This article addresses the question of how policymakers could deliberately influence processes of technology development. Using the development of wind turbines in Denmark as an example, the article describes the frames of meaning guiding the actions of those involved in the three subprocesses of policymaking, the generation of new technologies, and the management of the firms that bring new artifacts to the market. The three types of actors share an interest in one notion: the meaning of a technological artifact. This notion, however, plays a different role in the respective frames of meaning of the actors. For policymakers and managers, it is an instrumental notion. For technologists, it provides guidance to their activities. The shared interest affords the possibility of reaching common action with only congruent (not necessarily shared) meanings. Interactive forms of technology assessment can play a central role in bringing about such congruent meanings and thus in influencing the generation of new technologies.For better or worse, technology thoroughly permeates our societies. Technological developments have brought many blessings but also many threats. The desired or promised blessings do not always materialize, and preventing or reducing threats poses challenges that all too often cannot be met satisfactorily. This lack of success in effectively controlling technological development to keep it in line with social needs and political aims is disappointing in view of the longstanding public and political concerns about the negative impacts of technology in many areas and the desire to mobilize technology for positive objectives such as sustainable development (Smits and Leyten 1991 ). Apparently, the challenge is indeed very difficult to meet. AUTHORS' NOTE: We are grateful for having had the opportunity of presenting the ideas presented in this article in useful discussions with various colleagues in Denmark, in the Science

Many social problems can only be solved through some form of governmental involvement. In this article, a model is formulated for policy implementation. The various criticisms against a top-down model of implementation can be taken into account by conceptualizing implementation as communicative interaction between policy actors and their target groups, each characterized by distinct rationalities (section 4) with important consequences for the likelihood of learning and behavioral change (section 5). As explained in section 3, 'communicative action' is being used to underline that we go beyond the top-down vs. bottom-up distinction, thus doing justice to empirical findings and adopting a post-positivist epistemology. Normatively, this expresses a critical approach to 'implementation as the continuation of politics with different means.'The need for such an approach is illustrated by two case stories (section 2), one about fresh dairy packing in the Low Countries, the other one about nuclear missiles in the United States. Examples from these stories are used in sections 4 and 5 to clarify our model.

No abstract

This article describes an action research process to solve problems of democracy in neighborhoods in a modern European city. A relational constructionist approach has been used as the theoretical basis for this work. The methodological framework is based on action research, survey feedback and search conferences. The article begins by describing the historical and cultural context of democracy in the city. Special attention is paid to the development of the relationship between researchers and members of neighborhood associations on the one hand, and to the building of a mutual consensus on the problems, focus and methodology of action research on the other. Multiple voices of democracy start to make themselves heard in a process of data gathering and feedback. New futures and strategies for the associations were developed at a search conference. After the search conference had taken place new relationships were established in a communal dialogue with neighborhood councils. An evaluation of the process focuses on lessons learned by members of the associations in terms of strategy formulation; the establishment of relationships during the process; the multiple voices of democracy in a modern city; the effectiveness of the combination of a start up conference, survey feedback and search conference; and the way representative democracy can be improved in a relational process of social construction.

No abstract