10.6092/issn.2038-3460/17152
This article presents an account of the development of STS in Portugal. It pays particular attention to two dimensions. The first regards the domains typically studied by STS scholars in Portugal, grouped in four sections: studies on the scientific system, laboratory ethnographies, research on science and society and risk case studies. The second is the institutional setting in which STS are undertaken, detailing the institutions, groups, journals and associations in this field. The paper attempts to tie the specificities of Portuguese STS with the characteristics of the local scientific system, showing how themes and analysis are influenced by the “semiperipheral” condition of science in Portugal.
application/pdf
2038-3460
17152
2
en
Ana Delicado
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/
Tecnoscienza – Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies
public understanding of science
At the (Semi)Periphery. The Development of Science and Technology Studies in Portugal
Text.Serial.Journal
https://tecnoscienza.unibo.it/
4
Cartographies
2014-01-04
2023-06-12
2014-01-04
2023-11-07
125-148
TS
Ana Delicado
2013
10.6092/issn.2038-3460/17152
125
Institute of Social Sciences, Lisbon
2038-3460
2
public understanding of science
en
148
At the (Semi)Periphery. The Development of Science and Technology Studies in Portugal
https://tecnoscienza.unibo.it/article/download/17152/16059
4
                                                                        Cartographies

At the (Semi)Periphery
The Development of Science and Technology Studies
in Portugal
	
  
Ana Delicado
Institute of Social Sciences, Lisbon
	
  
	
  

       Abstract: This article presents an account of the development of STS in
       Portugal. It pays particular attention to two dimensions. The first regards
       the domains typically studied by STS scholars in Portugal, grouped in four
       sections: studies on the scientific system, laboratory ethnographies, re-
       search on science and society and risk case studies. The second is the insti-
       tutional setting in which STS are undertaken, detailing the institutions,
       groups, journals and associations in this field. The paper attempts to tie the
       specificities of Portuguese STS with the characteristics of the local scientific
       system, showing how themes and analysis are influenced by the “semi-
       peripheral” condition of science in Portugal.

       Keywords: science and technology studies; laboratory ethnography; sci-
       ence system; scientific community; public understanding of science.

       Corresponding author: Ana Delicado, Institute of Social Sciences, Uni-
       versity of Lisbon, Av. Prof. Anibal de Bettencourt, 9, 1600-189 Lisbon, Por-
       tugal – Email: ana.delicado@ics.ul.pt



1. Introduction

    Despite the universalist ambition of science, Science and Technology
Studies (STS) have demonstrated over and over again that local condi-
tions do matter in the production of science. And the same can be said
for STS as such, as this section on Cartographies shows (see, for instance,
Schubert 2011 or Prpić 2013).
    Science in Portugal is marked by a “semi-peripheral” condition, that
some authors have labeled as “the stepchildren of Galileo” (Nunes and
Gonçalves 2001; Nunes 2002). Weighted down by social and cultural fac-
tors such as the restrictions of Catholicism, the persistence of low literacy
levels well into the late 20th century, an authoritarian regime that distrust-
ed and repressed scientists and barely invested in scientific research, and
	
  
TECNOSCIENZA
Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies
4 (2) pp. 125-148 ISSN 2038-3460
www.tecnoscienza.net                              2013
126                                                             Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

an economic fabric that relies little on innovation and technological de-
velopment (Nunes and Gonçalves 2001), Portuguese science developed
late and feebly. Even though the indicators show an astonishing growth in
the past few decades (R&D expenditure has soared from 0.27% of GDP
in 1982 to 1.52% in 2011; the number of researchers in Full-Time Equiv-
alent has gone from 3,963 to 50,061 in the same period; the number of
publications in indexed international journals rose from 1,619 to 41,840
in the same time frame – DGEEC 2013).
    Portuguese science is marked by (Nunes 2002, pp. 194):

      -   internal heterogeneity, especially as expressed in the fluid or float-
          ing boundaries between disciplines and fields of research, the het-
          erogeneity of scientists' careers;
      -   unequal involvement of groups and research institutions with
          transnational worlds of science;
      -   strong feminization (in relative terms) of many research areas, in
          parallel with the difficulty of access of women to top positions of
          scientific and academic careers and management positions in re-
          search institutions;
      -   sharp dependence on funding from European programs;
      -   the overlapping between the worlds of science and academia, to-
          gether with the pivotal role of scientists with “atypical” discipli-
          nary careers and the high dependence of transnational networks
          for establishing scientific reputations.

    Portuguese STS are doubly affected by this “semi-peripheral” condi-
tion. On the one hand, STS scholars are part of this system and have en-
dured the same constraints and benefited from the same opportunities as
their colleagues in other fields. On the other hand, the choice of research
issues and subjects in STS cannot be but influenced by the particular
characteristics of the Portuguese scientific system.
    There is very little work done on the history of STS in Portugal.
Nunes and Roque (2008), in an introduction of an anthology, provide a
brief overview of STS in Portugal, setting them against the backdrop of
Portuguese science and exploring their mains specificities and thematic
dimensions. Much at the same time, Duarte (2009) published a quite de-
tailed working paper on the sociology of science in Portugal, describing
its main actors (authors and institutions), subjects of study and method-
ologies.
    The present article purports to be an overarching but not exhaustive
account of STS in Portugal, based mostly on books and articles published
in journals and conference proceedings. It leaves out many adjoining
fields, such as philosophy and history of science or innovation studies, as
well as works of theoretical nature, which according to Nunes and Roque
(2008) are anyhow scarce. These authors point this as a handicap for Por-
tuguese STS: by focusing on the empirical research of the “national case”,
Delicado                                                                 127
themes and research problems were “endogenised”, but excluded Portu-
guese researchers from wider international debates.
    In particular, this article pays attention to two dimensions of STS in
Portugal. The first regards the domains typically studied by STS scholars
in Portugal, grouped in four sections: studies on the scientific system, la-
boratory ethnographies, research on science and society and risk case
studies. The second is the institutional setting in which STS are undertak-
en, detailing the institutions, groups, journals and associations in this
field.


2. The Pre-history of STS in Portugal

    The end of the 1980s and the first half of the following decade in Por-
tugal were marked by an emerging interest in science by the scientific
community itself that would spark first internal reflexivity and later on
the advent of STS.
    One of the earliest indicators of this trend is the creation of the Asso-
ciation of Science and Technology for Development (ACTD) in 1985
(Delicado et al. 2013), an advocacy group formed by scientists from
across a wide range of fields (as well as business representatives) that
aimed to “raise public and politics awareness of the importance of science
in economic and political decision” (Gonçalves 1996). This association
promoted scientific meetings, organised the first interactive science exhi-
bitions in the country and published a journal, CTS Science Technology
and Society, between 1987 and 1994, that included some articles reporting
the results of ST studies at a national level and translations from leading
international authors.
    In 1992 ACTD, together with the newly formed FEPASC Portuguese
Federation of Scientific Societies and Associations (Delicado et al. 2013),
organised the conference “Scientific Community and Power” (Gonçalves
1993), that brought to Lisbon leading figures of STS, such as Steve Year-
ley and Sheila Jasanoff, but also provided an opportunity for Portuguese
researchers to present their work on STS issues (see below). Similar
events were organised in 1995 (“Science and Democracy”, with Bruce
Lewenstein, Toy MacLeod and Erik Millstone, among others – Gonçalves
1996) and in 1997 (“Science, Scientific Culture and Public Participation”,
with Ulrike Felt, Brian Wynne and Steve Yearley, among others – Gon-
çalves 2000).
    In the early 1990s several books on Portuguese science are published
under the aegis of José Mariano Gago, a physicist and founding member
of ACTD, that had been President of the JNICT Portuguese National
Board for Science and Technology (1986–1989) and later on the first
Minister of Science in Portugal (1995-2002 and again between 2005 and
2011). Two of these books are edited volumes devoted to an overview of
128                                                           Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

