Models of Public Engagement: Nanoscientists’ Understandings of Science–Society Interactions

Burri, Regula Valérie

doi:10.1007/s11569-018-0316-y

Cited by 25 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 shows, each of the three dialogue rounds focused on a slightly different question. Whereas the citizen dialogues centered on letting citizens explore the values, needs, and concerns that are important to them in relation to a specific nanotechnology-application field (i.e., nanomedicine, nanotechnology-enabled brain-machine interfaces, nanotextiles 6 ), both the national and the European multistakeholder dialogues focused more explicitly on the concept of RRI and the notion of public engagement. The latter two forms of dialogue can thus be characterized as engagement events about public engagement in nanotechnology.…”

Section: Core Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For convenience, we will refer to these institutions as "science centers" throughout the rest of the paper. 6 These application fields were chosen in close collaboration with the local science centers themselves, taking into account (1) the national research context, (2) the current public discourse in the country, and (3) the institutions' connections in the field.…”

Section: Role Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the context of our public engagement work, this "change" specifically refers to the democratization of the R&I system. 8 We consider this distinction in the framework particularly relevant because of the pervasive ambiguity about the degree of transformation that is strived for when using RRI and public engagement approaches [6,15].…”

Section: The Role Landscapementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We introduce a general role landscape and outline five distinct roles (engaged academic, deliberative practitioner, change agent, dialogue capacity builder, and project worker) that we-and perspectives [1][2][3][4]. The growing interest in public engagement has been fueled by several converging developments, including (1) public controversies concerning technologies such as genetic modification and nuclear power, (2) a growing interest in transdisciplinary modes of knowledge production, and (3) socioscientific critique on the "knowledge deficit" that is often attributed to laypeople in discussions on science and technology [5,6]. In the last two decades, attempts have been made to move public engagement "upstream" [1,7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Juggling Roles, Experiencing Dilemmas: The Challenges of SSH Scholars in Public Engagement

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The progressive introduction of emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology, has created a true testing ground for public engagement initiatives. Widespread experimentation has taken place with public and stakeholder dialogue and inclusive approaches to research and innovation (R&I) more generally. Against this backdrop, Social Science and Humanities (SSH) scholars have started to manifest themselves differently. They have taken on new roles in the public engagement field, including more practical and policy-oriented ones that seek to actively open the R&I system to wider public scrutiny. With public engagement gaining prominence, there has been a call for increased reflexivity among SSH scholars about their role in this field. In this paper, we study our own roles and stakes as SSH scholars in a European-funded public engagement project on responsible nanotechnology. We introduce a general role landscape and outline five distinct roles (engaged academic, deliberative practitioner, change agent, dialogue capacity builder, and project worker) that we—as SSH scholars—inhabited throughout the project. We discuss the synergistic potential of combining these five roles and elaborate on several tensions within the roles that we needed to navigate. We argue that balancing many roles requires explicit role awareness, reflexivity, and new competencies that have not been examined much in the public engagement literature so far. Our role landscape and exemplification of how it can be used to reflexively study one’s own practices may be a useful starting point for scholars who are seeking to better understand, assess, or communicate about their position in the public engagement field.

show abstract

Section: Core Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Role Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Role Landscapementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Juggling Roles, Experiencing Dilemmas: The Challenges of SSH Scholars in Public Engagement

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Citizen juries, discussion forums, or citizen conferences have been organized to assess the emergence of technological innovations in this field, to debate their potential risks and evaluate regulatory measures [31].…”

Section: Identity At Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemophobia versus the identity of chemists: heroes of chemistry as an effective communication strategy

Chalupa

Nesměrák

2020

Monatsh Chem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decades of chemophobia are taking a high toll on chemistry. As current surveys suggest, people are displaying an irrational desire to live in a world without chemistry, but at the same time are unable to answer trivial chemistry questions. Constant questioning of the importance of chemistry induced by chemophobia leads to a weakening of the identity of chemists and can have negative consequences on the reproduction of chemistry. The need for the support of a positive perception of the chemical profession and an offer of positive examples for self-identification is the result. Everyday communication thus becomes the background on which the determination of the identity of the chemist takes place. The new communication strategy, which we call "heroes of chemistry", aims not only to add a much-needed human touch to chemistry communications, but also to create the conditions for strengthening the identity of the chemist.

show abstract

Public benefit and risk perceptions of nanotechnology development: Psychological and sociological aspects

Kamarulzaman

Lee

Siow

et al. 2020

Technology in Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of Public Engagement: Nanoscientists’ Understandings of Science–Society Interactions

Cited by 25 publications

References 70 publications

Juggling Roles, Experiencing Dilemmas: The Challenges of SSH Scholars in Public Engagement

Juggling Roles, Experiencing Dilemmas: The Challenges of SSH Scholars in Public Engagement

Chemophobia versus the identity of chemists: heroes of chemistry as an effective communication strategy

Public benefit and risk perceptions of nanotechnology development: Psychological and sociological aspects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About