Beyond engagement exercises: Exploring the U.S. National Citizens' Technology Forum from the bottom-up

Journal of Public Deliberation

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2011, Pages

  Powell, Maria ^a   Delborne, Jason ^b   Colin, Mathilde ^c  

^a Midwest Environmental Justice Organization   (United States)

^b Department of Geology and Geological Engineering   (United States)

^c Avicenn ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

citizen engagement; consensus conference; deliberation; democracy; human enhancement; nanotechnology

Indexed keywords

EID: 80455130166     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Abelson, J., Forest, P. G., Eyles, J., Smith, P., Martin, E., & Gauvin, F. P. (2003). Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science & Medicine, 57:239-251. (Pubitemid 36582667)
2. Babbie, E. (1998). The Practice of Social Research. Wadsworth Publishing Co.: Belmont, CA.
3. Bowman, D. M., & Hodge, G. A. (2007). Nanotechnology and public interest dialogue: Some international observations. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 27:118-132.
4. Burkhalter, S., Gastil, J., & Kellshaw, T. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 12(4):398-422. (Pubitemid 37144495)
5. Chilvers, J. (2008). Deliberating competence: Theoretical and practitioner perspectives on effective participatory appraisal practice. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33:155-184.
6. Cunningham, K. & McKinney, H. (2010). Towards the Recognition and Integration of Action Research and Deliberative Democracy. Journal of Public Deliberation, 6(1), Article 3. http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol6/iss1/art3/ (last accessed Oct. 6 2011)
7. Delborne, J. A., Anderson, A. A., Kleinman, D. L., Colin, M., & Powell, M. (2011) Virtual deliberation? Prospects and challenges for integrating the internet in consensus conferences. Public Understanding of Science, 20(3):367-84.
8. De Walt, K., De Walt, B. R., & Wayland, C. B. (1998). Participant observation. In Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology, H. R. Bernard (Ed.), pp: 259-299. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
9. Einsiedel, E., Jelsoe, E., & Breck, T. (2001). Publics at the technology table: the consensus conference in Denmark, Canada, and Australia. Public Understanding of Science, 10:83-98. (Pubitemid 33625572)
10. Elam, M. & M. Bertilsson (2003). Consuming, engaging and confronting science: The emerging dimensions' of scientific citizenship. European Journal of Social Theory, 6(2):233.
11. Fagotto, E. & Fung, A. (2009). Sustaining Public Engagement: Embedded Deliberation in Local Communities. An Occasional Research Paper from Everyday Democracy and the Kettering Foundation. http://www.everydaydemocracy.org/en/ Resource.136.aspx (last accessed Oct. 6 2011).
12. Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, Experts and the Environment: The Politics of Local Knowledge, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
13. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Friedman, W. (2006). Deliberative democracy and the problem of scope. Journal of Public Deliberation, 2(1), Article 1. http://services.bepress.com/ jpd/vol2/iss1/art1/ (last accessed on Oct. 6 2011).
15. Gastil, J. & Black, L. W. (2008). Public deliberation as the organizing principle of political communication research. Journal of Public Deliberation, 4(1), Article 3. http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol4/iss1/art3/ (last addressed on Oct. 6 2011).
16. Gastil, J., & Dillard, J. P. (1999). The aims, methods, and effects of deliberative civic education through the National Issues Forums. Communication Education, 48:1-14.
17. Gavelin, K., Wilson, R., & Doubleday, R. (2007). Democratic technologies? Final report of the nanotechnology engagement group (NEG). London: Involve. http://www.involve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Democratic- Technologies.pdf (last accessed on Oct. 6 2011).
18. Gilbert, N. & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Goven, J. (2003). Deploying the consensus conference in New Zealand: democracy and de-problematization. Public Understanding of Science, 12:423-440. (Pubitemid 38085381)
20. Grundahl, J. (1995). The Danish consensus conference model. in Public participation in science: The role of consensus conferences in Europe, S. Joss and J. Durant (Eds.), pp. 31-40. London: Science Museum.
21. Guston, David H. (1999). Evaluating the first U. S. Consensus conference: The impact of the citizens' panel on telecommunications and the future of democracy. Science Technology Human Values, 24(4):451-82.
22. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard, Belknap Press.
23. Habermas, J. (1970). Toward a Theory of Communicative Competence. Inquiry, 13(4):360-375.
24. - (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action 1: reason and the rationalization of society. Boston MA: Beacon Press.
25. Hamlett, P. W. (2007). The National Citizens' Technology Forum Handbook, 41 p. (unpublished document)
26. Hamlett, P. W. & Cobb, M. D. (2006). Potential Solutions to Public Deliberation Problems: Structured Deliberations and Polarization Cascades. The Policy Studies Journal, 34(4):629-648. (Pubitemid 44920998)
27. Hamlett, P. W., D. Guston, & Cobb, M. D. (2008). National Citizens' Technology Forum: Nanotechnologies and Human Enhancement, Report #R08-0002 (The Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University). http://cns.asu.edu/files/NCTFSummaryReportFinalFormat08.pdf (last accessed on Oct. 6 2011).
28. Harvey, M. (2009). Drama, Talk, and Emotion. Science, Technology & Human Values, 34(2):139-161.
