Esta investigación está motivada por dos observaciones. En primer lugar, la constatación de que, a pesar de la multiplicación de directivas, leyes e iniciativas, la biodiversidad continúa disminuyendo. En segundo lugar, el reconocimiento de que la biodiversidad articula consideraciones sociales, políticas y científicas. En este marco, la pérdida de biodiversidad requiere de un análisis teórico en tres dimensiones, teniendo en cuenta las cuestiones sociales y éticas (¿cuál es el valor de la biodiversidad?), políticas (¿cuáles son los mecanismos legítimos para proteger la biodiversidad?) y epistemológicas (¿cómo podemos entender la biodiversidad?). Esta tesis presenta una conceptualización de la biodiversidad teniendo en cuenta estos tres niveles. Se discute cómo podemos mejorar la gobernanza de la biodiversidad desde estas tres perspectivas, poniendo así en relieve las bases sociales, políticas y científicas que la humanidad necesita entender y apoyar si quiere tratar de forma efectiva la cuestión de la protección de la biodiversidad. Para responder a esta pregunta, he enfocado mi investigación en las interfaces entre los actores clave de la investigación europea en biodiversidad. Adopto un punto de vista normativo según el cual las investigaciones que incluyen a las partes interesadas son por definición más ‘sociales’. En este contexto, los objectivos de esta tesis son: (i) pasar de un enfoque antropocéntrico basado en las necesidades humanas hacia otro más global y ecosistémico, (ii) poner de relieve las perspectivas que reconocen los procesos politicos de gobernanza de abajo a arriba, (iii) avanzar hacia procesos poliédricos y multidireccionales de producción y transferencia de conocimientos, y (iv) convertir las tensiones y desafios relacionados con la investigación intercultural e interdisciplinaria en oportunidades. Para cumplir estos objetivos, la tesis se apoya en cuatro estudios que valoran críticamente (i) la extensión del Modelo de Desarrollo de Escala Humana hacia lo no-humano como parte del análisis de los conflictos ambientales en el sur de Europa, (ii) dos mecanismos de gobernanza: la participación de los actores no gubernamentales y la producción de escenarios para la planificación ambiental en Europa occidental, (iii) los niveles y formas de involucramiento de los participantes en los proyectos europeos de investigación en biodiversidad (FP6) y el impacto de un enfoque más participativo, y (iv) los retos y oportunidades que surgen cuando nueve estudiantes de Doctorado escriben sus tesis a partir de sus proyectos de investigación interdisciplinarios (GoverNat). Para mejorar la gobernanza de la biodiversidad, propongo una visión holistica de las necesidades humanas y no humanas, reconociendo el valor intrínseco del mundo de los seres vivos (la dimensión social del concepto de biodiversidad, capítulo 1); fortalecer la vida comunitaria presente y futura promoviendo los procesos de toma de decisión colectivos de abajo a arriba (dimensión política del concepto de biodiversidad, capítulo 2); involucrar y compartir las experiencias de las partes interesadas claves, creando redes locales para la co-construcción de un conocimiento común (dimensión científica del concepto de biodiversidad, capítulo 3); y generar las condiciones para permitir la comunicación interdisciplinaria (capitulo 4). Esta tesis ofrece argumentos y herramientas para justificar la protección de la biodiversidad en sus dimensiones social, política y científicas, en un contexto interdisciplinario. Tambièn alimenta el debate sobre el diseño de las políticas públicas. A partir de ahora, necesitamos apoyar un enfoque integrador de la gobernanza basado en las necesidades fundamentales y en el cual el público esté involucrado. Esto permetirá una reflexión inclusiva, permanente pero dinámica sobre las propuestas futuras de políticas ambientales. / This research is underpinned by two observations: despite man-made directives, laws and initiatives, biodiversity is still shrinking; and the very concept of biodiversity combines societal, political and scientific considerations. The challenge of biodiversity loss therefore requires us to consider a three-layered theoretical framework that contains social and ethical (what are the values of biodiversity?), political (what are the legitimate mechanisms by which biodiversity can be protected?) and epistemological questions (how can we understand biodiversity?). In this thesis I develop this three-layered understanding of biodiversity and of the general issue of how we may best improve biodiversity governance from these three viewpoints in order to highlight the social, political and scientific foundations that humanity must understand and support if it is to address the issue of biodiversity protection in an effective way. To respond to this question, I focus on science-stakeholders interfaces in the field of European biodiversity research. I adopt a normative standpoint in which research that includes stakeholders was by definition more ‘social’, integrating human needs and the impact of human activity as fundamentals that