Two decades ago, John Urry and I outlined a tentative agenda for the sociology of the environment. Science was seen as implicated not simply as a central and necessary authority in providing solutions to our most perilous environmental problems but also in contributing to those same problems. Yet, what we underestimated at the time was the critical role of governance in science and technology and its role in modulating environment-society relations. For if we are to understand the differential contribution of science and technology to environmental change, we need to understand better the impact of traditional forms of science governance and the potentials of alternative configurations. In this chapter I discuss four paradigms through which science and technology have been governed, situating each in historical context. Starting with the ubiquitous ‘linear model of innovation’ I locate its origins and provenance, how it came to be replaced, at least in part, through a ‘grand challenges’ paradigm of science policy and funding, how this paradigm in turn has been subjected to rigorous analytical critique by a co-production model of science and society, and how this model, in part, is being put into practice through a framework of responsible research and innovation.