scientific research in Portugal (published by the Committee for Europalia
91, an arts festival held in Brussels in 1991 to celebrate the cultural herit-
age of Portugal), the other an extended essay written by Gago himself.
The State of Sciences in Portugal (Gago 1992a) comprises 11 chapters, or-
ganized by scientific field, divided in small sections by scientific disci-
pline, authored by leading researchers (but not STS scholars) and which
proffer a brief stock-taking of research in each of the disciplines. A fairly
similar endeavour would be undertaken almost a decade later by the Ob-
servatory of Sciences and Technologies (an organization within the Minis-
try of Science), through the publication of 16 volumes named Profiles of
Scientific Research. Each contains statistical data and an introductory text
signed by an expert (or group of experts) regarding a particular disci-
pline, in most cases derived from an evaluation of research units report
(Caraça 2001).
     Science in Portugal (Gago 1992b) is a smaller volume that also has four
chapters devoted to particular scientific disciplines (chemistry, social sci-
ences, language sciences and biomedicine), but in addition contains a list
of research centres in Portugal and three essays that can be seen as one of
the earliest publications in STS: one on the history of science in Portugal
in the 16th to the 18th centuries; an overview of science institutions and
policies (a synthesis of a not yet finished PhD thesis which would have
become a proper book later on – Ruivo 1998); an assessment of scientific
outputs based on statistical data (publications and human resources, be-
tween 1973 and 1986).
     Gago’s own book, Manifesto for Science in Portugal (Gago 1990), is in
fact a policy program, providing both an outline of the development of
science in Portugal and a set of proposals on how to stimulate that same
development. Particular attention is paid to international cooperation
(Portugal had become a member of several international or European or-
ganisations), scientific education and the promotion of public under-
standing of science (which would become, during Gago’s term as Minis-
ter, some of the main dimensions of science policy).
     In the same period, another book (Caraça 1993), mostly based on sta-
tistical indicators and an analysis of policies (but with a particular empha-
sis on business R&D and technological innovation), also took stock of the
development of science and technology in Portugal. The book derived
from a series of articles published in the social sciences journal Análise
Social (Caraça 1980, 1983) and was authored by another physicist that al-
so had a leading administrative position: João Caraça, head of the Science
Department of the Gulbenkian Foundation (the main non-profit organi-
sation in Portugal) since the mid-1980s (and until 2011).
     Even though these cannot be considered as STS works, they are a rel-
evant source for characterising the Portuguese scientific and technologi-
cal system prior to its rapid growth of the past two decades (and before
the regular publication of statistical data on S&T, first by the Observatory
of Sciences and Technologies, currently by the Statistics Department of
Delicado                                                                   129
the Ministry of Education and Science) and can be taken as a signal of an
interest in science as an object of inquiry. Something that would have
soon be taken up by academia in Portugal.


3. Studies on the Science System

    The first major research project on STS can be dated to the early
1990s, when the Gulbenkian Foundation commissioned a team of sociol-
ogists from CIES-ISCTE to characterise the behaviours, attitudes and ex-
pectations of Portuguese scientists. For that, the team applied a question-
naire survey to a sample of a thousand scientists working in higher educa-
tion and other public institutions (leaving out business companies, where
the number of researchers was insignificant), from all scientific fields. The
survey encompassed three main dimensions: the social and cultural struc-
ture of science, the representation of scientific knowledge and the interac-
tion between science and its contexts, as well as a socio-demographic
characterisation of researchers (Jesuíno 1995). This study allowed the
analysis of issues such as scientific practices of publication and interdisci-
plinarity (Stoleroff and Patrício 1995), the representations of science held
by scientists (Jesuíno and Ávila 1995; Jesuíno 1996), identities, borders
and communication networks (Vala and Amâncio 1995), class origins of
scientists (Machado et al. 1994), the internal stratification of the scientific
field (by measuring the distribution of scientific capital – Ávila 1997), the
creation of a typology of researchers according to their patterns of activity
(Ávila 1998), and the views of scientists regarding public opinion and sci-
ence policies (Costa el al. 1995; Costa 1996).
    Since then, surveys of scientists have been fairly frequent, but never
again with the same broad scope. Some of these studies focused on par-
ticular groups of scientists, whereas others resorted to surveying hetero-
geneous samples of the scientific community on specific issues.
    Some examples of the first type of studies are Patrício and Stoleroff’s
(1996) enquiry on project coordinators and on how they managed their
teams and divided labour within research; or Conceição’s (2003) study of
independent inventors (a rather marginal group in the science sphere),
concerning their choice of problems, their sources of information, and
their struggle to get their inventions recognised and applied. Costa et al.
(2009) were commissioned by the Gulbenkian Foundation to examine the
career paths of the recipients of the Incentive to Research Prize (1994-
2006), a group of a hundred young researchers below the age of 30 that
received funding for a one-year project. Their analysis was based on the
CVs of the researchers and sought to assess the effect of scientific awards,
to identify different trajectories in science careers and the variations by
scientific field. Gonçalves coordinated a wider study of a whole scientific
field in Portugal, biology, which encompassed a history of the disciplines,
130                                                         Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

surveys of professional biologists (inside and outside academia) and of
secondary education students, media analysis, overviews of educational
offer in universities and of job prospects in the private sector (see Gon-
çalves and Freire 2009).
    Regarding the second set of studies, some examples can also be point-
ed out. Pereira (2001) analysed the international collaborations of Portu-
guese scientists, both through statistical data and interviews with re-
searchers. In her PhD thesis, Silva (2004, 2005) surveyed researchers on
their use of the internet as a tool for scientific knowledge sharing and
communication, both with peers and with the public, at a time that this
subject had yet to reach the massive proportions it has today. Moutinho
et al. (2007) conducted a survey on scientists in public sector research or-
ganisations (including universities) and on their practices and representa-
tions regarding patenting. The practices and perceptions of scientists re-
garding “open science” (more precisely, the publication in open access
journals and other forms of making freely available to the public and to
the scientific community research data and results) were the subject of a
more recent survey (Cardoso et al. 2012). Delicado et al. (2013) conduct-
ed a survey on scientists concerning the membership of scientific associa-
tions in their research project.
    Other studies on the scientific system relied mainly on statistical data
produced by official sources, some delving on scientific publication (Silva
1992, Silva et al. 1993; Pereira 1996; Patrício 2010), others on R&D ex-
penditure and human resources (Gonçalves and Caraça 1984, Moura and
Caraça 1993; Pereira 2002; Godinho 2007; Horta 2010; Heitor and Bravo
2010; Heitor and Horta 2012; Heitor et al. 2013). Some are quasi con-
gratulatory works, celebrating the impressive growth of the system in the
past few decades in terms of input and output indicators. But others also
point out to chronic weaknesses of the systems, such as the lack of busi-
ness investment in R&D (Caraça 1980; Gonçalves and Caraça 1983;
Moura and Caraça 1993; Godinho 1993) and academic inbreeding at uni-
versities that drive away highly trained human resources (Pereira 2004;
Horta 2009; Heitor et al. 2013).
    International scientific mobility is a subject that has garnered an in-
creasing interest by STS, particularly so in sending countries, concerned
with the potential for “brain drain”. Portugal is no exception and several
studies have attempted to ascertain the inbound and outbound flows, the
motivations for leaving but also for returning, and the impact of mobility
in the production of science (Pereira 2002; Fontes 2007; Delicado 2010a,
2010b, 2011; Fontes and Araújo 2013; Fontes et al. 2013). Conversely,
few studies have broached the subject of foreign researchers in Portugal
and their role in placing the country in a “global platform of circulation
of researchers” (Reis et al. 2010).
    Another particular trait of the Portuguese scientific community is the
unusually high proportion of women researchers (46% in 2011, accord-
ing to official data – DGEEC 2013), even though, just like elsewhere, this
Delicado                                                                131
share is lower in the top echelons of the scientific career. Thus, the issue
of gender in science has merited several works, some more general (Ruivo
1986, 1993; Amâncio and Ávila 1995; Reis et al. 2010; Amâncio 2003),
other focused on particular disciplines (Almeida 1986), others in connec-
tion with other themes, such as international mobility (Delicado and
Alves 2013).
    Science policies have been a frequent object for analysis. Ruivo’s PhD
thesis, later published in book form (1998) is an in-depth analysis of sci-
ence policies and their impact on the development of the Portuguese sci-
entific system between 1967 and 1989, paying particular attention to the
impact of the transition to democracy and to the role of international or-
ganisations. Caraça (1999) updated this analysis, by focusing in the trans-
formations occurred in the 1980s and 1990s, mainly as a result of Euro-
pean structural funding and the creation of the ministry of Science. Heit-
or and Horta (2012) provide an English language overview of science and
technology in Portugal, covering the whole 20th century and the early 21st
century, with a particular focus in the past few decades and in policies
concerning human resources, research institutions and international net-
works.
    Other works have focused on particular sections of science policy.
Gonçalves (1993, 1996) and Pereira (2004b) published articles on the
construction of public policies on science and the role scientists play (or
failed to play) on it. Henriques (1999) also examines the consultation
processes behind R&D funding decisions and the establishment of peer
review as the procedure for allocating project grants. Pereira (2004a,
2004b) analysed the public debate surrounding policies concerning the
funding of research institutions in Portugal, tracing the transition from
traditional models based on greater autonomy to models promoting in-
creasing accountability and government control.
    Several studies (Pereira 2002; Patrício 2010; Horta 2010) examined
the role of science and higher education policies in promoting the inter-
nationalisation of Portuguese universities and researchers. Heitor et al.
(2013) argue that policies aimed at building advanced human capital are
key for the development of S&T systems, illustrating their argument with
the case of science policies in Portugal between 1986 and 2010, though it
should be mentioned that the main author had direct responsibilities in
this matter, since he was the Secretary of State for Science between 2005-
2011.
    Of a different nature is a survey of members of the Portuguese Par-
liament on science and science policy, conducted in 1995, that revealed a
mismatch between the high valuation of science by parliamentarians and
the low levels of government funding for science (Gonçalves et al. 1996).
132                                                           Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

