within and between science and technology studies (STS) and the history of science. In particular, journal relatedness data are used to analyze some of the structural features of their disciplinary identities and relationships. The results first show that, although the history of science is more than half a century older than STS, the size of the STS network is more than twice that of the history of science network. Further, while a majority of the journals in the STS network are connected by weak ties, about half of the history of science network consists of strong ties. The history of science network is thus more cohesive than the STS network. The relatively strong cohesion within the history of science network is associated with comparatively high degrees of intra-disciplinary communication, but comparatively weak ties to only a few related disciplines. The analysis also shows that very few members of the history of science cliques are situated on the shortest path between both specialties. Moreover, given the relatively impermeable nature of the history of science network, the latter partially depends on STS to reach some of the neighboring disciplines.     

The Congress for Cultural Freedom, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Minerva</Emphasis>, and the Quest for Instituting “Science Studies” in the Age of Cold War

The Congress for Cultural Freedom is remembered as a paramount example of the “cultural cold wars.” In this paper, I discuss the ways in which this powerful transnational organization sought to promote “science studies” as a distinct – and politically relevant – area of expertise, and part of the CCF broader agenda to offer a renewed framework for liberalism. By means of its Study Groups, international conferences and its periodicals, such as Minerva, the Congress developed into an influential forum for examining the ways Big Science impacted the relations between science, society, and politics, thus constituting a semi-institutional niche for Science Studies before its professionalization within academia during the 1970s. I argue that the Congress contributed to the construction of public space in which the relations between science, society and politics were debated, and science was reconceptualized as a social activity. The vision of “science studies” the CCF-associated intellectuals promulgated was different from the science studies we know today. Yet, this alternative vision, in which the issues of science politics appeared inseparable from those of science policy, science organization, and science governance, constituted the “pre-history” of science studies today.     

Beginning Science Policy Research in Europe: The Studiengruppe für Systemforschung, 1957–1973

Translator’s note*: I am pleased to offer this translation of a lecture by Helmut Krauch, both because he is an old friend, whom I have known for more than forty years, and because it fills a gap in the history of science policy research. As this lecture makes clear, the Studiengruppe, led by Krauch, was the first in Europe to measure the share of nuclear and military research in total R&D expenditure and to make systematic technology assessments to guide government policy. Moreover, its Project ORAKEL opened the way to wider public debate on major policy issues in science and technology. Krauch’s book on Computer Democracy remains an outstanding contribution to the reform of Western democracy. I commend this essay warmly to all concerned with the history of science and technology policy. This is an edited translation of a lecture delivered at the Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis at the Research Centre for Technical Change and the Environment in Karlsruhe, 10 April 2000. We are grateful to the Institute for permission to publish the essay, to Professor Christopher Freeman, for generously preparing a translation, and to Dr. Reinhard Coenen for helping to prepare the final version.     

情注鄱阳湖——记万向集团旗下的一个“明星企业”

谁能想到,报纸上一条“豆腐干”消息,居然改变了一方水土许多民众的命运。 成灾龙虾变成宝 2003年5月29日,万向集团董事局主席鲁冠球看到《人民日报》一则简讯：“小龙虾成生态公害》,说的是洞庭湖小龙虾成灾。一向怀有“反哺”农业浓烈情结的鲁冠球,得知离浙江更近的中国第一大淡水湖鄱阳湖小龙虾危害更甚。他召来麾下大将、浙江远洋渔业集团公司总经理曾岳祥,语重心长地说：“听到农民受灾,心里就难受。我们必须担当更多的社会责任。你马上带人去鄱阳湖考察,看看能不能帮助当地消除生态公害。”     

Towards a Culture of Application: Science and Decision Making at the National Institute of Standards &; Technology

How does the research performed by a government mission agency contribute to useable technologies for its constituents? Is it possible to incorporate science policy mechanisms for increasing benefits to users in the decision process? The United States National Institute of Standards &; Technology (NIST) promises research directed towards industrial application. This paper considers the processes that produce science and technology at NIST. The institute’s policies for science provide robust examples for how effective science policies can contribute to the emergence of useful technologies. To progress towards technologies that can be years away, the agency uses several means for integrating the needs of eventual information users into the prioritization process. To accomplish this, NIST units, such as the Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory, incorporate mechanisms for considering user need and project impact into different stages of its scientific decision processes. This, and other specific strategies that the agency utilizes for connecting the supply of science to information demand, provide lessons for generating useable science.     

