Sheila Jasanoff is an American academic and significant contributor to the field of Science and Technology Studies. She is Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology Studies at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, where she directs the Program on Science, Technology, & Society. [1] Her research focuses on science and the state in contemporary democratic societies. Her work is relevant to science & technology studies, comparative politics, law and society, political and legal anthropology, and policy analysis. Jasanoff’s research has considerable empirical breadth, spanning the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, the European Union, and India, as well as emerging global regimes in areas such as climate and biotechnology.

One line of Jasanoff’s work demonstrates how the political culture of different democratic societies influences how they assess evidence and expertise in policymaking. Her first book (with Brickman and Ilgen), Controlling Chemicals (1985), examines the regulation of toxic substances in the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom.[2] The book showed how the routines of decision making in these countries reflected different conceptions of what counts as evidence and of how expertise should operate in a policy context. In Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States (2005), she has shown how different societies employ different modes of public reasoning when making decisions involving science and technology. [3] These differences, which in part reflect distinct "civic epistemologies," are deeply embedded in institutions and shape how policy issues are framed and processed by the bureaucratic machinery of modern states.

Jasanoff has also contributed to scholarship on the interaction of science and law. Science at the Bar (1995), for example, reached beyond the prevailing diagnoses of structural incompatibilities between science and law to explore how these socially-embedded institutions interact and, to a certain extent, mutually constitute each other. [4] The concept of regulatory science, conducted for the purposes of meeting legally-mandated standards, and the "boundary" drawing activities of science advisory committees are analyzed in The Fifth Branch (1990).[5] More recently, she has explored the "rise of the statistical victim" in toxic torts, as the law with its individualistic orientation has increasingly encountered, and sought ways to accommodate, the statistical vision of such fields as epidemiology.[6] In her work on science and law, as well as her research on science in the state, she takes an approach that links ideas from constitutional law, political theory, and science studies to consider the "constitutional" role of science in modern democratic states.[7]

Jasanoff has considered the politics of science not only in a comparative but also in a global context. Examples include her work on the transnational aspects of the Bhopal disaster (Learning from Disaster 1994); her research on the formation and politics of global scientific advisory bodies such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; and her research on national and global environmental movements (e.g., Earthy Politics, 2004).

Jasanoff also has contributed to building Science and Technology Studies as a field. Prior to moving to Harvard, she was the founding chair of the Department of Science & Technology Studies at Cornell University. She is also the founder of the Science & Democracy Network, a group of scholars interested in the study of science and the state in democratic societies that has met annually since 2002. Her research has been recognized with many awards, including the Bernal Prize from the Society for Social Studies of Science.

She is married to Jay Jasanoff, and has two children, Maya Jasanoff, who is an associate professor in the Department of History at Harvard, Alan Jasanoff, is a neuroscientist at MIT.

本書為“決策科學化譯叢”之一，主要批判瞭指導監管機構運用科學知識的兩種普遍公認的範式——“民主論”模式和“技術統治論”模式，並通過研究美國環保局、美國食品藥品監督局的相關案例（如緻癌原風險評估指南的製定過程、甲醛的監管問題等）闡釋並評價瞭美國社會作齣關於科學和技術選擇的部分決策過程，討論瞭谘詢委員會以外的其他機製，並就如何提高科學谘詢的質量提齣瞭建設性設想。