Constructivist technology studies have often cast government as one “social group” among many, reflecting a liberal pluralist view of politics. This article argues, in contrast, that due to the conceptions of citizenship conveyed by policy designs, governments have a special role to play in the shaping of new technologies. This argument is illustrated in the case of the controversial 1996 decision by the California Air Resources Board to significantly revise its electric vehicle program. The article shows that the board’s decision changed the image of citizenship conveyed by its policy design, thus influencing the civic values embedded within electric vehicle technology.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barber, Benjamin R.1984. Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
2.
Bevan, Analisa R.1999. Manager, ZEV Implementation Section, California Air Resources Board. Interview by author. 28 May.
3.
Bijker, Wiebe E.1992. The social construction of fluorescent lighting, or how an artifact was invented in its diffusion stage. In Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change, edited by Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law, 75-102. Cambridge: MIT Press.
4.
Bottles, Scott L.1987. Los Angeles and the automobile: The making of a modern city. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5.
Brown, Mark B., Weert Canzler, Frank Fischer, and Andreas Knie. 1995. Technological innovation through environmental policy: California’s Zero-Emission Vehicle regulation. Public Productivity and Management Review19 (1): 77-93.
6.
Bullard, Robert, and Glenn S. Johnson, eds. 1997. Just transportation: Dismantling race and class barriers to mobility. Gabriola Island, BC; Stony Creek, CT: New Society Publishers.
7.
Cackette, Tom. 1995. Explaining California’s continuum. In Building the e-motive industry: Essays and conversations about creating an electric vehicle industry, edited by Scott A. Cronk, 52-56. Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.
8.
California Air Resources Board (CARB).1991. Proposed regulations for Low-Emission Vehicles and clean fuels, final statement of reasons. Sacramento, CA. July.
9.
California Air Resources Board (CARB).1994. Technical support document, Zero-Emission Vehicle update. Sacramento, CA. April.
10.
California Air Resources Board (CARB).1995. Public meeting to update board on technological progress of Zero-Emission Vehicles. Agenda Item 95-11-3. Sacramento, CA. October 26.
11.
California Air Resources Board (CARB).1996a. Final statement of reasons for rulemaking, including summary of comments and agency response. Sacramento, CA. 28 March.
12.
California Air Resources Board (CARB).1996b. Staff report: Initial statement of rulemaking: Proposed amendments to the Zero-Emission Vehicle requirements for passenger cars and light-duty trucks. Sacramento, CA. 9 February.
13.
California Air Resources Board (CARB).1998a. Resolution 98-53. Sacramento, CA. 5 November.
14.
California Air Resources Board (CARB).1998b. Zero-Emission Vehicle biennial program review. Sacramento, CA. 6 July.
15.
Callon, Michel. 1980. The state and technical innovation: A case study of the electric vehicle. Research Policy9:358-376.
16.
Callon, Michel. 1987. Society in the making: The study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. In The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, edited by Wiebe E.Bijker, ThomasP. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 83-103. Cambridge: MIT Press.
17.
Canzler, Weert, and Andreas Knie. 1994. Das ende des automobils: Fakten und trends zum umbau der autogesellschaft. Heidelberg, Germany: C. F. Müller.
18.
Cone, Marla. 1994. State holds firm on deadline for electric cars. Los Angeles Times, 14 May, A1.
19.
Cone, Marla. 1996. State air board repeals mandate for electric cars. Los Angeles Times, 30 March, A1.
20.
Connolly, William E., ed. 1969. The bias of pluralism. New York: Atherton.
21.
Dahl, Robert. 1961. Who governs?New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22.
Davison, Aidan, Ian Barns, and Renato Schibeci. 1997. Problematic publics: A critical review of surveys of public attitudes to biotechnology. Science, Technology, & Human Values22 (3): 317-348.
23.
Diekman, Andreas, and Peter Preisendörfer. 1998. Environmental behavior: Discrepancies between aspirations and reality. Rationality and Society10 (1): 79-102.
24.
