The Many Faces of Participation in Science

Literature Review and Proposal for a Three-Dimensional Framework

  • Philipp Schrögel Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)
  • Alma Kolleck Museum für Naturkunde Berlin

Abstract

Participatory and dialogic formats are the current trend in scientific communities across all disciplines, with movements such as Public Participation, citizen science, Do-It-Yourself-Science, Public Science and many more. While these formats and the names and definitions given to them, are prospering and diversifying, there is no integrative tool to describe and compare different participatory approaches. In particular, several theories and models on participatory science governance and citizen science have been developed but these theories are poorly linked. A review of existing typologies and frameworks in the field reveals that there is no single descriptive framework that covers the normative, epistemological and structural differences within the field while being open enough to describe the great variety of participatory research. We propose a three-dimensional framework, the participatory science cube, which bridges this gap. We discuss the framework’s openness for different forms of participation as well as potential shortcomings and illustrate its application by analysing four case studies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Philipp Schrögel, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)
Institute for German Studies – Department of Science Communication

References

Abelson J, Forest PG, Eyles J, Smith P, Martin E & Gauvin, FP (2003) Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science & Medicine 57: 239–251.

Arandjelovic M et al. (2016) Chimp&See: an online citizen science platform for large-scale, remote video camera trap annotation of chimpanzee behaviour, demography and individual identification (No. e1792v1). PeerJ Preprints.

Arnstein SR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners 35(4): 216-224.

Biegelbauer P & Hansen J (2011) Democratic theory and citizen participation: democracy models in the evaluation of public participation in science and technology. Science and Public Policy 38(8): 589-597.

Bonn A, Richter A, Vohland K, Pettibone L et al. (2016) Green Paper Citizen Science Strategy 2020 for Germany. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), German Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science (MfN), Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research (BBIB), Berlin. Available at: http://www.buergerschaffenwissen.de/sites/default/files/assets/dokumente/gewiss_cs_strategy_englisch_0.pdf (accessed 28.09.2016).

Bonney R, Ballard H, Jordan R, McCallie E, Phillips T, Shirk J & Wilderman CC (2009) Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report, July 2009.

Box GE & Draper NR (1987) Empirical model-building and response surfaces (Vol. 424). New York: Wiley.

Bucchi M & Neresini F (2008) Science and Public Participation. In: Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M & Wajcman J (eds) The handbook of science and technology studies. Cambridge and London: The MIT Press, 449-472.

Chung K & Lounsbury DW (2006) The role of power, process, and relationships in participatory research for statewide HIV/AIDS programming. Social Science & Medicine 63 (2006): 2129–2140.

Corburn, J (2005) Street science: community knowledge and environmental Health. Cambridge & London: The MIT Press.

Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Phillips T & Bonney R (2007) Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society 12(2):11. Available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art11/ (accessed 28.09.2016).

Davies SR (2014) Knowing and Loving: Public Engagement beyond Discourse. Science & Technology Studies 27(3): 90-110.

Decker M & Fleischer T (2012) Participation in ‘big style’: first observations at the German citizens’ dialogue on future technologies. Poiesis & Praxis 9(1-2): 81-99.

Dickinson JL & Bonney R (2012) Overview of Citizen Science. In: Dickinson JL & Bonney R (eds.) Citizen science: Public participation in environmental research. Ithaca and London: Comstock Publishing Associates.

Durant J (1999) Participatory technology assessment and the democratic model of the public understanding of science. Science and Public Policy 26(5): 313-319.

Finke P & Laszlo E (2014) Citizen Science: Das unterschätzte Wissen der Laien. München: Oekom.

Franzoni C & Sauermann H (2014) Crowd science: The organization of scientific research in open collaborative projects. Research Policy 43(1): 1-20.

Fung A (2006) Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public administration review 66(s1): 66-75.

Funtowicz SO & Ravetz JR (1995) Science for the post normal age. In: Westra L & Lemons J (eds) Perspectives on ecological integrity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 146-161.

Goodin RE (2008) Innovating democracy: democratic theory and practice after the deliberative turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hirsch Hadorn G, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Hoffmann-Riem H, Joye D, Pohl C, Wiesmann U & Zemp E (2008) The emergence of transdisciplinarity as a form of research. In: Hirsch Hadorn G et al. (eds) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 19-39.

Hagendijk R & Irwin A (2006) Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe. Minerva 44(2): 167-184.

Haklay M (2013) Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: Overview and typology of participation. In: Sui D, Elwood S & Goodchild M (eds) Crowdsourcing geographic knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 105-122.

Hatch M (2013) The maker movement manifesto: rules for innovation in the new world of crafters, hackers, and tinkerers. New York: McGraw Hill Professional.

Herb U (2016) Citizen Science als Demokratisierung der Wissenschaft?. TELEPOLIS, 27 August. Available at: http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/49/49218/1.html (accessed 18.09.2016).

