Open Access (free)
Reflections on the politics of openness in a new world order
Alexander Thomas T. Smith

Useful Evidence; Institute for Government; and Sciencewise. Turner, S. (2003). Liberal Democracy 3.0: Civil Society in an Age of Experts. London: Sage Publications. University of Manchester, Institute for Science, Ethics and Innovation (2010). Who Owns Science? The Manchester Manifesto. Retrieved 14 December 2016 from: www.isei.manchester.ac.uk/TheManchesterManifesto.pdf. Watermeyer, R. (2012). Written Evidence Submitted by ESRC Centre for Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics (Cesagen) Cardiff University (PE 01). Commons Select Committee, Public Administration

in Science and the politics of openness
New roles for experts and publics
Sarah Hartley and Adam Kokotovich

. (2005). Adjudicating the GM food wars: Science, risk, and democracy in world trade law. Yale Journal of International Law, 30, 81–123. Wynne, B. (2006). Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science: Hitting the notes, but missing the music? Public Health Genomics, 9(3), 211–220.

in Science and the politics of openness
Open Access (free)
Ash dieback and plant biosecurity in Britain
Judith Tsouvalis

, desperate measures were therefore in order. For example, in December 2012, the open-source platform OpenAshDieBack (oadb.tsl.ac.uk) was launched. It had been designed by scientists from the John Innes Centre in Norwich, and invited scientists from around the world to share scientific data on Chalara. This unconventional step of rapidly generating and releasing genomic sequence data was premised on the understanding that β€˜to foster open science and make it possible for experts around the world to access the data and analyse it immediately [would] speed up the process of

in Science and the politics of openness