4. Laboratory Ethnographies

     The previously mentioned studies are characterised by an “external”,
Mertonian approach to STS, focused on the characteristics of the scien-
tific community and of the S&T system. A second, though less volumi-
nous, strand of studies concerns the analysis of the production of scien-
tific knowledge, achieved mainly through laboratory ethnographies. But
how can the observation of scientific practices in Portuguese laboratories
highlight local differences and specificities? Scientific standards are set at
the core of the science system and differences at the periphery are caused
not just by local "cultural" specificities but also by the unequal power re-
lationship associated with a peripheral condition.
     The first laboratory ethnographies were conducted in Portugal in the
early 1990s. Martinez was an anthropologist employed by a chemistry and
biology research centre in the outskirts of Lisbon who teamed up with
sociologists to write one of the first Portuguese laboratory ethnography,
combined with document analysis and a survey (Martinez et al. 1994).
The authors applied Callon and Latour’s concepts of translation and ac-
tor-network, examining also the cultural patterns and modes of organisa-
tion within the research centre.
     Cristiana Bastos’ PhD thesis on the interactions between AIDS activ-
ism, the medical establishment and scientific research in the US and Bra-
zil was partly based on a laboratory ethnography conducted in Brazil.
Though the fieldwork was conducted outside Portugal, it is still an influ-
ential work in Portuguese STS, since it was published both in the US
(Bastos 1999) and in Portugal (Bastos 1997, 2002, 2008). Bastos’ host in-
stitution is one of the leading research centres in Portugal and she has
trained and supervised plenty of STS scholars.
     João Arriscado Nunes conducted his first laboratory ethnography at a
cancer research laboratory in Oporto. He paid particular attention to the
local division of scientific work and to the constraints placed by the lack
of resources that force researchers into technical or managerial tasks, typ-
ical of a “semi-peripheral” position in the world system of science (1996,
2001). These local conditions are invisible in the “finished product” (the
publications) and are also ignored by laboratory studies conducted in
more “central” countries, driving researchers to seek allies in internation-
al networks and outside the scientific sphere (in public and private fund-
ing and regulating bodies). His observations also allowed him to derive
inferences regarding the use of microscopy in constructing and learning
visualisation (Nunes 2000). In a later work, Nunes (2008) examines how a
particular biological and biomedical entity (in this case, a bacteria
thought to be responsible for stomach cancer) is enacted as an object of
knowledge and “an entity making a difference in the world” (a notion de-
rived from Daston).
     Some of Bastos and Nunes’ students went on doing similar laboratory
ethnographies, both at research labs (Faria 2001) and at other scientific
Delicado                                                                 133
settings, such as forensics labs (Costa et al. 2000; Costa and Nunes 2001)
or meteorology services (Praça 2008).


5. Science and Society

    Though the issue of public understanding of science (under its multi-
ple labels, from “scientific culture”, to “public engagement with science”,
to “science for and with society”, in the latest EU parlance) has become
transversal to all countries, it has perhaps gained a heightened attention
in STS in Portugal due to the priority it was given in science policy. This
priority was mainly expressed through the creation in 1996, under the
Ministry of Science, of a national agency (Ciência Viva) in charge of pro-
moting a wide array of science dissemination activities (for students and
the general public) and setting up a network of science centres (Gon-
çalves and Castro 2002, 2009; Heitor and Horta 2012).
    The (lack of) understanding of science by the Portuguese public was
early on identified as a problem that begged to be measured and solved.
Following the lead of Eurobarometer surveys in 1990 and 1992, the Ob-
servatory of Sciences and Technologies conducted national surveys on
scientific culture, measuring the (low) interest in and knowledge of sci-
ence of the Portuguese population between 1996 and 2000 (OCT 1998;
Ávila et al. 2000; Rodrigues et al. 2000; Freitas and Ávila 2000;). Much
like in other countries, these surveys came under criticism from Portu-
guese STS scholars for their simplistic views on science (Ávila and Castro
2002) and were abandoned since then, even though similar Eurobarome-
ter studies still continue to be conducted and their data is at times used
by some authors (Costa et al. 2009). In a slightly different vein, two social
psychologists, Castro and Lima (2000) also devised a questionnaire survey
to assess the variability of notions of science and environment within the
public, according to values and identities, and how the two are articulat-
ed.
    In 2000, the Gulbenkian Foundation commissioned a study on the
publics of science in Portugal by a team from CIES-ISCTE. The Founda-
tion was aiming to assess the interest of resuming the publication of their
magazine for scientific dissemination Colóquio/Ciências (published be-
tween 1988 and 2000). Costa et al. (2002) thus conducted a national sur-
vey on the practices and representations of the population regarding sci-
entific dissemination. The authors derived from the data a typology of
ways of relating to science, heavily influenced by educational levels, which
comprised seven type-profiles. However, two thirds of the population fell
on the three profile-types that are characterised by a significant distance
to science.
    CIES-ISCTE also conducted other studies on scientific culture, most
notably the evaluation of the Ciência Viva competition for schools and
134                                                           Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

some of its other activities (Costa et al. 2005), characterising the effect of
the activities of this Agency as having generated a “social movement” in
Portugal. This team, among others (Delicado 2004), have also striven to
extend scientific dissemination to the social sciences and to write about
their own experience (Conceição et al. 2008).
    There are fewer works on the other party of science communication:
the scientists. Gonçalves (1996, 1997, 2004; see also Jesuíno and Diego
2002) surveyed the researchers from the Faculty of Sciences of the Uni-
versity of Lisbon aiming to elicit their views on scientific culture and sci-
entific dissemination. Machado and Conde (1997) interviewed science
disseminators in order to ascertain their trajectories and dispositions,
their place in the scientific field, their practices and notions of dissemina-
tion. However, these two works predate the substantial growth in science
dissemination activities in Portugal, which has resulted in the involvement
of a greater number of scientists. Despite the fact that government fund-
ing programmes increasingly demand dissemination activities, it remains
to be seen whether this has affected the reward system or the distribution
of scientific capital within the scientific field.
    The development of science museums and science centres in Portugal
in the past few decades has also spurred a significant number of studies
on their characteristics, from monographs of particular institutions (e.g.
Caldeira and Antunes 2005; Duarte 2007) to wide-ranging works (Del-
icado 2006, 2009; Andrade 2003, 2010), from surveys and interviews with
visitors (Casaleiro 2000; Coelho 2009) to assessing the effects of visiting
exhibitions, in particular in school aged children (e.g. Botelho and Morais
2003, 2004; Faria et al. 2010).
    Another recurrent object of study in Portugal in this particular area of
STS has been the presence of science in the mass media and the represen-
tations of science they convey (Machado and Conde 1997; Mendes 2002;
Schmidt 2008), as well as of particular scientific issues, such as scientific
controversies (Correia 2000, 2002; Garcia 2001), climate change (Ramos
and Carvalho 2008), biotechnology (Jesuíno et al. 2001), or biology (Fon-
seca and Gonçalves 2009).
    If the issue of the public understanding of science has already an es-
tablished tradition in Portugal, the public engagement with science still
has a long way to go. One of the few published records of a consensus
conference in Portugal is described in the article by Coutinho and her
team (2004). Carvalho and Nunes (2013) promoted a focus group on
nanotechnology (integrated in the European research project DEEPEN –
Deepening Ethical Engagement and Participation in Emerging Nano-
technologies) that was characterized by the innovative introduction of
Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed and Augusto Boal’s Theatre of
the Oppressed. In fact, the increasing involvement in European projects
by Portuguese academics (and even by the Agency Ciência Viva) has the
potential to lead to the proliferation of engagement endeavours, but more
published evidence has yet to emerge.
Delicado                                                                 135
6. Risk Studies

