Demortain, David Modèles d’effets, effets des modèles. Calcul des doses et pouvoir industriel dans la gouvernance des produits chimiques. Journal Article Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances, 13 (4), pp. 1063-1096, 2019. Abstract | Links | BibTeX @article{Demortain2019,
title = {Modèles d’effets, effets des modèles. Calcul des doses et pouvoir industriel dans la gouvernance des produits chimiques.},
author = {Demortain, David},
editor = {Société d’Anthropologie des Connaissances},
url = {https://www.cairn.info/revue-anthropologie-des-connaissances-2019-4-page-1063.htm},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.3917/rac.045.1063},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-04-01},
journal = {Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances},
volume = {13},
number = {4},
pages = {1063-1096},
abstract = {The prediction of health risks is underpinned by the ambition to measure the hazards facing human populations, when it is impossible to test these hazards. It is sometimes suspected that model-based predictions of risk are inherently favorable to the interests of regulated industries: by staging the possibility to measure future risks with precision, modeling harms the credibility of the other kinds of evidence that are used by regulatory agencies to establish risks, such as experiments on animals or studies on humans. In effect, the use of models would delay or even prevent agencies from being able to estimate risks, and would eventually halt their decision-making. This article provides a history of the development and use of the Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling technique to verify whether it has such an effect on the governance of chemicals. It shows that the effects of models on regulatory decision-making are often limited, for one main reason: models, their theoretical construction, and their parameters or outputs, are routinely evaluated by the modelers who work for regulatory agencies. Models do not therefore set the risk, but open a space for interpreting the value of different forms of knowledge about those risks. The political effects of modeling, and the extent to which they strengthen the power of one or the other actor in the governance of chemicals, depends on the position of this very actor in configurations of uncertainty, or the set of networks that control the evaluation of knowledge and of their uncertainties. From this perspective, the power of the industry is far from being absolute. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The prediction of health risks is underpinned by the ambition to measure the hazards facing human populations, when it is impossible to test these hazards. It is sometimes suspected that model-based predictions of risk are inherently favorable to the interests of regulated industries: by staging the possibility to measure future risks with precision, modeling harms the credibility of the other kinds of evidence that are used by regulatory agencies to establish risks, such as experiments on animals or studies on humans. In effect, the use of models would delay or even prevent agencies from being able to estimate risks, and would eventually halt their decision-making. This article provides a history of the development and use of the Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling technique to verify whether it has such an effect on the governance of chemicals. It shows that the effects of models on regulatory decision-making are often limited, for one main reason: models, their theoretical construction, and their parameters or outputs, are routinely evaluated by the modelers who work for regulatory agencies. Models do not therefore set the risk, but open a space for interpreting the value of different forms of knowledge about those risks. The political effects of modeling, and the extent to which they strengthen the power of one or the other actor in the governance of chemicals, depends on the position of this very actor in configurations of uncertainty, or the set of networks that control the evaluation of knowledge and of their uncertainties. From this perspective, the power of the industry is far from being absolute. |
Fabo, Pablo Ruiz; Poibeau, Thierry Mapping the Bentham Corpus: Concept-based Navigation Journal Article Journal of data mining and digital humanities , 2019. Abstract | Links | BibTeX @article{Fabo2019,
title = {Mapping the Bentham Corpus: Concept-based Navigation},
author = {Pablo Ruiz Fabo and Thierry Poibeau },
url = {https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01915730v2},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-03-06},
journal = {Journal of data mining and digital humanities },
abstract = {British philosopher and reformer Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) left over 60,000 folios of unpublished manuscripts. The Bentham Project, at University College London, is creating a TEI version of the manuscripts, via crowdsourced transcription verified by experts. We present here an interface to navigate these largely unedited manuscripts, and the language technologies the corpus was enriched with to facilitate navigation, i.e Entity Linking against the DBpedia knowledge base and keyphrase extraction. The challenges of tagging a historical domain-specific corpus with a contemporary knowledge base are discussed. The concepts extracted were used to create interactive co-occurrence networks, that serve as a map for the corpus and help navigate it, along with a search index. These corpus representations were integrated in a user interface. The interface was evaluated by domain experts with satisfactory results , e.g. they found the distributional semantics methods exploited here applicable in order to assist in retrieving related passages for scholarly editing of the corpus. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
British philosopher and reformer Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) left over 60,000 folios of unpublished manuscripts. The Bentham Project, at University College London, is creating a TEI version of the manuscripts, via crowdsourced transcription verified by experts. We present here an interface to navigate these largely unedited manuscripts, and the language technologies the corpus was enriched with to facilitate navigation, i.e Entity Linking against the DBpedia knowledge base and keyphrase extraction. The challenges of tagging a historical domain-specific corpus with a contemporary knowledge base are discussed. The concepts extracted were used to create interactive co-occurrence networks, that serve as a map for the corpus and help navigate it, along with a search index. These corpus representations were integrated in a user interface. The interface was evaluated by domain experts with satisfactory results , e.g. they found the distributional semantics methods exploited here applicable in order to assist in retrieving related passages for scholarly editing of the corpus. |
