Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Without the imprimatur of colleagues, resources dry up, disciplines
wither, and lines of scientific investigation fail.
Latour names the third loop “alliances,” and FitzSimmons renames it
“allies,” but for my purposes it is best labeled “clients.” This loop rep-
resents the patrons that scientists have always had. These are the people
and groups that can put knowledge yielded by scientific discovery to
practical use. Knowledge contained by the academy is feeble compared
to that put into economic action. Agriculture may request specific help
on problems from scientists, or scientists may need to persuade growers
of the commercial potential of their research.
Latour labels the fourth loop “public representation,” although he is
quick to dissociate this from the stigma of “public relations.” He insists
that society ultimately has a say in the conduct of science, however
distorted or stereotypical its understanding may be. The public is located
just outside the edge of this loop. Pumping knowledge through it
requires very different skills than laboratory investigations, but it too is
science, just as much as is statistical analysis. This loop holds opportuni-
ties as well as dangers. Scientists may be celebrated for their innovation,
or their credibility may suffer attack for making public knowledge from
the field and laboratory, as Carson herself discovered. Scientists discount
the importance of this loop to their peril, as evinced by public squea-
mishness about transgenic crops.
Scientific knowledge circulates by the pumping of the heart. Without
“links and knots,” or scientific content, there would be no other loops;
they would die instantly. But the heart does not exist in isolation: it exists
to distribute knowledge throughout the entire system. This conceptual
core becomes stronger the faster it circulates knowledge through the
other four loops, in turn strengthening the power of science within
society.
Carson captured the public's attention by describing the ecological
folly of indiscriminate agrochemical use. She critiqued the practice of sci-
entists who thought of their work as exclusively serving their immediate,
economic clients: actors in loops two and three were only concerned
with each other's interests, and not ecological or social consequences.
Carson diffused knowledge from loop 1 to loop 4, mobilizing the public
to act on behalf of nature; in other words, she circulated knowledge from
society to reduce the hazards of irrational pesticide use. For her efforts
