I haven't had time to read this fully, but it would seem finding ways to help groups of individuals work to come to decisions regarding science and technology change in a way that can expose and understand a complex situation.
This bit seems relevant:
"Disputes between experts provoke major difficulties for decision-making and policy implementation in the case of such public confrontations, which, more often than not, are vociferous, protracted, rancorous and unresolved. Traditionally, the neutral, disinterested and objective expert has been promoted -- not least by scientists themselves -- as the rational and authoritative arbiter of public disputes over scientific or technical issues."
Published in Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1995), pp. 506-526, plus references, with minor changes due to sub-editing. Brian Martin and Evelleen Richards 1.
Doing good things better is Brian's latest book. He is prolific and in this book he describes the discipline of daily writing that he used to write this book (and previous work) -- and that he leads his students to use. The principles of daily writing are given in brief at http://www.faculty.umb.edu/pjt/DailyWriting.html.
Looking at Brian's website of writing, you will find material on activism, especially around developments in science and technology, but not only this.
So a couple of these annotated resources are seeming to point to the need for compelling and clear stories and communication. That would be interesting to follow up. And not just the dissemination of ideas, but the support for dialogue and deliberation.
Group items tagged 
