Table 1 Modes of knowledge production in the post-genomics era

Historically prevailed since the origin of modern thought associated with the Enlightenment and the rise of positivism more than four centuries ago - accompanied by a firm belief in science as 'special', 'a thing apart', 'value-neutral' and invariably an objective human activity seeking a 'singular truth'

A recent challenge to knowledge in 'mode 1' - in recognition that uncertainty and 'unknown unknowns' are ever present in science:

Even the research questions and study designs posed by scientists (not only the outcome and output of science) have unchecked assumptions and embedded value systems at play, that is, science is not a value-neutral or special activity to be placed on an 'untouchable pedestal'

Recognized particularly in scientific fields with vast uncertainties such as global warming, climate change and nanotechnology

Produced by experts based on a linear and positivist 'science push' model of innovation

'Co-produced' by both experts and non-experts/non-professionals such as citizen scientists, various publics and end-users of scientific innovation; 'push-and-pull' model of innovation

Modus operandi is 'single-scientist single-project'

Modus operandi is 'massively collaborative open science'

Assumes that knowledge is value-neutral and is not influenced by human values, politics or social systems in which science is embedded

Envisions a deterministic innovation trajectory once the 'truth' and allegedly objective facts are established

Recognizes the 'social construction' and politics of scientific knowledge and claims made on scientific evidence

Envisions multiple possible (multiplex) future(s) for an innovation trajectory

Citizens or innovation users may have considerations well beyond evidence to adopt an innovation, or may want to take part in the actual production and choice of the evidence on a scientific discovery

Sites of knowledge production are confined (or cloistered) to academia or expert communities

Distributed science: geographically and institutionally, with multiple disciplinary lenses

Occurs in institutions or 'locales' that have ceased to fit a classic category as either 'public' or 'private'

Typified by boundary organizations and 'knowledge brokers' between different knowledge communities, whether expert or lay

Uncertainty, if it exists at all, is an accident of science

Recognizes the need to make decisions about science, technology and innovation in the face of uncertainty

Narrow peer-review of science, technology and innovation, and primarily by expert communities

Robust 'extended peer review' including experts as well as public engagement and tacit/locally situated knowledge of various innovation actors beyond academia

Involvement of non-professionals, if permitted, is limited to a discourse on 'product uptake' or 'lack of education of publics'

Non-professionals influence science, technology and innovation at an upstream 'design' or 'research question formulation' stage: that is, in segments of scientific trajectory hitherto cloistered and not permitted to be shaped by non-experts, publics or non-scientists