À l’occasion de la session 2019 de la 4S (Society for the Social Studies of Science) Henri Boullier et Boris Hauray ont organisé un panel de 3 sessions, avec 12 interventions, autour de la question de l’influence des intérêts économiques sur la science, la politique et la régulation autour de 3 axes de recherches : (1) autour des notions et des cadres analytiques utilisés pour étudier l’influence industrielle (capture, conflit d’intérêts, biais, production de l’ignorance, hégémonie) ; (2) en étudiant les mécanismes de l’influence (stratégies de financement, portes tournantes, ghostwriting, lobbying, menaces ou représailles) ; et (3) en analysant la production de politiques qui visent à contrôler l’influence, ainsi que les mobilisations qu’elle suscite.
PANEL SUMMARY:
The influence of corporate interests – most notably from the cigarette, chemical, pharmaceutical, and food industries – on science and on health and environmental regulation has attracted a growing media and public attention. STS research has explored this issue in different ways, for example through the analysis of the impact of industry-funding on scientific publications, the study of corporate-biases in the production regulatory standards, or more broadly by questioning the commercialization of science. Lately, considerations on the politics, and power relationships, at play in the production of scientific knowledge have been renewed by the emergence of a “new political sociology of science”. This panel wants to bring together researchers taking on board the question of corporate influence on science and public regulation, and proposes to do so by following three lines of research: (1) first, by opening up a discussion on the notions and theoretical frameworks used to analyze industry or business influence (including, but not limited to: regulatory capture, conflict of interest, bias, production of ignorance, hegemony); (2) second, by studying the social mechanisms it involves (for instance, funding strategies, revolving-door dynamics, ghostwriting, lobbying, or threats and retaliations); (3) third, by analyzing production of policies aiming at controlling corporate influence, and the social mobilizations it triggers. More generally, the panel aims at helping the development of inter-sectoral and international comparison, and consequently welcomes papers that analyze the aforementioned corporate strategies in various industrial sectors and in various geographical areas of the global North and South.
Session 1 : Corporate Influence on Science and Regulation – I
Jean-Paul Gaudillière (Inserm/EHESS)
“Conflicts of interest, ignorance, hegemony and the diethylstilboestrol food crisis in the United States”
David J Hess (Vanderbilt)
“Why Don’t We Care About Electrosmog? Undone Science and the Public Sphere”
Michael Katell, Meg Young and Peter M Krafft (University of Washington)
“Patron or Perish? Interrogating the Role of Industry Funding in Academic Research”
Pascal Ragouet, Léo Mignot and Vincent Grimaud (Université de Bordeaux – Centre Emile Durkheim)
“Toward a Convergence Regime: Science and Neoliberal Governmentality”
Session 2 : Corporate Influence on Science and Regulation – II
Thomas Depecker (INRA), Marc-Olivier Déplaude (INRA), Nicolas Larchet (Université du Havre)
“Corporate Networking: Philanthropic Foundations and the Promotion of Business Interests”
Deep Jyoti Francis (Jawaharlal Nehru University)
“Regulations in Pharmaceutical Industry in India: Reflections from The Indian Parliament”
Paul Stephen Gillis-Smith and Danielle Davis (Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo)
“Constructing a ‘green’ campus: co-shaping of environmental science, corporation, and public discourse at a polytechnic university”
Sylvain Laurens (EHESS) and Paul Guille Escuret (Universités Paris Sorbonne/Aix-Marseille)
“‘Ordinary people are asking for science’. Lobbying strategies through pro-science movements in Europe”
Session 3 : Corporate Influence on Science and Regulation – III
François Dedieu (INRA)
“Ignoring by denoncing corporate influence”
Aïcha Bourad (INRA)
“Who’s running plant genetic improvement in France: Overlapping interests of trade and politics”
Kelly Holloway, Fiona A. Miller and Nicole Simms (University of Toronto)
“Regulatory intermediaries in commercially-driven prenatal screening”
Pierre-André Juven (CNRS)
“Influencing « policy options » at the OECD: The promotion of value-based pricing by pharmaceutical companies”
