Antonio Arellano, Michelle Chauvet y Ronny Viales (eds.), Redes y estilos de investigación: ciencia, tecnología, innovación y sociedad en México y Costa Rica, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, 2013
10.6092/issn.2038-3460/17335
application/pdf
2038-3460
17335
2
en
Miquel Domènech
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/
Tecnoscienza – Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies
Antonio Arellano, Michelle Chauvet and Ronny Viales (eds.), Networks and investigation styles: science, technology, innovation and society in Mexico and Costa Rica, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, 2013
Text.Serial.Journal
https://tecnoscienza.unibo.it/
7
Book Reviews
2017-01-24
2023-06-21
2017-01-24
2023-08-21
173-175
TS
Miquel Domènech
2016
10.6092/issn.2038-3460/17335
173
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
2038-3460
2
en
175
Antonio Arellano, Michelle Chauvet and Ronny Viales (eds.), Networks and investigation styles: science, technology, innovation and society in Mexico and Costa Rica, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, 2013
https://tecnoscienza.unibo.it/article/download/17335/16185
7
Book Review                                                                      173
References
Anderson, A. (1991) Source Strategies and the Communication of Environmental
      Affairs, in “Media, Culture and Society”, 13 (4), pp. 459-476.
Anderson, A., and Gaber, I. (1993) The Yellowing of the Greens, in “British
      Journalism Review”, 4 (2), pp. 49-53.
Anderson, A. (2000) Environmental Pressure Politics and the “Risk Society”, in S.
      Allan, B. Adam, and C. Carter (2000), Environmental Risks and the Me-
      dia, London, Routledge pp. 93-104.
Anderson, A. (2002) The Media Politics of Oil Spills, in “Spill Science and Tech-
      nology Bulletin”, 7 (1), pp. 7-15.
Anderson, A., and Marhadour, A. (2007) Slick PR? The Media Politics of the
      Prestige Oil Spill, in “Science Communication”, 29 (1), pp. 96-115.
Anderson, A., Petersen, A., Wilkinson, C., and Allan, S. (2009) Nanotechnology,
      Risk and Communication, Houndmills, Palgrave Macmillan.
Brunton, F., and Coleman, G. (2014) Closer to the Metal, in T., Gillespie, P. J.,
      Boczkowski and K.A. Foot (eds.), Media Technologies: Essays on Com-
      munication, Materiality, and Society, Cambridge MA and London UK,
      MIT Press.
Castells, M. (2009) Communication Power, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Cottle, S. (1998) Ulrich Beck, “Risk Society” and the Media: A Catastrophic
        View?, in “European Journal of Communication”, 13 (1), pp. 5–32.
Gillespie, T., Boczkowski, P.J., and Foot, K. A. (eds.) (2014) Media Technologies:
        Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society, Cambridge MA and
        London UK, MIT Press.
Parks, L., and Starosielski, N. (eds.) (2015) Signal Traffic: Critical Studies of Me-
       dia Infrastructures, Champaign, University of Illinois Press.


                                       ***

   Antonio Arellano, Michelle Chauvet, and Ronny Viales
   (eds.)
Redes y estilos de investigación: ciencia, tecnología, innovación y sociedad
en México y Costa Rica [Networks and investigation styles: science,
technology, innovation and society in Mexico and Costa Rica], Ciu-
dad de Mexico, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, 2013,
pp. 306

Miquel Domènech Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona



                                                                                173
174                                                          Tecnoscienza – 7 (2)