Duany, Andres, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, and Jeff Speck. 2000. Suburban nation: The rise of sprawl and the decline of the American Dream. New York: North Point.
25.
Efrus, Robert. 1995. Document of testimony at CARB public meeting to update board on technological progress of Zero-Emission Vehicles. Agenda Item 95-12-4. 16 November.
26.
Evashenk, Thomas A.1999. Manager, ZEV Implementation Section, California Air Resources Board. Interview by author. 12 May.
27.
Ezrahi, Yaron. 1980. Utopian and pragmatic rationalism: The political context of scientific advice. Minerva18:111-131.
28.
Feenberg, Andrew. 1999. Questioning technology. New York: Routledge.
29.
Fiorino, Daniel J.1990. Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values15 (2): 226-243.
30.
Fischer, Frank, and John Forester, eds. 1993. The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.
31.
Fishkin, James S.1995. The voice of the people: Public opinion and democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
32.
Fogelberg, Hans. 1998. The electric car controversy: A social-constructivist interpretation of the California Zero-Emission Vehicle mandate. Göteborg, Sweden: Chalmers University of Technology, Department of History of Technology and Industry.
33.
Green, Donald Philip. 1992. The price elasticity of mass preferences. American Political Science Review86 (1): 128-148.
34.
Gundersen, Adolf G.1995. The environmental promise of democratic deliberation. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
35.
Hall, Jane V. 1995. ZEVs and California’s future prosperity. Document of testimony at CARB public workshop on the benefits and costs of Zero-Emission Vehicles. Los Angeles. 8 November.
36.
Hård, Mikael, and Andreas Knie. 1994. The ruler of the game: The defining power of the standard automobile. In The car and its environments: The past, present and future of the motorcar in Europe, edited by Knut H. Sorensen, 137-158. Brussels: European Commission.
37.
Huang, Roland J. 1995. Comments on the benefits and costs of the Zero-Emission Vehicle program. Document of testimony at CARB public workshop on the benefits and costs of Zero-Emission Vehicles. Los Angeles. 8 November.
38.
Hughes, Thomas P.1987. The evolution of large technical systems. In The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, edited by Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 51-82. Cambridge: MIT Press.
39.
Ingram, Helen, and Steven Rathgeb Smith, eds. 1993. Public policy for democracy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
40.
Kalhammer, F. R., A. Kozawa, C. B. Moyer, and B. B. Owens. 1995. Performance and availability of batteries for electric vehicles: A report of the battery technical advisory panel. Prepared for California Air Resources Board, El Monte, California.
41.
Kirsch, David A.2000. The electric vehicle and the burden of history. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
42.
Kitowski, Jack. 1999. Division chief, On-Road Controls, California Air Resources Board. Interview by author. 28 May.
43.
Knie, Andreas, Otto Berthold, Mikael Hård, Trond Buland, Heidi Gjoen, Michel Quéré, Wolfgang Streicher, Bernard Truffer, and Sylvia Harms. 1997. Consumer use patterns of electric vehicles. FS II 97-105. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung.
44.
Kurani, Kenneth S., Thomas Turrentine, and Daniel Sperling. 1996. Testing electric vehicle demand in “hybrid households” using a reflexive survey. Transportation Research1 (2): 131-150.
45.
Laird, Frank N.1993. Participatory analysis, democracy, and technological decision making. Science, Technology, & Human Values18 (4): 341-361.
46.
Landy, Marc K., Marc J. Roberts, and Stephen R. Thomas. [1990] 1994. The Environmental Protection Agency: Asking the wrong questions from Nixon to Clinton. Expanded ed.New York: Oxford University Press.
47.
Lewinsohn-Zamir, Daphna. 1998. Consumer preferences, citizen preferences, and the provision of public goods. Yale Law Journal108 (2): 377-406.
48.
Lindblom, Charles E.1982. The market as prison. Journal of Politics44 (2): 324-336.
49.
Lowi, Theodore J.1964. American business, public policy, case studies, and political theory. World Politics16 (July): 677-715.