should be considered if we are to meet the environmental challenges of the present and the future. In this context, the objectives of this thesis are (i) to shift from an anthropocentric human needs-based approach to a more global and ecosystemic one, (ii) to highlight perspectives that acknowledge the redistribution of state functions towards non-state, and bottom up environmental governance process, (iii) to shift toward multi-faceted, multi-directional process of knowledge production and transfer, and (iv) to turn the tensions and challenges related to interdisciplinary and intercultural research for sustainable development into opportunities. To reach these objectives, the thesis builds on four case studies that cover a critical assessment of (i) the extension of the Human-scale Development model to non-humans in analysing environmental conflict in South Europe, (ii) two mechanisms of governance: the participation of non-state actors and scenario-building for environmental planning in Western Europe, (iii) the level and modalities of stakeholder engagement in EU-funded FP6 biodiversity research projects and the impact of a more participatory approach, and (iv) the challenges and opportunities that arise when nine PhD students set out to write a doctoral dissertation within an interdisciplinary research project (GoverNat). To improve biodiversity governance, I therefore propose a holistic view of human and non-human needs, recognizing the intrinsic value of the living world (i.e. the social dimension of the concept of biodiversity, chapter 1); strengthen community life present and future, encouraging bottom-to-top collective decision-making (i.e. political dimension of the concept of biodiversity, chapter 2); involve and share experiences of key stakeholders, creating local networks for the co-construction of common knowledge (i.e. scientific dimension of the concept of biodiversity, chapter 3); and enable interdisciplinary communication and networks that require time and patience (chapter 4). This thesis offers arguments and tools to justify the protection of biodiversity in its social, political and scientific dimensions, and therefore also in an interdisciplinary context. It also feeds the debate on sustainable public policy-making. From now on, we need to support an integrative approach to governance in which the public are involved based on fundamental needs. This would enable an inclusive, permanent but dynamic reflexion on future environmental policy proposals.

Dispersive soils are prevalent in many areas of South Africa and the presence of these soils has not only posed a problem in earth dam construction but has led to problems with a number of road projects. The use of dispersive soils in roadway embankments and structures can lead to serious engineering problems if the soils are not accurately identified before use and appropriate mitigation measures taken. Although the causes and consequences of soil dispersion are well understood, the consistent and positive identification of dispersive soils still remains a problem. Many identification methods have been proposed but none has been completely successful. The current tests used for identification include the pinhole, double hydrometer, crumb and chemical tests, which are generally used in combination to obtain the most reliable outcome. These laboratory tests, however, have not always been entirely consistent, either when used in combination or individually, and it is possible that the reason lies in the actual testing procedures. Recent investigations have shown that in many cases the identification and classification problems appear to be related to inconsistencies in the test methods and testing protocols. This has been highlighted recently at various conferences and presentations in South Africa, with a recommendation that the problem be investigated fully. The main objective of this project was thus to carry out a detailed investigation into the current methods used for the testing and identification of dispersive soils. The test methods were thoroughly analysed and shortcomings identified. The differences in results and interpretation resulting from different test techniques are examined and solutions to overcome the problems proposed. A further objective of this study is the assessment of the interpretation of results obtained from dispersive soil chemical analysis. A pilot study was first carried out, which recognized deficiencies in the identification process resulting from problems with the test methods. The pilot study allowed for the identification of these shortcomings in the test methods and their modification. The modified methods were used in the full study to obtain more consistent and reliable results. The study found the pinhole test as well as the Gerber and Harmse (1987) ESP versus CEC chart to be highly unreliable. The double hydrometer and crumb tests are good indicators of dispersivity if carried out accurately and repeatably using a standard test method. The chemical analysis of the soils should be carried out using the standard methods employed by