Science, Technology, Society, and Law

Cole, Simon A.; Bertenthal, Alyse

doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113550

Cited by 23 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 106 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given this anthropological experience, defining law becomes more challenging, but it can be seen as an assemblage of strategically positioned networks in which human and nonhuman constituents interact (Cole and Bertenthal 2017, 361) and which extend far beyond formal institutional boundaries (Turner and Wiber 2020). Such networks connect seemingly disconnected items, documents, artifacts, and people to form plural legal configurations of hitherto unexplored complexity, reach and signification (e.g., McGee 2014, 2015).…”

Section: Legal Pluralism—in From the Fringesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Pluralism and Science and Technology Studies: Exploring Sources of the Legal Pluriverse

Turner

Wiber

2022

Science, Technology, & Human Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In introducing the contributions to this special section, we explore the links between social and juridical concepts of normativity and science and technology. We follow the Legal Pluralism challenge to the notion of state law as the sole source of normative order and point to how technological transformation creates a pluralistic legal universe that takes on new shapes under conditions of globalization. We promote a science and technology studies (STS)-inspired reworking of Legal Pluralism and suggest expanding the portfolio of legally effective regimes of ordering to include the normativity generated by materiality and technology. This normativity is amply demonstrated in the case studies included in the papers which make up this special section. We conclude that the inclusion of approaches developed in STS research helps analytically to overcome what we view as an incomplete law project, one unable to deal with the technicized lifeworlds of a global modernity. The contributions to this special section illustrate that technomaterial change cannot be understood without recognition of the role of normative impacts, and conversely, the legal pluriverse cannot be understood without recognition of the normative role of techno-material arrangements.

show abstract

Section: Legal Pluralism—in From the Fringesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Pluralism and Science and Technology Studies: Exploring Sources of the Legal Pluriverse

Turner

Wiber

2022

Science, Technology, & Human Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this, we build onto the work of scholars working at the crossroad of law and STS (Cole and Bertenthal, 2017;Cloatre and Pickersgill, 2020;Turner and Wiber, 2022). This includes explorations of the layered processes through which policy and regulatory knowledge is constituted, while other forms of expertise become seen as less relevant to public decision-making (Jasanoff, 1990(Jasanoff, , 1995.…”

Section: Approaching Traditional Healing and Its Legal Orderingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traditional Healing and Law in Contemporary Senegal: Legitimacies, Normativities and Practices

Cloatre

Ndoye

Badji

et al. 2022

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we chart the context in which contemporary legal debates around traditional healing in Senegal unfold, pointing in particular to the type of power–knowledge relations that are at stake in both the current legal status–quo, and legal changes proposed in 2017. We interrogate the struggles over legitimacy and recognition that are at play in these processes, and the ways in which different actors relate to both formal legal rules, and more fluid forms of legalities, in which imaginaries of the law, and negotiations with the law, translate into everyday practices. We underline how legal and scientific discourses are mobilised to draw the opportunities and boundaries offered to different healing agents, and to organise their respective authority. Traditional healers overlap with modern health practices, while retaining their own ontologies and claims to legitimacy while representatives of the biomedical professions insist that they should have some oversight over the regulation of all healers. As negotiations continue over the possibility for the state to regulate traditional healing, everyday legal choreographies define the relative roles, possibilities and precarity of different healing agents.

show abstract

“…Although there is a growing recognition of the many useful applications of STS in law and society research (see Cole and Bertenthal 2017), neither model public health laws nor model laws in general have been studied as standards comparable to those in other fields such as commerce or medicine. This study fills this gap by analyzing model lawmaking using concepts drawn from the STS literature on standardization to explain how developers leverage both scientific and legal expertise to achieve technical and political legitimacy for their products.…”

Section: Model Laws As a Form Of Legal Standardizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standardizing States of Emergency: Fragmented Legitimacy of Model Public Health Lawmaking

Tolman¹

2021

Law Soc. Inq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The promulgation of model laws—exemplary statutes that states can voluntarily choose to adopt—is a prominent strategy that reformers in public health agencies, the legal academy, and non governmental organizations use to improve US public health law and make it more uniform. This article applies the science and technology studies literature on standardization to the process of model lawmaking to analyze how developers negotiate between alternative forms of expertise and utilize different drafting processes to secure the techno-political legitimacy of their model statutes. Drawing on archival records and interviews with thirty-four experts involved in the development of four model public health laws produced between 1999 and 2007, I show how developers work to satisfy multiple, and, at times, competing, audiences. I observe that developers leveraged forms of legal expertise to secure their model laws’ technical legitimacy and emphasized their objectivity, representativeness, and flexibility to promote their political legitimacy. Comparing the four model laws across several indicia of legitimacy, I find that the developers experienced varying degrees of success. This study contributes to the socio legal scholarship on model laws by revealing how they are able to achieve legitimacy, albeit fragmented, even in the context of scientific uncertainty.

show abstract

Science, Technology, Society, and Law

Cited by 23 publications

References 106 publications

Legal Pluralism and Science and Technology Studies: Exploring Sources of the Legal Pluriverse

Legal Pluralism and Science and Technology Studies: Exploring Sources of the Legal Pluriverse

Traditional Healing and Law in Contemporary Senegal: Legitimacies, Normativities and Practices

Standardizing States of Emergency: Fragmented Legitimacy of Model Public Health Lawmaking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About