    Another issue that has gained significant prominence in STS in Portu-
gal is the controversies generated by environmental risks and the interac-
tions between science, policy and public participation in the management
of such hazards. The late development of science in Portugal, a lack of
administrative tradition in resorting to scientific advice for policy deci-
sions and a weak civic culture that hinders public participation were the
backdrop to many of these studies, although the seeds of change can be
seen in many of them.
    Among the earliest ‘risk studies’ in Portugal is a problem that trans-
cended national borders: the mad cow disease that in the late eighties be-
came a public health problem in most of Europe (Gonçalves 1996, 2000;
Gonçalves et al. 2007; Pereira 2002, 2004). As in other countries, the gov-
ernment first tried to deny the problem, disregarding (and even discredit-
ing) expert advice, but it was ultimately forced by its membership of the
European Union to follow international safety guidelines and take pre-
emptive measures. This zigzag did little to enhance public trust in gov-
ernment but put Portuguese science in the spotlight for perhaps one of
the first times.
    Another case that sparked the interest of STS researchers was the dis-
covery of pre-historic engravings at the site of a planned construction of a
dam hydroelectric in the north of the country (Gonçalves 2000, 2001,
2002). Engineers and archaeologists started a dispute that would spill
over to the media (Garcia 2001) and garnered the public interest, eventu-
ally leading the (newly elected) socialist government to decide in favour of
the engravings and against the construction of the dam. A similar case but
with the opposite outcome was studied later by Bento (2008).
    Probably the most extensively studied environmental risk in Portugal
is the co-incineration of hazardous waste, a controversy that spanned al-
most a decade (Nunes and Matias; Matias 2004, 2008; Gonçalves et al.
2007; Gonçalves and Delicado 2009; Jerónimo 2010; Jerónimo and Gar-
cia 2011). The government’s proposal for solving the problem of hazard-
ous industrial waste by incinerating it in cement factories raised a strong
opposition from local coalitions of actors (residents, local authorities, en-
vironmental organisations), which forced the government to request fur-
ther expert advice (which was met with mistrust, both from the local ac-
tors but also from members of the scientific community, acting as coun-
ter-experts). This in turn led to successive delays and changes in policy
(with each change in government), lawsuits and other forms of resistance,
until the procedure was finally implemented in 2009.
    The issue of controversy and participation in environmental impact
assessments has also motivated several studies. Gonçalves (2002a, 2002b)
examined how changes in the civic culture of Portuguese society had an
impact over legislative and institutional frameworks, leading to improved
scientific and technical grounding of decisions and more democratic legit-
136                                                             Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

imacy. Lima (2000) presented the results of a survey of populations living
near a projected waste incineration facility, in order to show that this sort
of surveys constitute a more adequate way of assessing social impacts and
public perceptions than simply scrutinizing the (scarce) participation in
public consultation. However, Casto and Lima (2002) have also examined
the transcripts of the public consultation for the same facility, in order to
analyse the discourses of different actors (engineers, environmentalists,
business representatives, local authorities, scientists, citizens) and how
science is used to justify contrasting arguments. A later work (Lima 2006)
also used survey data to predict attitudes towards the incinerator, namely
variable such as perception of risks and justice, expectations, trust, and
distance of residence.
Other STS works have dealt with environmental and health risk in work
settings, such as an oil refinery plant in Sines (Granjo 2004) or the urani-
um mines in Urgeiriça (Mendes and Araújo 2010).


7. Institutional Settings

    Despite the wealth of STS research in the past few decades, this area
of knowledge still lacks some institutional foundations, such as journals,
associations, or research units.
    STS researchers in Portugal are mainly sociologists by training, alt-
hough some come from anthropology, social psychology and law. Unlike
what is common in other countries, few researchers are from the natural
sciences or engineering. STS is barely present in undergraduate education
and few post-graduate courses are on offer: a PhD Programme in
Knowledge, Governance and Innovation at the University of Coimbra
that started in 2005; a Master in Economics and Management of Science,
Technology and Innovation at the University of Lisbon that started in
1995 (aimed at the training of science managers that work in companies,
R&D units, universities, S&T parks and government bodies responsible
for science); and a Master in Science and Technology Studies at ISCTE
University Institute of Lisbon that started in 2009 but was suspended in
2012 due to the lack of applicants.
    There is no research unit solely dedicated to STS, so researchers in
this field are integrated in social sciences centres that cater to different ar-
eas of study. STS academics usually are part of broader research areas or
groups that deal with issues such as environment, health, knowledge soci-
ety, innovation, or work: the research group on science, economy and so-
ciety of the Centre for Social Studies (University of Coimbra), the re-
search area on sustainability, environment, risk and space of the Institute
of Social Sciences (University of Lisbon), the research groups on
Knowledge society, skills and communication and on Work, Innovation
and Economy at CIES-ISCTE (University Institute of Lisbon), the re-
Delicado                                                                 137
search area on Science, Technology, Health and Professions at SOCIUS
(ISEG, University of Lisbon) and the one on Culture, Science and Identi-
ty at CICS (Minho University). Finally, there is also IN+, the Centre for
Innovation, Technology and Policy Research, integrated in the Engineer-
ing School IST (University of Lisbon), plus a few researchers scattered in
other sociology or anthropology departments.
    There are currently no specialised STS journals in Portugal. As men-
tioned above, there had been two journals dedicated to science issues,
launched in the 1980s, but that failed to take advantage of the growth of
the field: CTS, published by ACTD between 1987 and 1994, and Co-
lóquio Ciências, edited by the Gulbenkian Foundation between 1988 and
2000. A bibliographic study (Duarte 2009) concerning sociology of sci-
ence in Portugal, in the period between 1988 and 2008, shows that there
have been 169 publications in this period, mainly in national social sci-
ences journals and books. The rate of publication was regular since the
mid-nineties and increased significantly from 2000 on. International pub-
lication is on the rise, driven by participation in international networks
and by funding policies that reward articles in indexed journals.
    Likewise, there is no STS association in Portugal. The Portuguese So-
ciological Association (APS) has a thematic section on Knowledge, Sci-
ence and Technology since 2010, which organized its first conference in
November 2011. The section has only 15 registered members, however,
in the last national congress of APS around 60 papers were presented in
this section. Concurrently, even though the EASST conference in Lisbon
in 1998 was an important event for disseminating STS in the country, just
11 Portuguese researchers are actually EASST members.
    Funding for research in STS has been granted from two main sources,
the Foundation for Science and Technology (integrated in the Ministry of
Science) and the Gulbenkian Foundation. In 2008, the Foundation for
Science and Technology created STS as a separate field in its R&D pro-
ject funding calls (traditionally, STS projects were part of the sociology or
anthropology fields). Between 2008 and 2012, 12 projects were funded,
totalling close to 1.5 M€. The Gulbenkian Foundation, the leading non-
profit organization in Portugal, had already played a very relevant role in
the development of science in Portugal, from the 1950s onwards, funding
the training of Portuguese researchers abroad at a time when government
intervention was very limited and commissioning research (rather than
launching open calls) in its main areas of interest.
Portuguese STS researchers have also participated in European projects,
funded by the Framework programme and other initiatives, such as
“Building a common database on scientific research and public decision
on TSEs in Europe” (1998-2001), “ADAPTA: Assessing Debate and Par-
ticipatory Technology Assessment” (1998-2000), “EUDEB: European
Debates on Biotechnology” (1999-2000), “OPUS: Optimizing Public
Understanding of Science” (2000-2003), “LSES: Life Sciences in Europe-
an Society” (2000-2004), “STAGE: Science, Technology and Governance
138                                                                 Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

in Europe” (2001-2005), “Deepening Ethical Engagement and Participa-
tion in Emerging Nanotechnologies” (2006-2009), or “Researching Ine-
quality through Science and Technology – ResIST” (2006-2009).