Tancoigne, Élise ; Baudry, Jérôme La tête dans les étoiles ? Faire sens de l’engagement dans le projet de science participative SETI@home Journal Article Réseaux, 214-215 , pp. 109-140, 2019. Abstract | Links | BibTeX @article{Tancoigne2019,
title = {La tête dans les étoiles ? Faire sens de l’engagement dans le projet de science participative SETI@home},
author = {Tancoigne, Élise and Baudry, Jérôme},
url = {https://www.cairn.info/revue-reseaux-2019-2-page-109.htm},
doi = {10.3917/res.214.0109},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-02-01},
journal = {Réseaux},
volume = {214-215},
pages = {109-140},
abstract = {De plus en plus de personnes participent à des projets de recherche via des plateformes de sciences participatives (citizen sciences) en ligne, dont les promesses d’éducation, de démocratisation et de production renouvelée des savoirs rencontreraient un public de profanes avides de science. En prenant l’exemple du projet d’astronomie SETI@home, lancé en 1999 et souvent cité comme pionnier des citizen sciences en ligne, nous partons des traces textuelles (profils, messages de forums) laissées en ligne par les participants pour explorer comment ils mettent en scène leur identité et font sens de leur engagement. Loin du « public imaginé » par les concepteurs des projets de citizen sciences se dessine alors l’image d’une communauté très hétérogène, moins intéressée par la science que par le dispositif même de mise en réseau des participants et de leurs ordinateurs.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
De plus en plus de personnes participent à des projets de recherche via des plateformes de sciences participatives (citizen sciences) en ligne, dont les promesses d’éducation, de démocratisation et de production renouvelée des savoirs rencontreraient un public de profanes avides de science. En prenant l’exemple du projet d’astronomie SETI@home, lancé en 1999 et souvent cité comme pionnier des citizen sciences en ligne, nous partons des traces textuelles (profils, messages de forums) laissées en ligne par les participants pour explorer comment ils mettent en scène leur identité et font sens de leur engagement. Loin du « public imaginé » par les concepteurs des projets de citizen sciences se dessine alors l’image d’une communauté très hétérogène, moins intéressée par la science que par le dispositif même de mise en réseau des participants et de leurs ordinateurs. |
Loconto, Allison; Desquilbet, Marion; Moreau, Théo; Couvet, Denis; Dorin, Bruno The land sparing – land sharing controversy: Tracing the politics of knowledge Journal Article 2019. Abstract | Links | BibTeX @article{Loconto2018,
title = {The land sparing – land sharing controversy: Tracing the politics of knowledge},
author = {Allison Loconto and Marion Desquilbet and Théo Moreau and Denis Couvet and Bruno Dorin},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.014},
doi = {10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.014},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-01-01},
abstract = {Feeding 9 billion people by 2050 on one hand, and preserving biodiversity on the other hand, are two shared policy goals at the global level. Yet while these goals are clear, they are to some extent in conflict, because agriculture is a major cause of biodiversity loss, and the path to achieve both of them is at the heart of a public controversy around ‘productive’ land use and biodiversity conservation. Over the years, the scientific, policy, civil society and agri-business communities have been engaged in producing evidence that can support a land sparing policy (separating intensive agricultural production from biodiversity conservation) or a land sharing policy (integrating the two in larger and more extensive landscapes). This paper contributes to this debate by analyzing land sparing and land sharing (LSS) as a socio-technical controversy. Through the analysis of large and small corpora of scientific, policy, corporate social responsibility and sustainability standards documents we explore the ethical underpinnings and social networks that support the opposing sides of this controversy. We explore these linkages in order to explain how the concept of land sparing achieved dominance in the scientific literature and how the concept has been taken up in international policy, business and civil society circles. We examine the convergences and divergences in alliances between actors in this controversy in order to map how specific actors have promoted the concept of land sparing as the best way to used land for biodiversity and food production.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Feeding 9 billion people by 2050 on one hand, and preserving biodiversity on the other hand, are two shared policy goals at the global level. Yet while these goals are clear, they are to some extent in conflict, because agriculture is a major cause of biodiversity loss, and the path to achieve both of them is at the heart of a public controversy around ‘productive’ land use and biodiversity conservation. Over the years, the scientific, policy, civil society and agri-business communities have been engaged in producing evidence that can support a land sparing policy (separating intensive agricultural production from biodiversity conservation) or a land sharing policy (integrating the two in larger and more extensive landscapes). This paper contributes to this debate by analyzing land sparing and land sharing (LSS) as a socio-technical controversy. Through the analysis of large and small corpora of scientific, policy, corporate social responsibility and sustainability standards documents we explore the ethical underpinnings and social networks that support the opposing sides of this controversy. We explore these linkages in order to explain how the concept of land sparing achieved dominance in the scientific literature and how the concept has been taken up in international policy, business and civil society circles. We examine the convergences and divergences in alliances between actors in this controversy in order to map how specific actors have promoted the concept of land sparing as the best way to used land for biodiversity and food production. |
