Controversies over issues such as genetically engineered food, foot-and-mouth disease and the failure of risk models in the global financial crisis have raised concerns about the quality of expert scientific advice. The legitimacy of experts, and of the political decision-makers and policy-makers whom they advise, essentially depends on the quality of the advice. But what does quality mean in this context, and how can it be achieved? This volume argues that the quality of scientific advice can be ensured by an appropriate institutional design of advisory organisations. Using examples from a wide range of international case studies, including think tanks, governmental research institutes, agencies and academies, the authors provide a systematic guide to the major problems and pitfalls encountered in scientific advice and the means by which organisations around the world have solved these problems.

The Yearbook addresses the overriding question: what are the effects of the 'opening up' of science to the media? Theoretical considerations and a host of empirical studies covering different configurations provide an in-depth analysis of the sciences' media connection and its repercussions on science itself. They help to form a sound judgement on this recent development.

Representing a wide range of disciplines -- biology, sociology, anthropology, economics, human ethology, psychology, primatology, history, and philosophy of science -- the contributors to this book recently spent a complete academic year at the Center for Interdisciplinary Research (ZiF) discussing a plethora of new insights in reference to human cultural evolution. These scholars acted as a living experiment of "interdisciplinarity in vivo." The assumption of this experiment was that the scholars -- while working and residing at the ZiF -- would be united intellectually as well as socially, a connection that might eventually enhance future interdisciplinary communication even after the research group had dispersed. An important consensus emerged: The issue of human culture poses a challenge to the division of the world into the realms of the "natural" and the "cultural" and hence, to the disciplinary division of scientific labor. The appropriate place for the study of human culture, in this group's view, is located between biology and the social sciences. Explicitly avoiding biological and sociological reductionisms, the group adopted a pluralistic perspective -- "integrative pluralism" -- that took into account both today's highly specialized and effective (sub-)disciplinary research and the possibility of integrating the respective findings on a case-by-case basis. Each sub-group discovered its own way of interdisciplinary collaboration and submitted a contribution to the present volume reflecting one of several types of fruitful cooperation, such as a fully integrated chapter, a multidisciplinary overview, or a discussion between different approaches. A promising first step on the long road to an interdisciplinarily informed understanding of human culture, this book will be of interest to social scientists and biologists alike.

This book opens up a new route to the study of knowledge dynamics and the sociology of knowledge. The focus is on the role of metaphors as powerful catalysts, and the book dissects their role in the construction of theories of knowledge. It is of vital interest to social and cognitive scientists alike.

What is a popular image of science and where does it come from? Little is known about the formation of science images and their transformation into popular images of science. In this anthology, contributions from two areas of expertise: image theory and history and the sociology of the sciences, explore techniques of constructing science images and transforming them into highly ambivalent images that represent the sciences. The essays, most of them with illustrations, present evidence that popular images of the sciences are based upon abstract theories rather than facts, and, equally, images of scientists are stimulated by imagination rather than historical knowledge.

What is a popular image of science and where does it come from? Little is known about the formation of science images and their transformation into popular images of science. In this anthology, contributions from two areas of expertise: image theory and history and sociology of the sciences explore techniques of constructing science images and transforming them into highly ambivalent images that represent the sciences. The essays, most of them with illustrations, present evidence that popular images of the sciences are based upon abstract theories rather than facts, and, equally, images of scientists are stimulated by imagination rather than historical knowledge.

A striking characteristic of modern knowledge society is the rapid spread of certain ideas and concepts back and forth from everyday to scientific discourses, and across many different contexts of meaning. This work attempts to open up a new road to the study of these "dynamics of knowledge". Sociologists of knowledge and recently evolutionary theorists have offered explanations that either attribute social attention to particular ideas or shifts of meaning to the predominance of certain groups. Maasen and Weingart, however, offer a radical new explanation that explores knowledge dynamics by reference to the interaction between metaphors and discourses. The study focuses on three major case studies: the spread of Darwin's phrase "struggle for existence" in the popularizing literature in turn of the century Germany; the reception of Thomas Kuhn's "Structure of Scientific Revolution" and its identification with the term "paradigm" in the sciences and humanities; and the diffusion of the concept of "chaos" from scientific to everyday discourses.

