319 Anais do XXI Seminário Internacional Nanotecnologias, Sociedade e Meio Ambiente desafios jurídicos éticos e sociais para a “grande transição sustentável” (XXI SEMINANOSOMA) used in this section to update the analysis perspective on science-society dynamics by incorporating the contrast between the concepts of science and society and science in society with the more demanding proposal regarding a new image of the science-society relationship from the science with and for society perspective, combining motiva- tions, prospects (social desirability) and co-responsibility. The section focuses on relevant elements for responsible science of impacts: reflexivity as a dimension closely associated with so- cio-technical robustness, and the capacity for learning, as a driver of research and innovation processes. These two elements constitute the components of reflexivity and mutual responsibility -responsiveness- defined as adaptive learning (Owen et al. 2012). The section aims to provide a conceptual hinge that facilitates the understanding of the original science of impacts project in the sci- ence and society (FP6) and science in society context and its poten- tial transformation today into a science with and for society within the framework of the science of right impacts associated to open (EC 2016) and responsible (EC 2013) research and innovation of EU FP 8. Section 4, “Conclusion”, takes up the problem posed in the chapter and summarises the result obtained: the updated understand- ing of the science of impacts in the new significance framework of responsible science and technology. Mode 2, PNS and ANT are the three cornerstones of this resignification. 2. The science-society assemblage as a constitutive element in the science valorisation process This section puts forward a critical understanding of the itin- erary followed by the STS (Science and Technology Studies) field of analysis in relation to the understanding of new science-society dynamics. Three canonical approaches are now analysed, according to which scientific activity is based on processes of science-society inter- weaving, in which relational dimensions intervene with a direct impact on science valorisation. The three approaches are: Mode 2 knowl- edge production – Mode 2 – (Gibbons et al. 1994, Nowotny et al. 2001), Post-Normal Science – PNS – (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1993, 2008) and Actor-Network Theory – ANT – (Callon and Law 1989, Latour 2005). The analysis of each approach seeks to: (i) in descriptive terms, deter- mine how new science-society dynamics are explained; (ii) in exploratory terms, how they establish the link between new science-society dynamics and the robustness and valorisation of scientific activity;
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz