Anais do XXI Seminário Internacional Nanotecnologias, Sociedade e Meio Ambiente desafios jurídicos éticos e sociais para a “grande transição sustentável” (XXI SEMINANOSOMA) 332 context” on the one hand, and laboratory or “scientific context” on the other; and fails to study the very content of what is performed inside laboratories. The sociology of science must show sociologists and social historians how societies shift and are reshaped by and through the content of science (Latour 1988). In short, the ANT approach offers a set of results that help understand science-society dynamics from an unfailingly relational per- spective. Therefore, the challenge lies in hypothesising the possibil- ities of a reflexive intervention (oriented towards the valorisation of relational quality) that is capable of accepting this approach. 3. New frameworks for intervention in science policy discourse: from “Science in Society” to “Science with and for Society” The contributions in the section above develop ways of under- standing the new knowledge production patterns in which science and society are no longer presented as entities with recognisably autono- mous discursive logics of operation. Once their interdependence has been accepted and, with it, the interweaving of differentiated actors and spheres in the knowledge production and distribution dynamics, conforming to autonomous quality criteria for one sphere or the other does not seem sufficient. This section shows how the need to understand and work on the intersections and dynamics of mutual configuration or transla- tion has been materialising. In the present context, it is also relevant to show how this path has been mapped out in two interconnected ways: a) the theoretical field of science and technology studies and b) public STI policies. This interconnection occurred when the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) approach was conceptualised and deployed as a pillar of the European Union (EU) FP7 (EC 2013, von Schomberg 2014), seeking sociotechnical integration to promote more ethical and socio-politically responsible forms of co-production and governance in science, technology and innovation (STI). RRI initiated a new framework for approaching the science-society complex that can be put to use for the problems being tackled in this field in Brazil and elsewhere, in relation to the study of nanotechnology’s societal and environmental “aspects”. In particular, it can be put in dialogue with the impact science perspective (Martins 2016). This perspective fol- lows a “consequentialist” logic that operates on the basis of a clear de- marcation between epistemic and ethical-socio-political aspects. This boundary between scientific-technical and social aspects, in addition
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz