Dialogue and science: Innovation in policy-making and the discourse of public engagement in the UK

Science and Public Policy

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 113-126

  Pieczka, Magda ^a   Escobar, Oliver ^b  

^a QUEEN MARGARET UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dialogue; Practitioners; Public engagement; Science and society policy; Science communication

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; CRISIS MANAGEMENT; INNOVATION; MODELING; POLICY MAKING;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84882978612     PISSN: 03023427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/scipol/scs073     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Anderson, R., Baxter, L. and Cissna, K., eds, (2004) Dialogue. Theorizing Difference in Communication Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2. Barber, B. (2003) Strong Democracy. Participatory Politics for a New Age, 20th anniversary edn. London: University of California Press.
3. Barke, R. (1986) Science, Technology and Public Policy. Washington, DC: QC Press.
4. Barnes, M., Newman, J. and Sullivan, H. (2007) Power, Participation and Political Renewal. Case Studies in Public Participation. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
5. Bauer, M. and Gregory, J. (2007) 'From journalism to corporate communication in post-war Britain'. In: Bauer, M. and Bucchi, M. (eds) Journalism, Science and Society, pp. 33-51. London: Routledge.
6. Bauer, M. and Jensen, P. (2011) 'The mobilization of scientists for public engagement', Public Understanding of Science, 20: 3-11.
7. Blakemore, C. (2002) 'From the "public understanding of science" to scientists understanding of the public'. In: Marcus, S. J. (ed.) Neuroethics: Mapping the Field, Conference Proceedings, pp. 211-23. New York: Dana Press.
8. Bohman, J. (1996) Public Deliberation. Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Burchell, K., Franklin, S. and Holden, K. (2009) Public culture as professional science. Final report of ScoPE project. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.
10. Cabinet Office. (2002) Viewfinder: A policy maker's guide to public involvement, accessed 5 January 2010.
11. Cheng, D., Claessens, M., Gascoigne, T., Metcalfe, J. et al. (2008) Communicating Science in Social Contexts: New Models, New Practices. New York: Springer.
12. Clarke, R. (2002) New Democratic Processes. Better Decisions, Stronger Democracy. London: Institute for Public Policy Research/EMPHASIS.
13. Communities and Local Government. (2008) Communities in control: Real people, real power, accessed 10 August 2010.
14. Committee to Review the Contribution of Scientists and Engineers to the Public Understanding of Science, Engineering and Technology. (1995) Report, accessed 15 October 2009.
15. Cornwall, A. (2008) Democratising Engagement. What the UK can Learn from International Experience. London: Demos.
16. Council for Science and Technology. (2005) Policy through dialogue: informing policies based on science and technology, accessed 10 December 2009.
17. Department for Communities and Local Government. (2002) Guidance on enhancing public participation - full report, accessed 11 March 2010.
18. Department of Health. (2004) The NHS improvement plan. Putting people at the heart of public services, accessed 11 March 2010.
19. Department of Health. (2008) Real involvement. Working with people to improve health services, accessed 11 March 2010.
20. Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills. (2008) A vision for Science and Society, [Consultation] accessed 11 March 2010.
21. Department of Trade and Industry. (2002) Boost for science and innovation, [Press release, 15 July 2002] accessed 10 December 2010.
22. Dogan, M., ed., (2005) Political Mistrust and the Discrediting of Politicians. Leiden: The Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill.
23. Dryzek, J. (2002) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford, UK: OUP.
24. Dryzek, J. (2005) The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, 2nd edn. Oxford, UK: OUP.
25. Dryzek, J. (2010) Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford, UK: OUP.
26. Escobar, O. (2009) 'The dialogic turn: Dialogue for deliberation'. In-Spire Journal of Law, Politics and Societies, 4/2: 42-70.
27. Escobar, O. (2011) Public dialogue and deliberation. A communication perspective for public engagement practitioners. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh Beltane - UK Beacons for Public Engagement, accessed 1 June 2012.
28. Escobar, O. (2012) 'The politics of dialogue', People & Science, June, P. 2, accessed 1 July 2012.
29. Fairclough, N. and Wodak, R. (1997) 'Critical discourse analysis'. In: van Dijk, T. (ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction, pp. 258-84. London: Sage.
30. Fischer, F. (2000) Citizens, Experts and the Environment. The Politics of Local Knowledge. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
31. Fischer, F. (2003) Reframing Public Policy. Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. New York: OUP.
32. Fischer, F. (2009) Democracy and Expertise. Reorienting Public Policy. New York: OUP.
33. Fung, A. (2008) 'Democratising the policy process'. In: Moran, M., Reinand, K. and Goodin, R. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, pp. 669-85. New York: OUP.