50.
Lowry, William R.1992. The dimensions of federalism: State governments and pollution control policies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
51.
Lukes, Steven. 1974. Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan.
52.
Lyons, James M. 1995. The cost of the ZEV mandate: 1998-2001. Document of testimony at CARB public workshop on the benefits and costs of Zero-Emission Vehicles. Los Angeles. 8 November.
53.
Majone, Giandomenico. 1989. Evidence, argument, and persuasion in the policy process. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
54.
Natural Resources Defense Council. 1994. No more tailpipes: The role of electric vehicles in clearing California’s air. Washington, DC: National Resources Defense Council.
55.
Pinch, Trevor J., and Wiebe E. Bijker. 1984. The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science14:399-441.
56.
Purcell, R. R. 1995. Make a business out of it. Document of testimony at CARB public workshop on consumer marketability of Zero-Emission Vehicles. El Monte, California. 28 June.
57.
Rajan, Sudhir Chella. 1996. The enigma of automobility: Democratic politics and pollution control. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
58.
Ringquist, Evan J.1993. Environmental protection at the state level: Politics and progress in controlling pollution. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
59.
Russell, Stewart. 1986. The social construction of artefacts: A response to Pinch and Bijker. Social Studies of Science16:331-346.
60.
Sagoff, Mark. 1988. The economy of the earth: Philosophy, law, and the environment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
61.
Schiffer, Michael Brian. 1994. Taking charge: The electric automobile in America. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.
62.
Schneider, Anne Larason, and Helen Ingram. 1997. Policy design for democracy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
63.
Sclove, Richard E.1995. Democracy and technology. New York: Guilford.
64.
Sen, Amartya K. [1978] 1990. Rational fools: A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. In Beyond self-interest, edited by Jane J. Mansbridge, 25-43. Reprint, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
65.
Shnayerson, Michael. 1996. The car that could: The inside story of GM’s revolutionary electric vehicle. New York: Random House.
66.
Skocpol, Theda. 1992. State formation and social policy in the United States. American Behavioral Scientist35 (4/5): 559-584.
67.
Soss, Joe. 1999. Lessons of welfare policy: Policy design, political learning, and political action. American Political Science Review93 (2): 363-380.
68.
Sperling, Daniel. 1995. Future drive: Electric vehicles and sustainable transportation. Washington, DC: Island.
69.
Surface Transportation Policy Project. 1999. Why are the roads so congested? A companion analysis of the Texas Transportation Institute’s data of metropolitan congestion. Washington, DC: Surface Transportation Policy Project.
70.
Turrentine, Thomas, Kenneth Kurani, and Daniel Sperling. 1992. Market potential of electric and natural gas vehicles. Davis, CA: Institute of Transportation Studies.
71.
Turrentine, Thomas, Kenneth Kurani, and Daniel Sperling.1995. The household market for electric vehicles. Document of testimony at CARB public workshop on marketability of electric vehicles. El Monte, California. 28 June.
72.
Volti, Rudi. 1990. Why internal combustion?Invention and Technology, 6(2):42-47.
73.
Walzer, Michael. 1992. The civil society argument. In Dimensions of radical democracy: Pluralism, citizenship, community, edited by Chantal Mouffe, 89-107. London: Verso.
74.
Wilson, James Q.1980. The politics of regulation. In The politics of regulation, edited by James Q. Wilson, 357-394. New York: Basic Books.
75.
Winner, Langdon. [1980] 1986. Do artifacts have politics? In The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology, 19-39. Reprint, Cambridge: MIT Press.
76.
Winner, Langdon. 1993. Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and the philosophy of technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values18 (3): 362-378.
77.
Wolff, G., D. Rigby, D. Gauthier, and M. Cenzatti. 1995. The potential impacts of an electric vehicle manufacturing complex on the Los Angeles economy. Environment & Planning27 (6): 877-905.
78.
Wynne, Brian. 1996. SSK’s identity parade: Signing-up, off-and-on. Social Studies of Science26:357-391.