29. Kadlec, A. & Friedman, W. (2007). Deliberative democracy and the problem of power, Journal of Public Participation, 3(1), Article 8. http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol3/iss1/art8/ (last accessed on Oct. 6 2011).
30. Kleinman, D. L., Delborne, J., Anderson, A. A. (2011) Engaging citizens: The high cost of citizen participation in high technology. Public Understanding of Science 20(2):221-240.
31. Kleinman, D. L., Powell, M., Grice, J., Adrian, J., & Lobes, C. (2007). A toolkit for democratizing science and technology policy: The practical mechanics of organizing a consensus conference. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 27:154-169.
32. Kokotovich, A. (2008). Theorizing public participation and its critique: A case study in nanotechnology policy. A thesis submitted to the faculty of the Graduate school of the University of Minnesota (In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science).
33. Kuran, T., & Sunstein, C. R. (1999). Availability Cascades and Risk Regulation. Stanford Law Review, 51(1):683-768.
34. Kyle, R. & Dodds, S. (2009). Avoiding empty rhetoric: engaging publics in debates about nanotechnologies. Science and Engineering Ethics, 15:81-96.
35. Mansbridge, J., Hartz-Karp, J., Amengual, M., & Gastil, J. (2006). Norms of deliberation: An inductive study. Journal of Public Deliberation, 2 (1). http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol2/iss1/art7/ (last accessed on Oct. 6 2011).
36. Mendelberg, T. (2002). The Deliberative Citizen: Theory and Evidence. In Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation, M. Delli Carpini, L. Huddy & R. Y. Shapiro (Eds.), pp. 151-93. New York: Elsevier Press.
37. Mouffe, C. (1999). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social Research, 66(3):745-758.
38. Nussbaum, M. C. (1995). Emotions and women's capabilities. In Women, Culture and Development, M. C. Nussbaum & J. Glover (Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
39. Philbrick, M. & Barandiaran, J. (2009). The National Citizens' Technology Forum: lessons for the future. Science and Public Policy, 36(5):335-347.
40. Phillips, S. D. & Orsini, M. (2002). Mapping the Links: Citizen Involvement in Policy Processes. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks Discussion Paper. http://www.cprn.org/documents/11418-en.pdf (last accessed, Oct. 4 2011)
41. Potter, J. & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behavior. London: Sage.
42. Powell, M. & Colin, M. (2008). Meaningful citizen engagement in science and technology; What would it really take? Science Communication, 30(1):126-136.
43. - & - (2009). Participatory paradoxes: Facilitating citizen engagement in science and technology from the top-down? Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29:325-342.
44. Powell, M., Colin, M., Kleinman, D., Delborne, J., & Anderson, A. (2011a) Imagining ordinary citizens? Conceptualized and actual participants for deliberations on emerging technologies, Science as Culture, 20(1):37-70.
45. Powell, M. & Kleinman, D. L. (2008) Building citizen capacities for participation in nanotechnology decision-making: the democratic virtues of the consensus conference model. Public Understanding of Science, 17(3):329-348.
46. Powell, M. Powell, J. Xiong, L., Moua, K., Schmitz, J., Olivas, B. Yang, V. (2011b). Invisible People, Invisible Risks: How scientific assessments of environmental health risks overlook minorities-and how community participatory science can make them visible. in Technoscience and Environmental Justice: Expert Cultures in a Grassroots Movement, G. Ottinger & B. Cohen (Eds.), pp 149-178. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
47. Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology and Human Values, 25(1):3-29.
48. Rowe, G., Marsh, R., & Frewer, L. J. (2004). Evaluation of a deliberative conference. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 29(1):88-121. (Pubitemid 38023900)
49. Rowe, G., Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2008). Analysis of a normative framework for evaluating public engagement exercises: reliability, validity and limitations. Public Understanding of Science, 17:419-441.
50. Ryfe, D. M. (2005). Does deliberative democracy work? Annual Review of Political Science, 8:49-71. (Pubitemid 40977447)
51. Sanders, L. M. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25(3 June):347-376.
52. Sunstein, C. R. (2002). Risk and Reason: Safety, Law, and the Environment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
53. - (2005). Laws of Fear: Beyond the Precautionary Principle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54. Toker, C. W. (2005). The deliberative ideal and co-optation in the Georgia Ports Authority's stakeholder evaluation group. in Evaluation Communication Yearbook (Vol. 2), S. Senecah (Eds.), pp. 19-48. Mahwah, NH: Lawrence Erlbaum.
55. Williams, M. S. (2000). The Uneasy Alliance of Group Representation and Deliberative Democracy. in Citizenship in Diverse Societies, W. Kymlicka and W. Norman (Eds.), pp. 124-52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
56. Young, I. M. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. in Democracy and Difference, S. Benhabib (Ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
57. - (2000). Inclusion and Democracy, New York: Oxford University Press.
58. - (2003). "Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy", Political Theory, 29 (5): pp. 670-690;
59. reprinted in Debating Deliberative Democracy (Philosophy, Politics and Society, 7), (2003), James S. Fishkin and Peter Laslett (Eds.), pp 102-120. Boston: Blackwell Publishing.