叶景葵：高风世或无

叶景葵（1874-1949）,字揆初,号卷庵,浙江杭州人。光绪癸卯年（1903）进士。辛亥革命后,弃官就商,走上实业救国的道路,担任浙江兴业银行上海总行董事长达三十年,是著名的银行家。在民国的金融业发展中,“叶氏”的名字鲜明地浮现,除了银行家的风采之外,更缘于其在另一片书香弥漫的世界中所留下的印迹,     

What’s Wrong with Talking About the Scientific Revolution? Applying Lessons from History of Science to Applied Fields of Science Studies

Since the mid-twentieth century, the ‘Scientific Revolution’ has arguably occupied centre stage in most Westerners’, and many non-Westerners’, conceptions of science history. Yet among history of science specialists that position has been profoundly contested. Most radically, historians Andrew Cunningham and Perry Williams in 1993 proposed to demolish the prevailing ‘big picture’ which posited that the Scientific Revolution marked the origin of modern science. They proposed a new big picture in which science is seen as a distinctly modern, western phenomenon rather than a human universal, that it was invented in the Age of Revolutions 1760–1848, and that science be de-centred within the new big picture: treated as just one of many forms of human knowledge-seeking activity. Their paper is one of the most highly cited in the history of science field, and has the potential to transform the way that science educators, science communicators, science policy-makers and scientists view science. Yet the paper and historians’ scholarly response to it are not well-known outside the history discipline. Here I attempt to bridge that disciplinary gap with a review of scholarly papers published 1994–2014 that cited Cunningham and Williams or otherwise discussed the Scientific Revolution, to gauge the extent of support for the old and new big pictures. I find that the old big picture is disintegrating and lacks active defenders, while many scholars support aspects of the new big picture. I discuss the significance of this for scholars in ‘applied’ fields of science studies such as education, communication and policy.     

Moral Economies in Science: From Ideal to Pragmatic

In the following pages we discuss three historical cases of moral economies in science: Drosophila genetics, late twentieth century American astronomy, and collaborations between American drug companies and medical scientists in the interwar years. An examination of the most striking differences and similarities between these examples, and the conflicts internal to them, reveals constitutive features of moral economies, and the ways in which they are formed, negotiated, and altered. We critically evaluate these three examples through the filters of rational choice, utility, and American pragmatism, using the latter to support the conclusion that there is no single vision of moral economies in science and no single theory—moral, political, social—that will explain them. These filters may not be the only means through which to evaluate the moral economies examined, but aspects of each appear prominent in all three cases. In addition, explanations for decisions are often given in the language of these theories, both at the macro (policy) level and at the local level of the moral economies we discuss. In light of such factors, the use of these frameworks seems justified. We begin with an attempt to define the nature of moral economies, then move to a consideration of scientific communities as moral communities operating within material and other constraints which we relate to wider questions of political economy and societal accountabilities.

The Joint Establishment of the World Federation of Scientific Workers and of UNESCO After World War II

The World Federation of Scientific Workers (WFScW) and UNESCO share roots in the Social Relations of Science (SRS) movements and in the Franco-British scientific relations which developed in the 1930s. In this historical context (the Great Depression, the rise of Fascism and the Nazi use of science, the social and intellectual fascination for the USSR), a new model of scientific internationalism emerged, where science and politics mixed. Many progressive scientists were involved in the war efforts against Nazism, and tried to prolong their international commitments into peacetime. They contributed to the establishment of the WFScW and of UNESCO in 1945–1946. Neither the WFScW nor UNESCO succeeded in achieving their initial aims. Another world emerged from the immediate post-war years, but it was not the world fancied by the progressive scientists from the mould of scientific internationalism. The aim of this article is to follow the path from the Franco-British networks towards the establishment of the WFScW and UNESCO; from an ideological scientific internationalism towards practical projects. It is to understand how these two bodies came to embody two different scientific internationalisms during the Cold War.

Alternative Facts and States of Fear: Reality and STS in an Age of Climate Fictions

Minerva - In the decades since the Science Wars of the 1990s, climate science has become a crucible for the negotiation of claims about reality and expertise. This negotiation, which has drawn...