ABSTRACT
Public participation is ubiquitous in many contemporary democratic societies – used for many purposes, and in many contexts, with particular and growing relevance for policy-making on science and technology issues. However, there is a dearth of evidence as to its qualities and benefits. We contend that the implementation and interpretation of participation faces a number of dilemmas that – together –undermine its successful adoption. In this paper, we identify and discuss six specific dilemmas that – together – may militate against the practice and development of good quality participation in science and technology policy, notably dilemmas of Timing; of Relevance; of Representation; of Evaluation; of Criticism; and of Impact. We theoretically account for these dilemmas and discuss their likely impacts. Finally, we provide some suggestions as to how the participation community might attempt to pre-empt difficulties due to these dilemmas and demonstrate participation effectiveness.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Gene Rowe
Gene Rowe is an independent research consultant and Director of Gene Rowe Evaluations, which he established in 2010. A social/cognitive psychologist, Gene gained his PhD from the Bristol Business School, and - after a variety of research posts - ended up at the Institute of Food Research, Norwich, where he rose to the Head of Consumer Science (before leaving to set up his consultancy). He has worked in a variety of areas, having conducted research into human judgment and decision-making, forecasting, expert knowledge elicitation, social science research methodology, risk analysis/ management/ perception, health expectations, science communication, and public/ stakeholder engagement (in agenda setting, policy-making, etc.). Much of his recent work has focused on the evaluation of engagement processes.
Richard Patrick Watermeyer
Richard Patrick Watermeyer is a Reader in Education and Director of Research in the Department of Education at the University of Bath and a Research Fellow of the International Centre of Higher Education Management (ICHEM). He is a sociologist of education (knowledge, science and expertise) with general interests in education policy, practice and pedagogy. He is specifically engaged with critical sociologies of higher education and a focus on new conceptualizations of academic praxis and the current and future role of the (public) university, particularly in the context of the marketization, globalization and neoliberalization of higher education.