the Soil Science Society of South Africa. Final rating systems were also found to be unreliable since they put a great deal of weight on the poorly reproducible pinhole test. Emphasis is thus put on the test methods being as simple and unambiguous as possible to promote repeatability and reproducibility of the results. Recommendations are finally made proposing a suite of tests as well as a decision process which should be followed when faced with a potentially dispersive soil. This investigation was aimed solely at the evaluation of test protocols and not the suitability or specification of limits for any rating systems. This should now be assessed using the standard test methods proposed in this thesis. / Dissertation (MSc)--University of Pretoria, 2013. / gm2014 / Geology / unrestricted

Las interacciones entre los agentes del sistema de innovación son una pieza clave para el fomento del intercambio de conocimiento, los procesos de aprendizaje y el proceso innovador. El análisis de las interacciones entre universidades y organismos públicos de investigación (ciencia) y los agentes del entorno social (sociedad) ha recibido una gran atención en la comunidad científica, entre otras razones, porque los resultados de estas interacciones pueden tener implicaciones en el diseño de las políticas de ciencia e innovación y en la gestión de la organización. En esta tesis se analizan las interacciones entre los investigadores del área de ciencias sociales y humanidades (CCSSHH) y los agentes sociales, dado que es un colectivo que ha sido escasamente estudiado desde esta perspectiva y presenta características específicas respecto a otros ámbitos científicos. Los tres estudios que componen la tesis abordan aspectos diferentes del tema objeto de estudio y se basan en datos empíricos obtenidos mediante encuestas y entrevistas realizadas en el Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC). El primer estudio pretende averiguar si la utilidad del conocimiento producido en las CCSSHH es menor que en las STEM (acrónimo inglés para ciencia, tecnología, ingeniería y matemáticas), tal como los enfoques de las políticas científicas al uso parecen presuponer al establecer medidas basadas en indicadores difíciles de aplicar a este colectivo (licencias de patentes, contratos de I+D con empresas, creación de spin off). El análisis empírico realizado muestra que los resultados de las investigaciones en CCSSHH no son menos útiles que los de las STEM porque, en ambos casos, hay agentes sociales interesados en ellos. Sin embargo, se aprecia que el tipo de mecanismo de colaboración varía entre áreas del conocimiento, al igual que el tipo de agente social con el cual los investigadores interactúan. Las empresas predominan entre los agentes sociales con los cuales colaboran los investigadores de las STEM mientras que los de CCSSHH colaboran con un grupo más variado de agentes sociales (i.e. administraciones, organizaciones no gubernamentales, etc.). El segundo estudio explora en qué medida los grupos de investigación del área de CCSSHH se relacionan con una variedad de agentes sociales mediante cauces no formalizados. Para ello, se realizan dos análisis complementarios (cuantitativo y cualitativo). Los resultados obtenidos ponen de manifiesto que la mayoría de las relaciones no se formalizan institucionalmente, lo cual significa que la institución no las identifica, registra o valora. Sin embargo, la participación en este tipo de colaboraciones informales, que no tienen necesariamente una contrapartida económica, resulta atractiva por su coste relativamente bajo (en términos económicos y de tiempo), por la ausencia de condiciones restrictivas (p. ej. derechos de propiedad, confidencialidad) y por la existencia de beneficios intangibles para el investigador. El tercer estudio analiza en qué medida los grupos de investigación de CCSSHH interactúan con su entorno mediante diferentes actividades de transferencia de conocimiento (TC) ¿consultoría, investigación contratada, investigación conjunta, actividades de formación e intercambio de personal¿ e identifica los determinantes de cada una de ellas. Los resultados indican que las actividades de TC más frecuentes son la consultoría y la investigación contratada, mientras que el intercambio de personal representa una actividad marginal entre las analizadas. El estudio de los factores que determinan la participación en estas actividades de TC muestra que considerar el potencial uso social de los resultados desde el principio aumenta la participación de los grupos de investigación en todas las actividades de TC analizadas. En conjunto, los tres estudios permiten concluir que la investigación en CCSSHH produce conocimiento y resultados que son de interés para la sociedad. Sin embargo, se diferencian de otras áreas científicas en los mecanismos de interacción predominantes y en la variedad de agentes sociales con los que interactúan. Estas conclusiones pueden tener utilidad práctica para el diseño de políticas destinadas a fomentar el amplio conjunto de interacciones identificadas, para la mejora de las prácticas de gestión y para tratar de evaluar las citadas interacciones mediante indicadores capaces de recoger el amplio espectro de mecanismos identificados en esta tesis. / Interactions among agents in the innovation system are critical for the promotion of knowledge exchange, learning processes and the innovation process. The analysis of interactions between universities or public research organisations (science) and social agents (society) has received great attention in the scientific community because, among other reasons, the results of these interactions can have implications for the design of science and innovation policies and organisation management. This thesis analyses the interactions between researchers in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) and social agents. The SSH community is a collective that has been little studied from this perspective and presents particular characteristics as compared to other scientific fields. The three studies included in the thesis address different aspects of the topic and are based on empirical data obtained through surveys and interviews conducted in the Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC). The first study explores whether the knowledge produced by the SSH is less useful than that produced in STEM fields (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), as science policy seems to presume when establishing measures based on indicators (patent licenses, R&D contracts with companies, creating spin off) that are difficult to apply to the SSH community. The empirical analysis shows that SSH research outputs are no less useful than those from STEM because, in both cases, there are social agents interested in them. However, the preferred type of collaborative mechanism varies across fields, as does the type of agent with whom researchers interact. Firms are the prevailing type of agent collaborating with STEM researchers whilst SSH researchers collaborate with a varied group of social agents (i.e. government, NGOs, etc.). The second study explores the extent to which SSH research groups engage with a variety of social agents through non¿formalized collaborations. To do this, two complementary analyses (quantitative and qualitative) are conducted. Results show that most of the collaborations are not institutionally formalized, which means that the research organisation does not identify, record or value them. However, engagement in these informal collaborations, that do not necessarily have an economic counterpart, are attractive due to the relatively low cost (in time and economic terms) of many such activities, the absence of restrictive conditions (e.g. IPR, confidentiality) and other intangible benefits accruing to the researcher. The third study examines the extent to which SSH research groups interact with social agents through different knowledge transfer (KT) activities ¿consultancy, contract research, joint research, training and personnel mobility¿ and identifies the determinants of each. Results show that the most frequent KT activities are consultancy and contract research, while personnel exchange is a marginal activity among those analysed. The study of the factors determining the engagement in these activities shows that consideration of the social uses of the research outputs from the beginning enhances research groups¿ engagement in all the knowledge transfer activities analysed. Overall, the three studies support the conclusion that SSH research produces knowledge and outputs that are of interest to society. However, differences from other scientific fields are found in terms of the prevalent type of interaction mechanisms used and the variety of social agents with whom interactions are established. These findings may have practical utility for the design of policies aimed at encouraging and enhancing the range of interactions, for improving managerial practices and for the assessment of these interactions through indicators able to capture the type of interactions identified in this thesis. / Olmos Peñuela, J. (2013). Science-Society interactions in the social sciences and humanities:empirical studies of the Spanish Council for Scientific Research [Tesis doctoral]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/31653 / TESIS / Premios Extraordinarios de tesis doctorales

L'eau est un besoin vital pour l'Homme et chaque société se doit de la gérer au mieux pour subvenir à ce besoin élémentaire aujourd'hui et dans l'avenir. Les changements climatiques en cours et en particulier le réchauffement climatique influencent fortement les hydrosystèmes et les activités économiques de montagne forçant ces territoires à s'adapter à ces nouvelles conditions. Les choix de développement socio-économiques ont également une importance prépondérante dans l'émergence ou non de pénuries d'eau.Au cours de cette thèse un modèle couplant représentations des ressources naturelles et des activités socio-économiques a été construit. Il permet d'explorer à la fois les impacts sur la disponibilité des ressources en eau, des changements climatiques et des choix socio-économiques