    Redes y estilos de investigación: ciencia, tecnología, innovación y so-
ciedad en México y Costa Rica has to be understood as the fruit of a col-
laborative experience in the Red de Estudios Sociales de la Ciencia y la
Tecnología (RESOCTI). This is a research network shaped by three very
active research groups from Latin America. Two of them are from Mexi-
co: Cuerpo Académico Sociedad y Biotecnología, at the Universidad
Autónoma Metropolitana Azcapotzalco (UAM-A), and Cuerpo Académi-
co Sociología de la Tecnociencia, at the Universidad Autónoma del Es-
tado de México (UAEMex). The third one is from Costa Rica: Programa
de Estudios Sociales de la Ciencia, la Técnica y el Medio Ambiente, at the
Universidad de Costa Rica.
    The book is structured in three parts. The first section “Construcción
tecnológica: agrobiotecnología y ofidismo” presents four case studies re-
garding biotechnological innovations in Latin America. In spite of all be-
ing devoted to similar questions, at least in the first three cases – focused
on genetically modified organisms – the reader would not have the im-
pression of dealing with repetitive arguments. Indeed, these three-
mentioned works emphasize different aspects of this polemic topic, offer-
ing to the reader a wide range of aspects to be considered. Thus, the ana-
lyzed issues go from the importance of social participation in bio-
technological debates to the role of scientific institutions in the commer-
cialization of transgenic seeds. What they have in common is a construc-
tivist approach, even if the reader will appreciate again differences be-
tween them. The fourth case study approaches a completely different
subject: the development of ophidism in Costa Rica. The link with the
rest of the papers has to do with the use of the Social Network Analysis as
the basis of their explanation. This methodology has a transversal pres-
ence over the book and, actually, constitutes one of the unifying compo-
nents of the edition. The second section “Análisis de redes sociotécnicas”
is a powerful exercise of Social Network Analysis focused on three new
cases entailing GMO controversies. Still, where the emphasis is placed
differs from one another and the analyses carried out allow the reader to
grasp an idea of different uses and potentialities of Social Network Analy-
sis. Finally, the third and last section “Enfoques ESCTI de los cuerpos
académicos” traces the trajectories of both Mexican partners of the re-
search network above mentioned. Crucially, this is quite useful in order
to understand the very origin of the book.
    It is difficult to offer a general overview of the book, mainly because it
is an edited book with different and singular contributions. Besides, the
content is quite uneven and the deepness of the analyses or the very quali-
ty of the writing style varies substantially depending on the chapter. Nev-
ertheless, it has certainly great value as an example of the vitality of re-
search in the field of Science and Technology Studies from Latin America.
    Without doubt, some of its contributions merit to be outlined. Let me
mention which are, from my point of view, the most relevant ones. First,
the book is an interesting and consequent application of the Social Net-
Book Review                                                                 175
work Analysis to Science and Technology Studies. By itself, it delivers a
set of case studies that will certainly be very inspiring for those interested
in this methodology and its potentiality in the study of topics such as the
evolution of research lines in research groups or the analysis of co-
authorships as an indicator of the internationalization practices of institu-
tions. Second, as a whole, the book offers a very complete outlook of the
history and current debates regarding transgenic crops in Latin America,
although specially focused on Mexico. Sometimes the reader might have
the impression that authors are undertaking a descriptive task rather than
an analytical one, but, in any case, it works as a conceptual map to situate
relevant actors and to identify significant issues, i.e. the global food crisis,
linked with the development of GMO. Finally, in its theoretical dimen-
sion, it is true that it cannot be said that there is a clear commitment with
a particular theoretical option, but it is also true that Actor-Network
Theory appears as a quite significant element in several chapters. In this
sense, the book constitutes another example of the influence of this ap-
proach in Latin America, becoming a popular toolkit for social analysis.


                                     ***

    M. Audétat (ed.)
Sciences et technologies émergentes: pourquoi tant de promesses?
[Emerging Sciences and Technologies: Why so many promises?], Paris,
Hermann, 2015, pp. 316.

Attila Bruni Università di Trento

    Expectations are important. When we are faced with a person or a
situation (whether known or unknown), what we expect is somehow con-
stitutive of the relationship that we are about to establish with that person
or situation. One may cite various works by Goffman in this regard, but I
expect that those reading this review will find the previous sentence so
obvious that it requires no further specification. This makes it possible to
immediately point out another feature of expectations: that they reduce
complexity and facilitate communication and representation. In both so-
ciology and social psychology, “expectation” is commonly defined as the
individual’s reasonably realistic prediction about the behaviour of other
members of society in a context of uncertainty. The more knowledge ac-
tors possess about social dynamics, the more they will be able to have sol-
id and reliable expectations. The main problem therefore arises when ex-
pectations are not fulfilled.
    If we move from the individual and everyday level to that of science,
we realize that expectations are nothing more than assumptions that

                                                                            175