8. Conclusions: The Future?

     We end as we begun, by briefly exposing the constraints and oppor-
tunities that STS in Portugal are currently facing, in tandem with Portu-
guese science. Though as a weakly institutionalised field, STS are perhaps
in a more vulnerable position than others.
     Portuguese science is experiencing testing times. Due to the financial
crisis and to policy options, government funding is dwindling. A science
system built on shaky ground (heavily reliant on public funding and
based on a workforce made of temporary contracts and grants) threatens
to collapse. Membership of international organisations is at risk, the
number of students in tertiary education is starting to decline, institutions
struggle with lack of funds to build and maintain networks, and the exo-
dus of highly trained researchers is already visible.
How the science system will respond to these challenges and how scien-
tific practices will be transformed by this new “leanness” of resources will
be an enticing matter for future STS research. Provided the field of STS
also survives these testing times.


References
Almeida, A.N. de (1986) As mulheres e as ciências sociais — os sujeitos e os objec-
   tos de investigação, in “Análise Social”, XXII (94), pp. 979-985.
Amâncio, L. (2003) Gender and Science in Portugal, in “Portuguese Journal of So-
  cial Sciences”, 1 (3), pp. 185-198.
Amâncio, L. and Ávila, P. (1995) O Género na Ciência, in J.C. Jesuíno (ed.), A
  Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos Finais do Século XX, Oeiras, Celta, pp.
  135-162.
Andrade, P. (ed.) (2003) Literacia Cientifico-Tecnológica e Opinião Pública (o caso
   dos consumidores dos Museus de Ciência), in “Atalaia-Intermundos – Revista
   Internacional de Exegese Contemporânea”, 12/13.
Andrade, P. (ed.) (2010) Museus, Públicos e Literacia Científico-Tecnológica. Redes
   de Comunicação e Significados no Espaço Interdimensional do Museu, Lisboa,
   Edições Colibri.
Ávila, P., Gravito, A.P. and Vala, J. (2000) Cultura Científica e crenças sobre a ci-
    ência, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Cultura Científica e Participação Pública, Oei-
    ras, Celta, pp. 19-31.
Delicado                                                                           139
Ávila, P. (1997) A distribuição do capital científico: diversidade interna e permeabi-
    lidade externa no campo científico, in “Sociologia - Problemas e Práticas”, 25,
    pp. 9-49.
Ávila, P. (1998) Práticas científicas: uma tipologia dos investigadores portugueses, in
    “Sociologia - Problemas e Práticas”, 26, pp. 85-119.
Ávila, P. and Castro, P. (2002) Compreender a Ciência. O Inquérito à Cultura Ci-
    entífica dos Portugueses, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Os Portugueses e a Ciência,
    Lisboa, Publicações Dom Quixote, pp. 287-320.
Bastos, C. (1997) A pesquisa médica, a SIDA e as clivagens da ordem mundial: uma
   proposta de antropologia da ciência., in “Análise Social”, XXXII (140), pp. 75-
   111.
Bastos, C. (1999) Global Responses to AIDS: Science in Emergency, Bloomington,
   Indiana University Press.
Bastos, C. (2002) Ciência, Poder, Acção: As Respostas à SIDA, Lisboa, Imprensa de
   Ciências Sociais.
Bento, S. (2008) Arte rupestre em Alqueva: quando as pedras não falam, in J.A.
   Nunes and R. Roque (eds.), Objectos Impuros: Experiências em Estudos sobre a
   Ciência, Porto, Edições Afrontamento, pp. 263-302.
Botelho, A. and Morais, A.M. (2003) O que fazem os alunos num centro de ciência,
   in “Revista Portuguesa de Educação”, 16 (1), pp. 157-192.
Botelho, A. and Morais, A.M. (2004) A aprendizagem de conceitos científicos em
   centros de ciência, in “Revista de Educação”, 12 (1), pp. 5-23.
Caldeira, H. and Antunes, E. (2005) O Museu de Física da Universidade de Coim-
   bra: das Origens às preocupações actuais, in A.C. Silva, A. Semedo (eds.) Colec-
   ções de ciências físicas e tecnológicas em museus universitários: homenagem a
   Fernando Bragança Gil, Porto, Universidade do Porto (Faculdade de Letras,
   Departamento de Ciências e Técnicas do Património), pp. 55-74.
Caraça, J. (1980) As actividades de investigação e desenvolvimento (I&D) e o de-
   senvolvimento económico, in “Análise Social”, XVI (63), pp. 613-619.
Caraça, J. (1983) O financiamento das actividades de investigação e desenvolvimen-
   to experimental (I&D) no médio prazo, in “Análise Social”, XIX (76), pp. 313-
   326.
Caraça, J. (1993) Do saber ao fazer: Porquê organizar a ciência, Lisboa, Gradiva.
Caraça, J. (1999) A prática de políticas de ciência e tecnologia em Portugal, in M.M.
   Godinho and J. Caraça (eds.), O Futuro Tecnológico, Lisboa, Celta, pp. 7-18.
Caraça, J. (2001) Os perfis da investigação científica em Portugal: um retrato da ri-
   gidez universitária, in “Análise Social”, XXXVI (160), pp. 961-965.
Carapinheiro, G. and Amâncio, L. (1995) A Ciência como Profissão, in J. C. Jesuí-
   no (ed.), A Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos Finais do Século XX, Oeiras,
   Celta, pp. 47-71.
Cardoso, G., Jacobetty, P. and Duarte, A. (2012) Para uma Ciência Aberta, Lis-
140                                                                 Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