pour un territoire de montagne à différents horizons temporels. Toutes les combinaisons de scénarios climatiques et socio-économiques peuvent être expérimentées dans le modèle.La station de ski de Megève (France) a servi de terrain d'application pour le développement du modèle hydro-anthropique. Ce modèle devant servir comme aide à la décision pour la mise en place de politiques d'adaptation, la délicate question du transfert de connaissances entre Science et Société est interrogée. Via l'insertion du modèle scientifique développé dans des Serious-Games une proposition d'interface est réalisée. A travers le projet C3-Alps qui a financé cette thèse, d'autres transferts de connaissances pour l'adaptation aux changements climatiques dans les Alpes ont également été réalisés. / Water is a vital need for Human and each society have to manage it at best to meet this basic need today and in the future.Current climatic changes and especially global warming strongly impact hydrosystems and economical activities of mountainous areas, forcing these territories to adapt to these new conditions. Socio-economic development choices have also a great importance in water shortages occurrence. In this thesis a model coupling representations of water resources and and socio-economic activities was built.It allows to explore both climate change impacts and socio-economic choices impacts on water resources availability in a mountain territories at different time scales. All combinations of climate change and socio economic choices scenarios are testable.The Megève ski resort station in France was used to develop and apply the hydro-anthropic model. The latter must contribute, as a decision support tool, to climate change adaptation policies developpement. Therefore, the tricky question of knowledge transfer between Science and Society is addressed in this thesis. The scientific model developped was introduced in Serious-Games as an interface proposal. Through the C3-Alps projet which financed this thesis, others knowledge tranfers for climate change adapation in the Alps were also addressed.

Esta tese trata, de forma ampla, da relação ciência e sociedade. Especificamente procura compreender o processo de construção do sistema biotecnológico em face do contexto ao qual está relacionado. A argumentação teórica estrutura-se em torno de questões levantadas pelos estudos sociais da ciência e tecnologia, e tem como marco teórico a teoria dos sistemas sociais de Niklas Luhmann, que parte da diferença sistema/entorno para compreender a relação ciência e sociedade. A questão levantada refere-se à estrutura de reprodução da ciência contemporânea e sua relação com o entorno. A hipótese argumenta que a estrutura do sistema biotecnológico sofreu uma mudança, da reprodução baseada na "verdade" à reprodução baseada no "funcionamento". Esta última forma de reprodução emerge em função das perturbações do entorno da ciência, principalmente em função do contexto caracterizado por exigências tecnológicas. Vinculadas a tais exigências estão ainda exigências de aplicação, legalidade, lucratividade, segurança, inovação. A pesquisa utilizou entrevista semi-estruturada com líderes de grupos de pesquisa em biotecnologia em seis estados da federação, e pesquisa documental, como métodos de coleta de dados, e utilizou técnicas qualitativas de análise, especificamente, a análise de conteúdo temática. De maneira mais específica, a investigação localiza-se na periferia do sistema global de ciência e tecnologia, e apresenta como a diferenciação centro/periferia também incide na reprodução do sistema biotecnológico. Para tanto, constrói-se o conceito de regime de produção de conhecimento, um regime de perturbações recíprocas entre sistemas, limitado pelas configurações institucionais dos Estados nacionais. Tal regime, no Brasil, foi caracterizado pelos sistemas do direito, da economia, da política e da ciência, e as perturbações dos três primeiros na biotecnologia é o que se investiga nesta pesquisa. Conclui-se que a pesquisa biotecnológica produz um outro tipo de verdade, a saber, a verdade eficaz. / This thesis deals with the relationship between science and society. It particularly seeks to understand the process of construction of biotechnology and its context. Beyond this, it searches to link biotechnology research to the global society and to the specific context of peripheral science The theoretical argument is structured around issues raised by social studies of science and technology, and uses the theoretical framework of the theory of social systems of Niklas Luhmann, who considered the difference system / environment to understand the relationship between science and society. The main question raised refers to the structure of the reproduction of contemporary science and its relation with the environment. Therefore, our hypothesis argues that the structure of the biotechnology has changed from a reproduction based on "truth" to a reproduction based on "operation". The latter form of reproduction emerges in the light of disturbances around the science, especialy in a context