How to design a participatory process for a consortium of science centres and science museums (based in several European countries) on an emerging issue at the European level.
Contact:
- Simon Joss, Centre for the Study of Democracy, University of Westminster, josss@wmin.ac.uk
- Katherine Ng, Centre for the Study of Democracy, University of Westminster, ngk@wmin.ac.uk
Short description of the case
This case study guides you through the design of a participatory process for a consortium of science centres and science museums across a variety of European national contexts on an emerging issue at the European level. Goal of this process is to enhance dialogue on nanotechnologies and nanosciences in society at the European level.
This case is developed on the basis of an initiative by Citta della Scienza, Naples (a science museum) that was held from 2005 to 2007 and entitled NanoDialogue: enhancing dialogue on nanotechnologies and nanosciences in society at European level.
Training objectives
Participants will learn:
- To take into account the importance of issue framing in the design of a participatory process for an emerging issue
- To consider the communication strategies of creating social dialogue and its implications upon the associated organisation, assessment and subsequent dissemination of outcomes
- To design of a participatory initiative (choice of method, critical implementation points, etc.)
This case is specifically designed for science centres and science museums. It will also be of interest to those who have a general interest in citizen participation within science and technology.
Training method
Participants work in small groups to discuss and design a participatory process within a « real life » context, and also present the results of their debates in plenary sessions. CIPAST members will be facilitating this session and providing assistance to case study participants.
They are introduced to the context of the NanoDialogue case, along with a brief discussion of nanotechnologies and nanosciences (N&N).
Participants will then consider how to achieve the core aims and objectives of the proposed initiative, which are:
- To provide information and raise awareness among the general public on the latest research in nanotechnologies and nanosciences
- To implement social dialogue between the research community, civil society and citizens; with design and use of high quality communication tools and participatory methodologies
- To identify the main issues and preoccupations of these groups concerning nanotechnologies and nanosciences
Case study participants will incorporate factors such as the available budget, the timescale given, and the utilisation of the existing project partners. They will be asked to bear in mind a number of planning steps that may assist the design of their methodology, including issue framing, implementation, and evaluation, and also to explain the rationale of their choices. The final stage of the design involves drafting a press release for the announcement of the launch.
This case requires 5-7 hours: an introduction of 30 minutes to outline and elaborate upon the case; 3-4 hours of collective work in small group; 1-2 hours of presentation and debriefing.
Previous knowledge required
- ID card Nanodialogue
- Some previous knowledge about participatory methodology and European cross-national collaborative project work is desirable.
Guideline on how to work with the case study
1. Read: the ID card NanoDialogue [30.7 kb, pdf]
A. INTRODUCTION
2. Read A1: the PPP Introduction of the programme and the purpose of the case study [481.5 kb, ppt] (don’t forget to read the notes!)
3. Read A2, the working material on NanoDialogue [482.9 kb, pdf]. This material provides an overview of N&N and related issues, and a background description of the NanoDialogue project.
4. Split into groups of 3-5 persons.
It is your task to design a participatory initiative that addresses and incorporates:
- Consideration of nanotechnologies and nanosciences, and the related ethical, legal, social, and economic issues
- Providing information and raise awareness among the general public on the latest research in nanotechnologies and nanosciences
- Facilitation of social dialogue between the research community, civil society and citizens
- Use of high quality communication tools within the design of the process and use of participatory methodologies
- Identification of the main issues and preoccupations of these groups (research community, civil society and citizens) concerning nanotechnologies and nanosciences
- To fully utilise the partner consortium of museums and science centres, along with an academic research institution, and a not-for-profit organisation that represents science and technology centres and museums throughout Europe
- The budget of 850, 000 Euros
- The two year duration of the project
B. ANALYSIS OF THE CONTEXT
5. Analyse the context of the participatory process, including:
- the state-of-the-art of N&N
- requirements for social dialogue and participation
- the nature of the European partner consortium involved
- the budget and time available
Answer the questions on these topics in document B1 [22.7 kb, pdf].
C. DESIGN THE METHOD
6. Plan:
- the participatory design
- the implementation of the participatory initiative
- the knowledge management across the partner consortium
- the incorporation of the communication and dissemination strategy into the methodological framework
Answer the questions on these topics in document C1 [36.2 kb, pdf].
D. EVALUATION AND IMPACT
7. Consider:
- how to integrate an accompanying evaluation into the initiative
- how the impact will be assessed
Answer the questions on these topics in document D1 [22 kb, pdf].
8. Now draft a short press release detailing your proposal.
E. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION
9. Present and explain your participatory design choice in plenary. Characterise the main features of the design, implementation and accompanying evaluation of the NanoDialogue project.
10. Read E1 and learn how the actual NanoDialogue project was carried out [511.5 kb, ppt].
11. Discuss the similarities and differences in the choices made.
F. EVALUATION
12: Please fill in F1: the handout participants impressions [16.3 kb, pdf]: positive and negative about this case workshop
Schedule (based on Procida workshop):
| Start | End | Activity |
|---|---|---|
| 9:00 | 9.20 | Introductory PowerPoint (A) |
| 9.20 | 9.30 | Questions and clarifications |
| 9.30 | Split into groups | |
| 9.30 | 10.00 | Analyse the context (B) |
| 10.00 | 10.45 | Group work: design of the method (C) |
| 10.45 | 11.00 | Break |
| 11.00 | 12.15 | Continue design of the method (C) |
| 12.15 | 12.30 | Evaluation and Impact (D) |
| 12.30 | 13.00 | Draft a press release |
| 13.00 | 13.30 | Presentation of the method in plenary |
| 13.30 | 14.00 | Presentation of the actual NanoDialogue, discussion and evaluation (E&F) |