      boa, Mundos Sociais.
Carvalho, A. and Nunes, J.A. (2013) Technology, methodology and intervention:
   performing nanoethics in Portugal in “NanoEthics” 7 (2), pp. 149-160.
Casaleiro, P. (2000) Os visitantes dos museus e os média da ciência, in M.E. Gon-
   çalves (ed.), Cultura Científica e Participação Pública, Oeiras, Celta, pp. 303-
   317.
Castro, P. and Lima, M.L. (2000) A variabilidade das concepções de ciência e de
   ambiente entre o público, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Cultura Científica e Partici-
   pação Pública, Oeiras, Celta, pp. 41-62.
Castro, P. and Lima, M.L. (2002) Discursos sobre a Ciência num Debate Ambien-
   tal, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Os Portugueses e a Ciência, Lisboa, Publicações
   Dom Quixote, pp. 115-155.
Coelho, A.R. (2009) Experiências de visita a um centro de ciência: o caso do público
   não-escolar do Pavilhão do Conhecimento - Ciência Viva, in “Working Paper
   CIES-IUL”, 70, CIES-IUL.
Conceição, C.P., Gomes, M.C., Pereira, I., Abrantes, P. and Costa, A.C. (2008)
   Promoção da Cultura Científica: Experiências da Sociologia, in “Sociologia -
   Problemas e Práticas”, 57, pp. 51-81.
Conceição, C.P. (2003) Protagonistas e contextos da produção tecnológica em Por-
   tugal: O caso da invenção independente, in “Sociologia - Problemas e Práticas”,
   41, pp. 119-138.
Correia, M. (2000) Projecto COMBO, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Cultura Científica
   e Participação Pública, Oeiras, Celta, pp. 231-241.
Correia, M. (2002) O Verso e o Reverso das Representações da Ciência. As aborda-
   gens do Projecto COMBO que passaram na Televisão, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.),
   Os Portugueses e a Ciência, Lisboa, Publicações Dom Quixote, pp. 79-114.
Costa, A.F. (1996) Ciência e Reflexividade Social. Relações entre Ciência e Socieda-
   de segundo um Inquérito aos Investigadores Portugueses, in M.E. Gonçalves
   (ed.), Ciência e Democracia, Venda Nova, Bertrand Editora, pp. 199-221.
Costa, A.F., Conceição, C.P., Pereira, I., Abrantes, P. and Gomes, M.C. (2005)
   Cultura Científica e Movimento Social: Contributos para a análise do programa
   Ciência Viva, Oeiras, Celta Editora.
Costa, A. F. Conceição, C.P., Coelho, A.R. and Dias, A. (2009) Trajectórias de Jo-
   vens Cientistas. O Prémio Estímulo à Inovação 1994-2006, Lisboa, Gradiva.
Costa, A.F., Ávila, P. and Machado, F.L. (1995) Políticas Científicas, in J.C. Jesuí-
   no (ed.), A Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos Finais do Século XX, Oeiras,
   Celta, pp. 163-179.
Costa, A.F., Ávila, P. and Mateus, S. (2002) Públicos da Ciência em Portugal, Lis-
   boa, Gradiva.
Costa, A.F., Palma, C. and Ávila, P. (2009) Scientific Culture and modes of relating
   to science , in A.F. Costa, F.L. Machado and P. Ávila, Knowledge and Society
Delicado                                                                        141
    (Portugal in the European Context, vol. II), Oeiras, Celta, pp. 59-80.
Costa, S. and Nunes, J.A. (2001) As contribuições da ciência “impura”: A harmoni-
   zação da biologia forense e a diversidade do sistemas jurídicos, in J.A. Nunes,
   M.E. Gonçalves (eds.), Enteados de Galileu? A Semiperiferia no Sistema Mun-
   dial da Ciência, Porto, Edições Afrontamento, pp. 107-141.
Costa, S., Machado, H. and Nunes, J.A. (2002) O ADN e a Justiça: A Biologia Fo-
   rense e o Direito como Mediadores entre a Ciência e os Cidadãos, in M.E. Gon-
   çalves (ed.), Os Portugueses e a Ciência, Lisboa, Publicações Dom Quixote,
   pp. 199-233.
Costa, S., Nunes, J.A. and Machado, H. (2000) Política molecular, crime e cidada-
   nia genética em Portugal, in “Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais”, 57/58, pp.
   291-301.
Coutinho, A.G. and Jorge, S. (2004) Comunicar ciência em Portugal: uma avaliação
   das perspectivas para o estabelecimento de formas de diálogo entre cientistas e o
   público, in “Comunicação e Sociedade”, 6, pp. 113-134.
Delicado, A. (2004) As Ciências Sociais e a Promoção da Cultura Científica, in Pro-
   ceedings V Congresso Português de Sociologia, Braga.
Delicado, A. (2006) Os Museus e a Promoção da Cultura Científica em Portu-
   gal, “Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas”, 51, pp. 53-72.
Delicado, A. (2009) A Musealização da Ciência em Portugal, Lisboa, Fundação
   Calouste Gulbenkian/Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia.
Delicado, A. (2010) Going Abroad to do Science: Mobility Trends and Motivations
   of Portuguese Researchers, in “Science Studies”, 23 (2) pp. 36-59.
Delicado, A. (2010) O Retorno dos “Cérebros”: Regresso e Reintegração dos Inves-
   tigadores Portugueses em Mobilidade, in “Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia”,
   Tecnología y Sociedad, 5 (15), pp. 185-218.
Delicado, A. (2011) The consequences of mobility: careers and work practices of
   Portuguese researchers with a foreign PhD degree, in F. Dervin (ed.), Analysing
   the consequences of international academic mobility, Newcastle, Cambridge
   Scholars Publishing, pp. 163-180.
Delicado, A. and Alves, N. de A. (2013) “Fugas de Cérebros”, “Tetos de Vidro” e
   “Fugas na Canalização”: mulheres, ciência e mobilidade, in E. Araújo, M. Fon-
   tes and S. Bento (eds.), Para um debate sobre Mobilidade e Fuga de Cérebros,
   Braga, Centro de Estudos de Comunicação e Sociedade, Universidade do Mi-
   nho, pp. 8-31.
Delicado, A. Rego, R., Conceição, C.P., Pereira, I. and Junqueira, L.
   (2013) Ciência, Profissão e Sociedade: Associações Científicas em Portugal, Lis-
   boa, Imprensa de Ciências Sociais.
DGEEC. (2013) Sumários Estatísticos do IPCTN11: principais resultados de I&D,
  Lisbon, DGEEC.
Duarte, M.C.D. (2007) O Museu Nacional da Ciência e da Técnica (1971-1976),
   Coimbra, Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra.
142                                                               Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

Duarte, T. (2009) A sociologia da ciência em Portugal, in “Working Papers CIES-
   IUL”, 69, CIES-IUL.
Faria, C., Pereira, G. and Chagas, I. (2010) D. Carlos de Bragança, a Pioneer of
    Experimental Marine Oceanography: Filling the Gap between Formal and In-
    formal Science Education, in “Science & Education”, 41 (S1), pp. 1-14.
Faria, M.I. (2001) Ciência como rede: Protocolos e novas tecnologias de informação
    na investigação biomédica, in J.A. Nunes and M.E. Gonçalves (eds.), Enteados
    de Galileu? A Semiperiferia no Sistema Mundial da Ciência, Porto, Edições
    Afrontamento, pp. 77-105.
Fonseca, R.B. (2009) A Biologia na imprensa portuguesa, in M.E. Gonçalves and J.
   Freire, Biologia e Biólogos em Portugal. Ensino, Emprego e Sociedade, Lisboa,
   Esfera do Caos.
Fontes, M. (2007) Scientific mobility policies: how Portuguese scientists envisage
   the return home, in “Science and Public Policy”, 34 (4), pp. 284-298.
Fontes, M. and Araújo, E. (2013) (I)Mobilidades e redes científicas internacionais:
   Contextos e relações em mudança, in E. Araújo, M. Fontes and S. Bento (eds.),
   Para um debate sobre a mobilidade e fuga de cérebros, Braga, Centro de Estu-
   dos de Comunicação e Sociedade, Universidade do Minho, pp. 97-124.
Fontes, M. and Araújo, E. (2013) (I)Mobilidades e redes científicas internacionais:
   Contextos e relações em mudança, in Para um debate sobre a mobilidade e fuga
   de cérebros, Braga, Centro de Estudos de Comunicação e Sociedade, pp. 97-
   124.
Fontes, M., Videira, P. and Calapez, T. (2012) The Impact of Long-term Scientific
   Mobility on the Creation of Persistent Knowledge Networks, in “Mobilities”, 8
   (3), pp. 1-26.
Freitas, E. and Ávila, P. (2000) Inquérito à Cultura Científica dos Portugueses
    2000, Lisboa, Observatório das Ciências e das Tecnologias.
Gago, J.M. (1990) Manifesto para a Ciência em Portugal, Lisboa, Gradiva.
Gago, J.M. (ed.) (1991) Ciência em Portugal, Lisboa, Comissariado para a Europá-
   lia 91 – Portugal, Imprensa Nacional – Casa da Moeda.
Gago, J.M. (ed.) (1992) O Estado das Ciências em Portugal, Lisboa, Comissariado
   para a Europália 91 – Portugal, Publicações Dom Quixote.
Garcia, J.L. (2001) Oblivionismo e Teodiceia dos Mass Media no caso de Foz Côa,
   in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), O caso de Foz Côa: um Laboratório de Análise Socio-
   política, Lisboa, Edições 70, pp. 103-144.
Godinho, M.M. (1993) Interacção Ciência-Tecnologia em Portugal (Ou algumas ra-
  zões para se contrariar convicções estabelecidas), in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Co-
  munidade científica e poder, Lisboa, FPASC/Edições 70, pp. 177-211.
Godinho, M.M. (2007) Indicadores de C&T, inovação e conhecimento: Onde esta-
  mos? Para onde vamos?, in “Análise Social”, XLII (182), pp. 239-274.
Gonçalves, C.D. (1996) (Re)pensar a ‘ciência como cultura, in “Sociologia, Pro-
Delicado                                                                        143
    blemas e Práticas”, 21, pp. 47-68.
Gonçalves, C.D. (1997) Divulgação científica. Um sistema de comunicação e cultu-
  ra: entre reprodução e diferenciação, in “Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas”, 23,
  pp. 205-208.
Gonçalves, C.D. (2005) Cientistas e leigos: uma questão de comunicação e cultura,
  in “Comunicação e Sociedade”, 6, pp. 11-33.
Gonçalves, M.E and Delicado, A. (2009) The Politics of Risk in Contemporary
  Portugal: Tensions in the Consolidation of Science-Policy Relations, in “Science
  and Public Policy”, 36 (3), pp. 229-239.
Gonçalves, M. E. (1993) Ciência, comunidade científica e democracia em Portugal,
  in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Comunidade científica e poder, Lisboa, FPASC/ Edi-
  ções 70, pp. 133-150.
Gonçalves, M.E. (1996) Ciência e Política em Portugal: O caso da Doença das “Va-
  cas Loucas”, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Ciência e Democracia, Venda Nova, Ber-
  trand Editora, pp. 121-139.
Gonçalves, M.E. (1996) Mitos e realidades da política científica portuguesa, in “Re-
  vista Crítica de Ciências Sociais”, 46, pp. 47-67.
Gonçalves, M.E. (2000) Ciência política e participação, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.),
  Cultura Científica e Participação Pública, Oeiras, Celta, pp. 201-230.
Gonçalves, M.E. (2000) The importance of being European: The science and poli-
  tics of BSE in Portugal, in “Science, Technology & Human Values”, 25 (4),
  pp. 417-448.
Gonçalves, M.E. (2002) Imagens Públicas da Ciência e Confiança nas Instituições:
  Os Casos de Foz Côa e da Co-incineração, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Os Portu-
  gueses e a Ciência, Lisboa, Publicações Dom Quixote, pp. 157-197.
Gonçalves, M.E. (2002) Implementation of EIA directives in Portugal: how changes
  in civic culture are challenging political and administrative practice, in “Envi-
  ronmental Impact Assessment Review”, 22 (3), pp. 249-269.
Gonçalves, M.E. and Castro, P. (2002) Science, culture and policy in Portugal: a
  triangle of changing relationships?, in “Portuguese Journal of Social Sciences”,
  1 (3), pp. 157-173.
Gonçalves, M.E., Patrício, M.T. and Costa, A.F. (1996) Political Images of Science
  in Portugal, in “Public Understanding of Science”, 5 (4), pp. 395-410.
Gonçalves, M.E. and Castro, P. (2009) Local is beautiful? Governing science-
  society relations in Europe, in “Portuguese Journal of Social Science”, 8, pp.
  191-207.
Gonçalves, V.B. and Caraça, J. (1984) Os recursos humanos e o esforço nacional em
  I&D., in “Análise Social”, XX (80), pp. 115-124.
Granjo, P. (2004) Trabalhamos sobre um barril de pólvora: homens e perigo na re-
   finaria de Sines, Lisboa, Imprensa de Ciências Sociais.
Heitor, M. and Horta, H. (2012) Science and Technology in Portugal: From late
144                                                                 Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