Representing a wide range of disciplines -- biology, sociology, anthropology, economics, human ethology, psychology, primatology, history, and philosophy of science -- the contributors to this book recently spent a complete academic year at the Center for Interdisciplinary Research (ZiF) discussing a plethora of new insights in reference to human cultural evolution. These scholars acted as a living experiment of "interdisciplinarity "in vivo."" The assumption of this experiment was that the scholars -- while working and residing at the ZiF -- would be united intellectually as well as socially, a connection that might eventually enhance future interdisciplinary communication even after the research group had dispersed.
An important consensus emerged: The issue of human culture poses a challenge to the division of the world into the realms of the "natural" and the "cultural" and hence, to the disciplinary division of scientific labor. The appropriate place for the study of human culture, in this group's view, is located "between biology and the social sciences."
Explicitly avoiding biological and sociological reductionisms, the group adopted a pluralistic perspective -- "integrative pluralism" -- that took into account both today's highly specialized and effective (sub-)disciplinary research and the possibility of integrating the respective findings on a case-by-case basis. Each sub-group discovered its own way of interdisciplinary collaboration and submitted a contribution to the present volume reflecting one of several types of fruitful cooperation, such as a fully integrated chapter, a multidisciplinary overview, or a discussion between different approaches. A promising first step on the long road to an interdisciplinarily informed understanding of human culture, this book will be of interest to social scientists and biologists alike.

Controversies over issues such as genetically engineered food, foot-and-mouth disease and the failure of risk models in the global financial crisis have raised concerns about the quality of expert scientific advice. The legitimacy of experts, and of the political decision-makers and policy-makers whom they advise, essentially depends on the quality of the advice. But what does quality mean in this context, and how can it be achieved? This volume argues that the quality of scientific advice can be ensured by an appropriate institutional design of advisory organisations. Using examples from a wide range of international case studies, including think tanks, governmental research institutes, agencies and academies, the authors provide a systematic guide to the major problems and pitfalls encountered in scientific advice and the means by which organisations around the world have solved these problems.

The Yearbook addresses the overriding question: what are the effects of the 'opening up' of science to the media? Theoretical considerations and a host of empirical studies covering different configurations provide an in-depth analysis of the sciences' media connection and its repercussions on science itself. They help to form a sound judgement on this recent development.

The formal scientific communication system is currently undergoing significant change. This is due to four developments: the digitisation of formal science communication; the economisation of academic publishing as profit drives many academic publishers and other providers of information; an increase in the self-observation of science by means of publication, citation and utility-based indicators; and the medialisation of science as its observation by the mass media intensifies. Previously, these developments have only been dealt with individually in the literature and by science-policy actors. The Future of Scholarly Publishing documents the materials and results of an interdisciplinary working group commissioned by the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities (BBAW) to analyse the future of scholarly publishing and to make recommendations on how to respond to the challenges posed by these developments. As per the working group’s intention, the focus was mainly on the sciences and humanities in Germany. However, in the course of the work it became clear that the issues discussed by the group are equally relevant for academic publishing in other countries. As such, this book will contribute to the transfer of ideas and perspectives, and allow for mutual learning about the current and future state of scientific publishing in different settings.

Interdisciplinarity is an inflationary concept in the discourses of higher education and science policy. Yet, some recent structural reforms in European and US universities reflect fundamental changes in the organization of knowledge production and teaching. This publication takes a fresh look at the meaning given to the concept of interdisciplinarity with these reforms. It presents examples of different forms of interdisciplinary research and teaching. These case studies are put in the broader context of reflections on developments in the organization of universities and their implications for knowledge production.