Unequal access to scientific knowledge
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20702006000200003Keywords:
Scientific knowledge, Inequalities, Categorical inequality, Social identitiesAbstract
The author raises questions about unequal access to scientific knowledge whose consequences affect human well being: control over production of that knowledge, control over its distribution, and access to that knowledge by people whose well being it will or could affect. I will try to show how and why they matter. the problem of access to scientific knowledge involves agency, identity, and freedom. It involves those themes in three different ways. First, the production and distribution of scientific knowledge depends on knowledgeable agents who almost inevitably hoard their knowledge to the differential advantage of themselves and their sponsors. Second, control over scientific knowledge organizes around identity-defining boundaries between those who have rights to that knowledge and those who lack such rights. Third, overcoming the barriers between beneficiaries and victims of unequal access ordinarily requires heroic agency on the part of advocates and political authorities.Downloads
References
ANNAN, Kofi. (2003), “A Challenge to the World’s Scientists”. Science 299, 7 mar. p.1485.
BRUBAKER, Rogers. (2005), “Ethnicity without Groups”. In: ADAMS, Julia; CLEMENS, Elisabeth S. & ORLOFF, Ann Shola (eds.), Remaking Modernisty Politics, History, and Sociology. Durham, North Carolina, Duke University Press, pp. 470-492.
DEATON, Angus. (2003), “Health, Inequality, and Economic Development”. Journal of Economic Literature, 41: 113-158.
FREUDENBERG, William R. (2005), “Seeding Science, Courting Conclusions: Reexamining the Intersection of Science, Corporate Cash, and the Law”. Sociological Forum, 20: 3-33.
HIRSCHMAN, Albert O. (1991), The Rhetoric of Reaction. Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
INTERNET WORLD STATS. (2005), “Internet World Stats. Usage and Population Statistics”. www.internetworldstats.com/top20.htm, consultado em 07/06/2005.
KENNEDY, Donald. (2005), “Bayh-Dole: Almost 25”. Science, 307: 1375.
LANG, James. (2001), Notes of a Potato Watcher. College Station, Texas A&M University Press.
NARAYAN, Deepa & PETESCH, Patti (eds.). (2002), Voices of the Poor. From Many Lands. Nova York/Washington, DC, Oxford University Press/World Bank.
PARAJE, Guillermo; SADANA, Ritu & KARAM, Ghassan. (2005), “Increasing International Gaps in Health-Related Publications”. Science, 308: 959-960.
POSNER, Richard A. (2005), “Intellectual Property: The Law and Economics Approach”. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19: 57-74.
SCIENCE. (2006), “Qatar Taps Wells of Knowledge”. Science, 312: 46-47, abr.
SEN, Amartya. (1995), “The Political Economy of Targeting”. In: VAN DE WALLE, Dominique & NEAD, Kimberly (eds.). Public Spending and the Poor: Theory and Evidence. Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, pp. 11-24.
TILLY, Charles. (1998), Durable Inequality. Berkeley, Univesity of California Press.
TILLY, Charles. (2005a), Identities, Boundaries, and Social Ties. Boulder, Colorado, Paradigm Press.
TILLY, Charles. (2005b), “Historical Perspectives on Inequality”. In: ROMERO, Mary & MARGOLIS, Eric (eds.). The Blackwell Companion to Social Inequalities. Oxford, Blackwell, pp. 15-30.
UNDP (United Nations Development Program). (2001), Human Development Report 2001. Nova York, Oxford University Press.
UNDP (United Nations Development Program). (2004), Human Development Report 2004. Nova York, UNDP.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Tempo Social
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.