      awakening to the challenge of knowledge integrated communities, in G.
      Neave, A. Amaral (eds.) Higher Education in Portugal 1974-2009, Dordrecht,
      Springer, pp. 179-226.
Heitor, M. and Bravo, M. (2010) Portugal at the Crossroads of Change, Facing the
   Shock of the New: People, Knowledge and Ideas Fostering The Social Fabric to
   Facilitate the Concentration of Knowledge Integrated Communities, in “Tech-
   nological Forecasting and Social Change”, 77 (2), pp. 218-247.
Heitor, M., Horta, H. and Mendonça, J. (2013) Developing Human Capital and
   Research Capacity: Science Policies Promoting Brain Gain, in “Technological
   Forecasting and Social Change”, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.
   07.008
Henriques, L. (1999) Sistemas consultivos e estratégias de selecção de projectos de
   I&D: Portugal, os últimos 20 anos, in M.M. Godinho and J. Caraça (eds.), O
   Futuro Tecnológico, Lisboa, Celta, pp. 19-42.
Horta, H. (2009) Global and national prominent universities: internationalization,
   competitiveness and the role of the State, in: “Higher Education”, 58 (3), pp.
   387-405.
Horta, H. (2010) The Role of the State in the Internationalization of Universities in
   Catching-up Countries: An Analysis of the Portuguese Higher Education Sys-
   tem, in: “Higher Education Policy”, 23 (1), pp. 63-81.
Jerónimo, H.M. (2010) Queimar a Incerteza. Poder e ambiente no conflito da co-
    incineração de resíduos industriais perigosos, Lisboa, Imprensa de Ciências So-
    ciais.
Jerónimo, H.M. and Garcia, J.L. (2011). Risks, Alternative Knowledge Strategies
    and Democratic Legitimacy: The Conflict over Co-incineration of Hazardous In-
    dustrial Waste in Portugal, in “Journal of Risk Research”, 14 (8), pp. 951-967.
Jesuíno, J.C. (1996) Imagens e Contextos da Ciência, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Ci-
    ência e Democracia, Venda Nova, Bertrand Editora, pp. 161-198.
Jesuíno, J.C. and Ávila, P. (1995) Modelos e Representações da Ciência, in J.C. Je-
    suíno (ed.), A Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos Finais do Século XX, Oei-
    ras, Celta, pp. 89-106.
Jesuíno, J.C. and Ávila, P. (1995) Processos de Decisão, in J.C. Jesuíno (ed.), A
    Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos Finais do Século XX, Oeiras, Celta, pp.
    33-46.
Jesuíno, J.C. and Diego, C. (2002) Estratégias de Comunicação da Ciência, in M.E.
    Gonçalves (ed.), Os Portugueses e a Ciência, Lisboa, Edições Dom Quixote,
    pp. 235-285.
Jesuino, J.C., Nunes, J.A., Diego, C., Alcantara, P., Costa, S. and Matias, M.
    (2001) Representation of biotechnology in Portugal, in G. Gaskell and M.
    Bauer (eds.), Biotechnology, 1996-2000: The Years of Controversy, pp. 258-
    266.
Lima, M.L. (2000) As controvérsias públicas nos estudos de impacte ambiental, in
   M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Cultura Científica e Participação Pública, Oeiras, Celta,
Delicado                                                                          145
    pp. 139-151.
Lima, M.L. (2006) Predictors of Attitudes towards the Construction of a Waste In-
   cinerator: Two Case Studies, in “Journal of Applied Social Psychology”, 36,
   pp. 441-466.
Machado, F.L. and Conde, I. (1988) A divulgação científica em Portugal: do lado
   da produção, in “Sociologia - Problemas e Práticas”, 5, pp. 11-38.
Machado, F.L., Ávila, P. and Costa, A.F. (1995) Origens Sociais e Estratificação
   dos Cientistas, in J.C. Jesuíno (ed.), A Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos
   Finais do Século XX, Oeiras, Celta, pp. 109-133.
Martinez, M.S., Ávila, P. and Costa, A.F. (1994) A tensão superficial: ciência e or-
   ganização num centro de investigação científica, in “Sociologia - Problemas e
   Práticas”, 16, pp. 75-109.
Matias, M. (2004) Don’t treat us Like Dirt: The Fight Against the Co-incineration
   of Dangerous Industrial Waste in the Outskirts of Coimbra, in “South Europe-
   an Society and Politics”, 9 (2), pp. 132-158.
Matias, M. (2008) Quantas partes fazem um todo? A saúde como factor de contro-
   vérsia científica no seio dos conflitos ambientais em Portugal: o caso de Souselas,
   in J.A. Nunes and R. Roque (eds.), Objectos Impuros: Experiências em Estudos
   sobre a Ciência, Porto, Edições Afrontamento, pp. 303-328.
Mendes, H. (2002) Visibilidade da Ciência nos Mass Media: A Tematização da Ci-
  ência nos Jornais Público, Correio da Manhã e Expresso, in M.E. Gonçalves
  (ed.), Os Portugueses e a Ciência, Lisboa, Publicações Dom Quixote, pp. 31-
  78.
Mendes, J.M. and Araújo, P. (2010) Nuclearidade, trabalho dos corpos e justiça: A
  requalificação ambiental das minas da Urgeiriça e os protestos locais, in “Socio-
  logia - Problemas e Práticas”, 64, pp. 81-105.
Moura, F. and Caraça, J. (1993) A aposta no saber: a ciência e o desenvolvimento,
  in “Análise Social”, XXVIII (120), pp. 135-144.
Moutinho, P., Fontes, M. and Godinho, M.M. (2007) Do Individual Factors Mat-
  ter? A Survey of Scientists’ Patenting in Portuguese Public Research Organisa-
  tions, “Scientometrics”, 70 (2), pp. 355-377.
Nunes, J.A. (1995) A Política do Trabalho Científico: Articulação Local Conversão
  Reguladora e Acção à Distância, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Ciência e Democra-
  cia, Venda Nova, Bertrand Editora, pp. 251-276.
Nunes, J.A. (2000) Públicos, mediações e construções situadas da ciência, in M.E.
  Gonçalves (ed.), Cultura Científica e Participação Pública, Oeiras, Celta, pp.
  81-100.
Nunes, J.A. (2001) Laboratórios, escalas e mediações na investigação biomédica. A
  oncobiologia entre o local e o global, in J.A. Nunes and M.E. Gonçalves (eds.),
  Enteados de Galileu? A Semiperiferia no Sistema Mundial da Ciência, Porto,
  Edições Afrontamento, pp. 33-75.
Nunes, J.A. (2002) As dinâmicas da(s) ciência(s) no perímetro do centro: Uma cul-
146                                                                  Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

