Summary of key themes emerging from policy discourses (Corpus C)
1. Basic entities recognised or constructed
In terms of the basic entities recognised, the focus of the policy discourses is split between people, technology, government and the economy.
People are variably referred to in terms of their relationship to the technologies in question – farmers and consumers in the case of GM; patients, men and women in the case of embryology research; the public in the case of nanoscience and synthetic biology; and as engineers, workers or professionals in discussions about technology transfer and funding. Perhaps surprisingly for a corpus that includes parliamentary documents, there are no references to citizens or voters.
Scientific and technological concepts are also discussed – words such as nanoparticles, embryo, chimera and gene are significant.
Government is discussed in terms of ministers, regulation, bill, committee.
The economy is also an important matter for these discourses, with concepts such as markets, business sector, pounds, investment being key. Tying in with the idea of government and the economy, words relating to countries and nations – the UK, Europe, international are also important.
In terms of boundaries, when talking about embryo research, the boundary between human and animal is very important for the policy discourse – but this is seen as a legal rather than an ontological boundary.
2. Assumptions about natural relationships
a. Science drives progress and solves problems
The policy discourses contain a strong sense of the promise of advancement or cures from science. Science and technology is seen as the provider of solutions – for healthcare, for sustainability and for the economy. The precise nature of the solutions or benefits offered by such developments is unspoken – indeed their unknown nature is mentioned – the implication being that more science will inevitably bring social goods as this is the purpose of science.
b. Risks and uncertainties are knowable
Coupled with this however is the acknowledgement that uncertainties and risks surround some of these new developments. These risks and uncertainties are seen as knowable or manageable with more information and are epiphenomena.
c. Social and ethical concerns can be addressed
Concerns about social and ethical issues are matters that have been created by the public and matters, which can also be addressed with more information or legal clarity.
3. Agents and their motives
Science is seen as producer of goods and solutions. More science therefore brings more social goods.
The public are discussed as a group who have concerns and objections not shared by the scientific community – public dialogue is a way of finding out what these concerns are, so that experts can decide which ones are valid and address them.
The source of most advice on the matters being considered are ‘experts’ – specifically the scientific members of august bodies such as the learned societies. They have the right to talk on these subjects and verify/challenge public concerns.
The law is also an important source of advice and seen in the policy discourses as the way to settle social and ethical issues. Legal decisions are often used as a proxy for discussion of moral and social issues.
Industry is an important partner in developing these new technologies and translating them into businesses, jobs and economic growth to keep the UK internationally competitive.
Above all this however, is the role of Government in hearing these different interests and standpoints, balancing interests and providing rules to ensure that science causes no harm and is able to proceed effectively.
4. Key metaphors and other rhetorical devices
The sense of progress and the potential future benefits to come from science is a key theme running throughout the policy discourse. The future therefore is a key rhetorical device in the policy discourse – it is not about what science is doing now, but what it can do in the future. As I have already mentioned, this is not necessarily based upon any specific benefits in the pipeline, but the idea of science as a producer of solutions in the future.
Alongside that runs the idea of the need for the UK economy to compete in a global market. Throughout the discourse the role of science and innovation in driving the UK economy is important, as is the suggestion that this will keep us ahead of the game – giving us an international lead, for instance. This ties in somewhat with the expert rhetoric of time and urgency.
The advice of others is also evoked throughout the policy discourses, providing third party endorsement to policy proposals or allowing particular issues to be raised by ‘others’ – for example, social and ethical issues are raised by the public. Expert advice appears to have the most currency and is also used to neutralise more problematic discussions – legal expertise is drawn upon to settle the ontological questions at the heart of the hybrid embryo legislation, and scientific expertise guides judgements about the potential risks of environmental technologies, for example.
The Policy sociotechnical imaginary: Science driving economic progress Together, these features build up a picture of an imaginary of ‘science driving economic progress’. In this imaginary, with sufficient resources and freedom, science has the ability to solve the world’s problems. Any problems or risks arising can be managed and dealt with by more knowledge and information. Social and ethical issues raised by the public can be addressed by anticipating and managing risk or by the law. Industry is a partner in developing these new technologies and converting them into jobs and wealth and the role of government is to ensure that the partnerships and infrastructures are in place to ensure this happens in a way in which the different interests are balanced.