characterized by technological requirements. Besides theses, there are requirements for application, legality, profitability, safety and innovation. This research was conducted using semi-structured interviews with leaders of biotechnology research groups from six brazilian states. Besides, a documentary research was conducted and a thematic content analysis was performed. Particularly, this research is located at the periphery of the global system of science and technology, and presents how the differentiation center/periphery also affects the reproductive system of biotechnology. In this sense, we construct the concept of knowledge production regime, a regime of mutual disturbances between systems, which is limited by the institutional configurations of national states. In Brazil, such regime was characterized by systems of law, economy, policy and science. This research has focused on the disturbance of the first three on biotechnology. It is concluded that research biotechnology produces another kind of truth, namely truth effectively.

Esta tese trata, de forma ampla, da relação ciência e sociedade. Especificamente procura compreender o processo de construção do sistema biotecnológico em face do contexto ao qual está relacionado. A argumentação teórica estrutura-se em torno de questões levantadas pelos estudos sociais da ciência e tecnologia, e tem como marco teórico a teoria dos sistemas sociais de Niklas Luhmann, que parte da diferença sistema/entorno para compreender a relação ciência e sociedade. A questão levantada refere-se à estrutura de reprodução da ciência contemporânea e sua relação com o entorno. A hipótese argumenta que a estrutura do sistema biotecnológico sofreu uma mudança, da reprodução baseada na "verdade" à reprodução baseada no "funcionamento". Esta última forma de reprodução emerge em função das perturbações do entorno da ciência, principalmente em função do contexto caracterizado por exigências tecnológicas. Vinculadas a tais exigências estão ainda exigências de aplicação, legalidade, lucratividade, segurança, inovação. A pesquisa utilizou entrevista semi-estruturada com líderes de grupos de pesquisa em biotecnologia em seis estados da federação, e pesquisa documental, como métodos de coleta de dados, e utilizou técnicas qualitativas de análise, especificamente, a análise de conteúdo temática. De maneira mais específica, a investigação localiza-se na periferia do sistema global de ciência e tecnologia, e apresenta como a diferenciação centro/periferia também incide na reprodução do sistema biotecnológico. Para tanto, constrói-se o conceito de regime de produção de conhecimento, um regime de perturbações recíprocas entre sistemas, limitado pelas configurações institucionais dos Estados nacionais. Tal regime, no Brasil, foi caracterizado pelos sistemas do direito, da economia, da política e da ciência, e as perturbações dos três primeiros na biotecnologia é o que se investiga nesta pesquisa. Conclui-se que a pesquisa biotecnológica produz um outro tipo de verdade, a saber, a verdade eficaz. / This thesis deals with the relationship between science and society. It particularly seeks to understand the process of construction of biotechnology and its context. Beyond this, it searches to link biotechnology research to the global society and to the specific context of peripheral science The theoretical argument is structured around issues raised by social studies of science and technology, and uses the theoretical framework of the theory of social systems of Niklas Luhmann, who considered the difference system / environment to understand the relationship between science and society. The main question raised refers to the structure of the reproduction of contemporary science and its relation with the environment. Therefore, our hypothesis argues that the structure of the biotechnology has changed from a reproduction based on "truth" to a reproduction based on "operation". The latter form of reproduction emerges in the light of disturbances around the science, especialy in a context characterized by technological requirements. Besides theses, there are requirements for application, legality, profitability, safety and innovation. This research was conducted using semi-structured interviews with leaders of biotechnology research groups from six brazilian states. Besides, a documentary research was conducted and a thematic content analysis was performed. Particularly, this research is located at the periphery of the global system of science and technology, and presents how the differentiation center/periphery also affects the reproductive system of biotechnology. In this sense, we construct the concept of knowledge production regime, a regime of mutual disturbances between systems, which is limited by the institutional configurations of national states. In Brazil, such regime was characterized by systems of law, economy, policy and science. This research has focused on the disturbance of the first three on biotechnology. It is concluded that research biotechnology produces another kind of truth, namely truth effectively.

