Abstract
Public participation and engagement in decision-making regarding science and technology (‘PP&E’) is an increasingly common practice. But what is known of whether PP&E achieves its goals? Surprisingly, little research evaluates PP&E. We put forth three reasons why PP&E advocates and practitioners should take evaluation seriously: the absence of evaluation causes PP&E's advocacy to fail a minimal burden-of-proof standard; PP&E's costs are greater than they appear; and these costs may be disproportionately borne by the already-disadvantaged. Evaluating PP&E would require identifying PP&E's objectives and assessing its success in meeting them. To this end we survey scholarship advocating PP&E and identify three sets of objectives: substantively improving decision-making, deontologically fulfilling widely-held norms, and politically redistributing power away from techno-scientific elites. While there is some ad hoc evidence of progress toward these goals, we find no robust evaluation of PP&E. We offer four recommendations that might assist in evaluating PP&E more thoroughly.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 2129543 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-24 |
| Number of pages | 24 |
| Journal | Journal of Responsible Innovation |
| Volume | 10 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 10 Nov 2022 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2023 |
Bibliographical note
Copyright the Author(s) 2022. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.Keywords
- public engagement
- Science and Technology Studies
- decision-making
- objectives
- public participation
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'If deliberation is the answer, what is the question? Objectives and evaluation of public participation and engagement in science and technology'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver