The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding ‘anticipatory governance’
Abstract
Anticipatory governance is ‘a broad-based capacity extended through society that can act on a variety of inputs to manage emerging knowledge-based technologies while such management is still possible’. It motivates activities designed to build capacities in foresight, engagement, and integration – as well as through their production ensemble. These capacities encourage and support the reflection of scientists, engineers, policy makers, and other publics on their roles in new technologies. This article reviews the early history of the National Nanotechnology Initiative in the United States, and it further explicates anticipatory governance through exploring the genealogy of the term and addressing a set of critiques found in the literature. These critiques involve skepticism of three proximities of anticipatory governance: to its object, nanotechnology, which is a relatively indistinct one; to the public, which remains almost utterly naïve toward nanotechnology; and to technoscience itself, which allegedly renders anticipatory governance complicit in its hubris. The article concludes that the changing venues and the amplification within them of the still, small voices of folks previously excluded from offering constructive visions of futures afforded by anticipatory governance may not be complete solutions to our woes in governing technology, but they certainly can contribute to bending the long arc of technoscience more toward humane ends.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services
Lipsky, M. (1981) · Michigan Law Review · doi:10.2307/1288305 · Cited by 8,981
The Social Control of Technology
Mayne, A. J. (1982) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.2307/2634327 · Cited by 577
Cited by
Machine learning, social learning and the governance of self-driving cars
Stilgoe, J. (2018) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/0306312717741687 · Cited by 375
van Noordt, C., & Misuraca, G. (2022) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2022.101714 · Cited by 356
Anticipatory innovation governance: Shaping the future through proactive policy making
(2020) · OECD Working Papers on Public Governance · doi:10.1787/cce14d80-en · Cited by 303
Climate change and transdisciplinary science: Problematizing the integration imperative
Klenk, N., & Meehan, K. (2015) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2015.05.017 · Cited by 248
Anticipating and Addressing the Ethical Implications of Deepfakes in the Context of Elections
Diakopoulos, N., & Johnson, D. (2019) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3474183 · Cited by 194
Metadata
- Authors
- Guston, D. H.
- Venue
- Social Studies of Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-11-15
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 218-242
- ISSN
- 0036-8539 (ISSN-L)
- 0306-3127
- 1460-3659
- OpenAlex
- W2128217744
- Cited by
- 749
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 15.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding ‘anticipatory governance’. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0306312713508669
- The paper
- Guston, D. H. (2014). Understanding ‘anticipatory governance’. Social Studies of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312713508669
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.