Abstract

In recent years the language of public engagement has increasingly infused discus- sions about the science-society relationship. This is particularly evident in Australia, the United Kingdom and Europe in relation to nanotechnologies. Thus far, the discourse of public engage- ment has been largely preoccupied with exploring the mechanisms for 'engaging' 'the public', with single stakeholder-driven events dominating initiatives. Many engagement efforts have re - invented the so-called deficit model of public understanding, whereby 'the problem' to be addressed is 'the public's' assumed 'ignorance' or lack of awareness of the science. In comparison, there has been little reflection on the assumptions and conceptual frameworks that guide stake- holders' policies and actions, including constructions of science and citizenship. If one is to address the lack of opportunities for citizen participation in science policymaking, it is essential to question these assumptions and reveal how they guide and limit thinking and action. This article outlines the diverse conceptions of 'the public' and 'public engagement', reflecting the different values, experiences and positioning of Australian stakeholders within the nanotechnology field. The article seeks to contextualise the discourse of public engagement, highlighting the particular set of conditions and concerns that have shaped its language and practices and the attendant gov- ernmental implications. Finally, it concludes by identifying the kinds of strategies that will be required to advance the democratisation of science and technology in the future.

Highlights

  • In recent years ‘public engagement’ has become a catchphrase in the field of new and emerging technologies in a number of countries

  • We suggest that methods are needed that allow citizens to deliberate on social objectives rather than just scientific, technical and ethical issues that have been the emphasis of public engagement endeavours to date

  • While public engagement in the United Kingdom (UK) has many shortcomings in practice, it has been a leader in many respects in this field, with a number of institutions, including the Royal Society, the Wellcome Trust, non-government organisations (NGOs) and the national government undertaking a diverse range of engagement activities on nanotechnologies, biotechnologies, and other areas of science in recent years

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In recent years ‘public engagement’ has become a catchphrase in the field of new and emerging technologies in a number of countries. Making reference to recent public engagement endeavours and drawing on data from our own study of Australian stakeholders’ views on communication on nanotechnology (Petersen et al 2010), we highlight the various stakeholder articulations of ‘public engagement’, reflecting very different constructions of citizens and the state and their respective roles and responsibilities in the field of science and technology.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.