Abstract
Science is often the best and sometimes the only means to address health, environmental, economic and other challenges. Debate with the public about research, its results and possible applications ensures a rational, informed process to find sustainable solutions. However, there is a conundrum at the heart of science communication, outreach activities, public or upstream engagement and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): When is it best to engage with the public about a controversial or emerging field of science; before or after people have become aware of the issue and begun talking about it? The timing has consequences: RRI, for example, relies on early public engagement and debate in order to guide research and applications and to ensure research and innovation align with public needs and values. However, early communication about controversial research raises the risk of creating unfounded hopes and fears. Here, we explore the contours of this conundrum by focusing on synthetic biology. Despite our focus, the issues actually affect all types of science communication and RRI activities. In some fields, such as climate change, the issues have been discussed more openly than in others. We aim to learn from these discussions when trying to answer the question: When is it the right time to responsibly raise awareness about synthetic biology? Social scientists have analysed science communication and public engagement for many years, focusing in particular on constructions of “the public”. They have shown that publics are plural and diverse and often able to offer “lay expertise” on specific issues. This means that a simple communication model that stresses promoting public understanding, acceptance and trust in science is problematic. More recently, social scientists have begun to foster a new approach—called RRI—that encourages public engagement from the beginning of the research process, engagement that is regarded as crucial for making …
Highlights
Social scientists have analysed science communication and public engagement for many years, focusing in particular on constructions of “the public”
In Europe, media reports are mostly focussed on ethical concerns, followed by biosafety and biosecurity matters. This means that in terms of framing, fear dominated over hope. We investigated these trends in a bit more depth, using the news database LexisNexis to search for synthetic biology in “All English Language News”
A s Research and Innovation (RRI) involves assessing commercial and scientific interests together with social, ethical and environmental concerns, how can this be done when there is scarcity of public information and debate about synthetic biology, while at the same time there is surge in industrial research and development? when we further investigated some of the commercial and academic press releases, it became clear that engaging with ethical and social issues is generally regarded as an obstacle to commercial growth, rather than integral to
Summary
Social scientists have analysed science communication and public engagement for many years, focusing in particular on constructions of “the public”. The issue of advocacy never went out of fashion in the context of climate change, where science and politics collide on an almost daily basis, much more so than in synthetic biology.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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