Irwin A (1995) Citizen science: A study of people, expertise and sustainable development. London and New York: Routledge.

Jasanoff S (2003) Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva 41(3): 223-244.

Joss S & Durant J (1995) Public participation in science: The role of consensus conferences in Europe. London: NMSI Trading Ltd., Science Museum.

Kasemir B, Jäger J, Jaeger CC, Garnder MT (eds) (2003) Public participation in sustainability science: a handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kasperowski D & Brounéus F (2016) The Swedish mass experiments – A way of encouraging scientific citizenship? Journal of Science Communication 15(1) Y01: 1-9.

Lengwiler M (2008) Participatory approaches in science and technology historical origins and current practices in critical perspective. Science, Technology & Human Values 33(2): 186-200.

Leydesdorff L & Ward J (2005) Science shops: a kaleidoscope of science–society collaborations in Europe. Public Understanding of Science 14(4): 353-372.

Lynam, T, De Jong, W., Sheil, D, Kusumanto, T & Evans, K (2007) A review of tools for incorporating community knowledge, preferences, and values into decision-making in natural resources management. Ecology and Society 12(1): 5.

Macey, GP (2003). Community Environmental Policing. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 22(3): 383-414.

Nowotny H, Scott P & Gibbons M (2003) Introduction: Mode 2 Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge. Minerva 41(3): 179-194.

Ornes S (2016) Science and Culture: The value of a good science hack. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113(29): 7928-7929.

Ottinger G (2010) Buckets of resistance: Standards and the effectiveness of citizen science. Science, Technology & Human Values 35(2): 244-270.

Prainsack B (2014) Understanding Participation: The ‘citizen science’ of genetics. In: Prainsack B, Werner-Felmayer G & Schicktanz G (eds) Genetics as Social Practice. Farnham: Ashgate

Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biological conservation 141(10): 2417-2431.

Riesch H & Potter C (2013) Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions. Public Understanding of Science 0(0): 1–14.

Rowe G & Frewer LJ (2000) Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values 25(1): 3-29.

Rowe G & Frewer LJ (2005) A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science, Technology & Human Values 30(2): 251-290.

Shirk JL, Ballard HL, Wilderman CC, Phillips T, Wiggins A, Jordan R, ... & Bonney R (2012). Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society 17(2), 29. Available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol17/iss2/art29/ (accessed 28.09.2016).

Silvertown J (2009) A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24(9): 467-471.

Stirling A (2008) “Opening up” and “closing down” power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology & Human Values 33(2): 262-294.

Stiesy L (1990): 100 Jahre Entomologische Gesellschaft ORION ‒ Berlin. Berlin: Entomologische Gesellschaft ORION ‒ Berlin.

Tippett J, Handley JF & Ravetz J (2007) Meeting the challenges of sustainable development – A conceptual appraisal of a new methodology for participatory ecological planning. Progress in Planning 67: 9–98.

von Unger H (2013) Partizipative Forschung: Einführung in die Forschungspraxis. Wiesbaden: Springer.

Walter-Herrmann J & Büching C (eds) (2014). FabLab: Of machines, makers and inventors. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.

Whyte WFE (1991) Participatory action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Wiggins A & Crowston K (2011) From conservation to crowdsourcing: A typology of citizen science. In: Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii international conference on System Sciences (ed Sprague Jr. RH) Koloa, Kauai, Hawaii, 4-7 January 2011: 1-10. Los Alamitos, CA, Washington, Tokyo: IEEE Computer Society Conference Publishing Services (CPS).

Wiggins A & Crowston K (2012) Goals and tasks: Two typologies of citizen science projects. In: Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (ed Sprague Jr. RH) Maui, Hawaii, 4–7 January 2012: 3426-3435. Los Alamitos, CA, Washington, Tokyo: IEEE Computer Society Conference Publishing Services (CPS).

Wilderman CC (2007) Models of community science: design lessons from the field. In: Citizen Science Toolkit Conference, (eds McEver C, Bonney R, Dickinson J, Kelling S, Rosenberg K & Shirk JL) Ithaka NY, June 20-23 2007. Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY. Available at: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/citscitoolkit/conference/toolkitconference/proceeding-pdfs/Wilderman%202007%20CS%20Conference.pdf (accessed 28.09.2016)

Wilsdon J & Willis R (2004) See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream. London: Demos.

Wohlsen M (2011) Biopunk: DIY scientists hack the software of life. New York: Penguin Group.

Woolley JP, McGowan ML Teare HJ, Coathup V, Fishman JR, Settersten Jr. RA, Sterckx S, Kaye J & Juengst ET (2016) Citizen science or scientific citizenship? Disentangling the uses of public engagement rhetoric in national research initiatives. BMC medical ethics 17:33.

Wright, MT, Roche B, von Unger H, Block M & Gardner B (2010) A call for an international collaboration on participatory research for health. Health Promotion International 25: 115–122.

Published
2019-05-15