Search

Science is being transformed by a series of technical and organizational changes that profoundly affect the terms of its production and use, thereby reconfiguring its role in contemporary societies. At the national level, these changes have particularly been analyzed in terms of modes (Nowotny et al., 2001), of ?regimes of knowledge production (Pestre, 2003; Van Oudheusden et al., 2015), of reconfiguration of the relationship between state, science and industry (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff, 2000; Joerges and Shinn, 2001), of shifting governance and research evaluation (Mustar and Laredo, 2002), or of a renewed relationship between science and society, due to the increase in public controversies involving scientific and technical issues (Latour, 1999).Furthermore, the nature of the production of scientific knowledge is also subject to greateropenness, for example to indigenous knowledge, patient associations (Callon and Rabeharisoa, 2003) or other kind of actors (Jasanoff, 2004, Collins and Evans, 2008).At the international level, even if science always was an international enterprise (Salomon,2006) during recent decades it has become increasingly globalized and the reorganization of international science presents a growing complex map. Indeed, some authors (Rosemann,2014; Moya-Anegón et al., 2013; Grauwin et al., 2012; Veugelers, 2010) talk about a newmultipolarity, particularly pointing at the decline of the formerly leading nations in the shareof international scientific production (especially the US and Western Europe), and theemergence of new regions, like BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, China). However, there existuntil today very few studies focused on the consequences of these changes on less advanced(semi-peripheral) countries and on the relationships among knowledge production centers,with a critical perspective that takes into account the emerging complex dynamics. Therefore, our aim in this chapter is to suggest an analytical framework and to present empirical data on these dynamics, as well as on the consequences that globalization has on the international organization of science, analyzing the complex relations between centers and peripheries (emphasizing the plural). Fil: Delvenne, Pierre. No especifíca; Fil: Kreimer, Pablo Rafael. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina

This chapter reconstructs the main lines of evolution of science for development highlighting some initiatives that targeted infrastructure, health, capacity building, natural resources, international trade and competitiveness. The mounting trend of business-foundation collaboration has crystallized in the term "philanthrocapitalism", which tries to sell the idea of the philanthropic largesse and social-entrepreneurial mission of new billionaires of the 1990s as unprecedented and capable of "saving the world". The chapter reviews the way the United Nations' platforms came to complement or be subordinated to powerful individual or country programs. It finally focuses the increasing role of business philanthropy and charitable investment within the growth of corporate social responsibility (CSR) models and the associated actual and symbolic role of experts and expertise, including the recent multiplication of "think tanks" and consulting work for public policies in developing countries. The Rockefeller and Gates Foundations are two remarkable examples of the nature of philanthropy in the contemporary world. Fil: Vessuri, Hebe. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Centro Nacional Patagónico. Instituto Patagónico de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas; Argentina