...
首页> 外文期刊>British journal for the history of science >Towards a transnational industrial-hazard history: charting the circulation of workplace dangers, debates and expertise
【24h】

Towards a transnational industrial-hazard history: charting the circulation of workplace dangers, debates and expertise

机译:迈向跨国工业危险历史:绘制工作场所危险,辩论和专业知识的分布图

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

We argue that industrial hazards have remained an integral feature of the international and 'global' economy since the early modern period, and invite historians of science into the study of their history. The growth and dissemination of knowledge about these hazards, as well as the production and trade that generate them, continue to generate deep inequalities in just who is exposed to them, as illustrated by the shifting impact of the asbestos-related disease plague in the past half-century. Exposure levels in poorer countries have risen as those in affluent societies have fallen, the latter due as much to popular protest and media exposure as to scientific expertise. We suggest that the best way to understand the formation of knowledge about these hazards is not to return to the epistemological battlegrounds of the 'science wars' of the 1990s but to seek more interdisciplinary integration of the multifaceted ways that material bodies, environments and interests contribute to an understanding of such hazards and injuries. We propose the framework of 'industrial-hazard regimes' as an avenue into the ways in which knowledge about risks and dangers at work are created, translated and contested in different countries and times. While urging a return, in some respects, to the early models of 'progressive enlightenment' devised by radical commentators and pioneering historians of the industrial hazard in the early twentieth century, we would revise these early approaches, and also offer some sceptical commentary on the difficulties raised, more recently, by narratives of 'heroic populism' or 'anti-science epidemiology'. The critical standpoints for which we argue recognize the diverse social and political identities and loyalties not only of past contributors to the controversies on industrial hazard, but also of historians of science and medicine themselves.
机译:我们认为,自近代早期以来,工业危害就一直是国际和“全球”经济的一个不可或缺的特征,并邀请科学史学家对其历史进行研究。关于这些危害的知识的增长和传播,以及产生这些危害的生产和贸易,仅在暴露于这些危害的人中继续产生深远的不平等,正如过去与石棉相关的疾病瘟疫的不断变化的影响所表明的那样。半个世纪。贫穷国家的暴露水平随着富裕社会的下降而上升,这是由于民众的抗议和媒体对科学专门知识的影响。我们建议,了解有关这些危害的知识的最好方法不是回到1990年代“科学大战”的认识论战场,而是寻求对物质,环境和利益做出贡献的多方面方式进行更多的学科交叉整合了解此类危险和伤害。我们提出了“工业危害机制”框架,以此作为在不同国家和时代创建,翻译和辩论有关工作中的风险和危险的知识的途径。在某些方面敦促返回激进评论员和20世纪初工业危害史家的先驱历史学家设计的“进步启发”的早期模型的同时,我们将修改这些早期方法,并就此提出一些怀疑的评论。最近,“英雄民粹主义”或“反科学流行病学”的叙述引发了许多困难。我们争辩的批判立场不仅认识到过去对工业危害问题的争论的贡献者,而且也对科学和医学史学家本身的多元化的社会和政治认同和忠诚。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号