      tura científica de fronteira?, in “Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais”, 63, pp.
      189-198.
Nunes, J.A. (2008) Circulation or (re)enactment? Performing the variable viru-
  lence/pathogenicity of helicobacter pylori, in “HoST – History of Science and
  Technology”, 2, pp. 43-74.
Nunes, J.A. and Gonçalves, M.E. (2001) Introdução¸ in J.A. Nunes and M.E.
  Gonçalves (eds.), Enteados de Galileu? A Semiperiferia no Sistema Mundial da
  Ciência, Porto, Edições Afrontamento, pp. 13-31.
Nunes, J.A. and Matias, M. (2003) Controvérsia científica e conflitos ambientais em
  Portugal: O caso da co-incineração de resíduos industriais perigosos, in “Revista
  Critica de Ciências Sociais”, 65, pp. 129-150.
Nunes, J.A. and Roque, R. (2008) Introdução, in J.A. Nunes and R. Roque (eds.)
  Objectos Impuros: Experiências em Estudos sobre a Ciência, Porto, Edições
  Afrontamento, pp 13-35.
Observatório das Ciências e das Tecnologias (1998), Relatório do Inquérito à Cul-
   tura científica dos Portugueses 1996/1997, Lisboa, Ministério da Ciência e da
   Tecnologia, Observatório das Ciências e das Tecnologias.
Oliveira, L.J. (2004) A Internet como meio de partilha e divulgação da ciência: a re-
    presentação da comunidade científica portuguesa, in “Comunicação e Socieda-
    de”, 6, pp. 171-191.
Patricio, M.T. (2010) Science Policy and the Internationalisation of Research in
    Portugal, in “Journal of Studies in International Education”, 14 (2), pp. 161-
    182.
Patrício, M.T. and Stoleroff, A. (1995) A Organização Interna da Produção Cientí-
    fica: Gestão e Participação nas Equipas Estruturadas em Torno de Projectos, in
    M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Ciência e Democracia, Venda Nova, Bertrand Editora,
    pp. 223-249.
Pereira, T.S. (1996) Uma análise do impacto das políticas europeias na colaboração
   internacional em investigação científica em Portugal e no Reino Unido, in “Aná-
   lise Social”, XXXI (135), pp. 229-265.
Pereira, T.S. (1999) A ciência e a inovação tecnológica: da ciência enquanto saber à
   ciência enquanto prática, in M.M. Godinho and J. Caraça (eds.), O Futuro
   Tecnológico, Lisboa, Celta, pp. 147-161.
Pereira, T.S. (2001) Colaborações científicas internacionais e a diversidade dos sis-
   temas de investigação: Entre o global e o local, in J.A. Nunes and M.E. Gon-
   çalves (eds.), Enteados de Galileu? A Semiperiferia no Sistema Mundial da Ci-
   ência, Porto, Edições Afrontamento, pp. 143-170.
Pereira, T.S. (2002) International dimension of research in Portugal: the European
   Research Area and beyond in “Science and Public Policy”, 29 (6), pp. 451-61.
Pereira, T.S. (2004a) Processos de governação da ciência: O debate em torno do mo-
   delo de financiamento das unidades de investigação em Portugal, in “Revista
   Crítica de Ciências Sociais”, 70, pp. 5-32.
Delicado                                                                         147
Pereira, T.S. (2004b) Science policy-making, democracy, and changing knowledge
   institutions, in “International Journal of Social Sciences”, 56 (180), pp. 245-
   256.
Praça, G. (2008) O que faz a “experiência? A ontologia de algumas caixas-negras no
   Instituto de Meteorologia, in J.A. Nunes and R. Roque (eds.), Objectos Impu-
   ros: Experiências em Estudos sobre a Ciência, Porto, Edições Afrontamento,
   pp. 137-157.
Prpić, K. (2013) STS in a (Post)Socialist Context. Science and Technology Studies in
   Croatia, in “Tecnoscienza” 4 (1), pp. 165-181.
Ramos, R. and Carvalho, A. (2008) Science as rhetoric in media discourses on cli-
   mate change, in J. Strunck, L. Holmgreen and L. Dam (eds.), Rhetorical As-
   pects of Discourse in Present-day Society, Cambridge, Cambridge Scholars
   Press, pp. 223-247.
Reis, A.L., Rosa, M.J.V., Amâncio, L., Patrício, T., Santos, C., Silva, L., Ribeiro,
    M. and Araújo, H.C. (2001) Women and Science: Review of the Situation in
    Portugal, In: OCT National Report, Helsinki Group, Commission for the
    Equality of Women’s Rights, ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/improving/docs/
    women_national_report_portugal.pdf
Reis, J., Tolda, J., Pereira, T.S., Serra, N. and Basto, E. (2010) Imigrantes em Por-
    tugal: Economia, Pessoas, Qualificações e Territórios, Coimbra, Almedina.
Rodrigues, M.L., Duarte, J. and Gravito, A.P. (2000) Os portugueses perante a ci-
   ência, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Cultura Científica e Participação Pública, Oei-
   ras, Celta, pp. 33-39.
Ruivo, B. (1986) A mulher e o poder profissional: a mulher em actividades de inves-
   tigação científica em Portugal, in “Análise Social”, XXII (92-93), pp. 669-680.
Ruivo, B. (1993) Women in Scientific Research and in Science Policy in Portugal in
   Logue, H. and Talapessy, L. Women in Science – International Workshop,
   Brussels, E.C. Directorate General XI, pp. 25-38.
Ruivo, B. (1998) As políticas de ciência e tecnologia e o sistema de investigação,
   Lisboa, Imprensa Nacional Casa da Moeda.
Schubert, C. (2011) In the Middle of Things. Germany’s ongoing Engagement with
   STS, in “Tecnoscienza”, 2 (2), pp. 93-103.
Schmidt, L. (2008) Comunicar a Ciência: o papel dos media e os problemas científi-
   co-ambientais, in L. Schmidt and J.P. Cabral (eds.), Ciência e Cidadania - Ho-
   menagem a Bento de Jesus Caraça, Lisboa, Imprensa de Ciências Sociais, pp.
   85-112.
Silva, C.M., Antunes, C.L. and Lisboa, M. (1993) Produção de Conhecimento cien-
    tífico em Portugal, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Comunidade Científica e Poder,
    Lisboa, FPASC/Edições 70, pp. 37-53.
Silva, L. (2005) Qual o papel da Internet na promoção da (in)existência de laços en-
    tre os investigadores da comunidade lusófona?, in “Anuário Internacional da
    Comunicação Lusófona”, 3, pp. 189-204.
148                                                                 Tecnoscienza - 4 (2)

Stoleroff, A. and Patrício, M.T. (1995) A Prática Científica, in J.C. Jesuíno (ed.), A
    Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos Finais do Século XX, Oeiras, Celta, pp.
    203-211.
Stoleroff, A.D. and Patrício, M.T. (1993), Lógicas da divisão do trabalho científico:
    Notas de uma pesquisa sociológica, in M.E. Gonçalves (ed.), Comunidade cien-
    tífica e poder, Lisboa, FPASC/Edições 70, pp. 133-150.
Vala, J. and Amâncio, L. (1995), Identidades e Fronteiras da Comunidade Científi-
   ca, in J.C. Jesuíno (ed.), A Comunidade Científica Portuguesa nos Finais do Sé-
   culo XX, Oeiras, Celta, pp. 89-106.