Esta tese trata, de forma ampla, da relação ciência e sociedade. Especificamente procura compreender o processo de construção do sistema biotecnológico em face do contexto ao qual está relacionado. A argumentação teórica estrutura-se em torno de questões levantadas pelos estudos sociais da ciência e tecnologia, e tem como marco teórico a teoria dos sistemas sociais de Niklas Luhmann, que parte da diferença sistema/entorno para compreender a relação ciência e sociedade. A questão levantada refere-se à estrutura de reprodução da ciência contemporânea e sua relação com o entorno. A hipótese argumenta que a estrutura do sistema biotecnológico sofreu uma mudança, da reprodução baseada na "verdade" à reprodução baseada no "funcionamento". Esta última forma de reprodução emerge em função das perturbações do entorno da ciência, principalmente em função do contexto caracterizado por exigências tecnológicas. Vinculadas a tais exigências estão ainda exigências de aplicação, legalidade, lucratividade, segurança, inovação. A pesquisa utilizou entrevista semi-estruturada com líderes de grupos de pesquisa em biotecnologia em seis estados da federação, e pesquisa documental, como métodos de coleta de dados, e utilizou técnicas qualitativas de análise, especificamente, a análise de conteúdo temática. De maneira mais específica, a investigação localiza-se na periferia do sistema global de ciência e tecnologia, e apresenta como a diferenciação centro/periferia também incide na reprodução do sistema biotecnológico. Para tanto, constrói-se o conceito de regime de produção de conhecimento, um regime de perturbações recíprocas entre sistemas, limitado pelas configurações institucionais dos Estados nacionais. Tal regime, no Brasil, foi caracterizado pelos sistemas do direito, da economia, da política e da ciência, e as perturbações dos três primeiros na biotecnologia é o que se investiga nesta pesquisa. Conclui-se que a pesquisa biotecnológica produz um outro tipo de verdade, a saber, a verdade eficaz. / This thesis deals with the relationship between science and society. It particularly seeks to understand the process of construction of biotechnology and its context. Beyond this, it searches to link biotechnology research to the global society and to the specific context of peripheral science The theoretical argument is structured around issues raised by social studies of science and technology, and uses the theoretical framework of the theory of social systems of Niklas Luhmann, who considered the difference system / environment to understand the relationship between science and society. The main question raised refers to the structure of the reproduction of contemporary science and its relation with the environment. Therefore, our hypothesis argues that the structure of the biotechnology has changed from a reproduction based on "truth" to a reproduction based on "operation". The latter form of reproduction emerges in the light of disturbances around the science, especialy in a context characterized by technological requirements. Besides theses, there are requirements for application, legality, profitability, safety and innovation. This research was conducted using semi-structured interviews with leaders of biotechnology research groups from six brazilian states. Besides, a documentary research was conducted and a thematic content analysis was performed. Particularly, this research is located at the periphery of the global system of science and technology, and presents how the differentiation center/periphery also affects the reproductive system of biotechnology. In this sense, we construct the concept of knowledge production regime, a regime of mutual disturbances between systems, which is limited by the institutional configurations of national states. In Brazil, such regime was characterized by systems of law, economy, policy and science. This research has focused on the disturbance of the first three on biotechnology. It is concluded that research biotechnology produces another kind of truth, namely truth effectively.