34. Gastil, J. (2008) Political Communication and Deliberation, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. Hajer, M. and Wagenaar, H., eds, (2003) Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. New York: CUP.
36. Hargreaves, I. and Ferguson, G. (2000) Who's misunderstanding whom?, [Report]. London: Economic and Social Research Council.
37. Hilton Associates. (2009) Certificate programme in public participation, accessed March 2010.
38. Holliman, R., Whitelegg, E., Scanlon, E., Smidt, S and Thomas, J., eds, (2009) Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age: Implications for Public Engagement and Popular Media. Oxford, UK: OUP.
39. Horst, M. (2008) 'In search of dialogue: staging science communication in consensus conferences'. In: Cheng, D., Claessens, M., Gascoigne, T., Metcalfe, J. et al. (eds)Communicating Science in Social Contexts: New Models, New Practices, pp. 259-74. New York: Springer.
40. House of Lords. (2000) Science and society, accessed 10 December 2010.
41. IAP2. (2006) Planning for effective participation. Student manual. Thornton, CO: International Association for Public Participation.
42. Innes, J. E. and Booher, D. E. (2010) Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. New York: Routledge.
43. Involve. (2005) People and participation. How to put citizens at the heart of decision-making, accessed 11 March 2010.
44. Irwin, A. (2006) 'The politics of talk: Coming to terms with the "new" scientific governance', Social Studies of Science, 36: 299-320.
45. Irwin, A. (2009) 'Moving forward or in circles? Science communication and scientific governance in an age of innovation'. In: Holliman, R., Whitelegg, E., Scanlon, E., Smidt, S. and Thomas, J. (eds) Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age: Implications for Public Engagement and Popular Media, pp. 3-17. Oxford, UK: OUP.
46. Lengwiler, M. (2008) 'Participatory approaches in science and technology: historical origins and current practices in critical perspective'. Science, Technology and Human Values, 33: 186-99.
47. Lord Sainsbury. (October 2007) The Race to the Top: A Review of Government's Science and Innovation Policies. London: HMSO.
48. Mutz, D. (2007) Hearing the Other Side. Deliberative Versus Participatory Democracy. New York: CUP.
49. Neal, H., Tobin, L. and McCormick, J. (2008) Beyond Sputnik: U.S. Science Policy in the 21st Century. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
50. New Economics Foundation. (1998) Participation works! 21 techniques of community participation for the 21st century, accessed 12 March 2010.
51. Nielsen, K. (2010) 'More than "mountain guides" of science: a questionnaire survey of professional science communicators in Denmark', Journal of Science Communication, 9/2: 1-11.
52. OECD. (2001) Citizens as partners. Information, consultation and participation in policy-making, accessed 13 March 2010.
53. OECD. (2003) Open government. Fostering dialogue with civil society, accessed 13 March 2010.
54. OECD. (2008) Mind the gap: Fostering open and inclusive policy making, accessed 13 March 2010.
55. Pidgeon, N. and Rogers-Hayden, T. (2007) 'Opening up nanotechnology dialogue with the publics: Risk communication or "upstream engagement"?', Health Risk and Society, 9: 191-210.
56. Pieczka, M. (2002) 'Public relations expertise deconstructed'. Media, Culture and Society, 24: 301-23.
57. Pieczka, M. and Escobar, O. (2010) 'The engagers: Professionalization of science public engagement in Scotland', paper presented at the Science and the Public 2010 conference, held 3-4 July 2010, Imperial College, London.
58. POST. (2001) Open channels: Public dialogue in science and technology, Report No. 153, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology accessed 15 December 2009.
59. POST. (2002) Public dialogue on science and technology, Postnote 192, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology accessed 15 December 2009.
60. Rayner, S. (2003) 'Democracy in the age of assessment: Reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision making', Science and Public Policy, 30: 163-71.
61. Research Councils UK. (2002) Dialogue with the public: practical guidelines, Report commissioned by Research Councils UK and the Office of Science and Technology from People Science & Policy Ltd and Taylor Nelson Sofres.
62. Roberts, G. (2002) SET for success: the supply of people with science, technology engineering and mathematical skills, [Report, April 2002] London: HM Treasury accessed 10 December 2010.
63. Rogers-Hayden, T. and Pidgeon, N. (2007) 'Moving engagement "upstream"? Nanotechnologies and the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering's inquiry', Public Understanding of Science, 16: 345-64.
64. Rowe, G., Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J. and Pidgeon, N. (2005) 'Difficulties in evaluating public engagement initiatives: reflections on an evaluation of the UK GM Nation? Public debate about transgenic crops', Public Understanding of Science, 14: 331-52.
65. Royal Society. (1985) Public Understanding of Science. London: Royal Society.
66. Ryfe, D. (2002) 'The practice of deliberative democracy: A study of 16 deliberative organizations', Political Communication, 19: 359-77.
67. Science for All Expert Group. (2010) Report and action plan from the Science for All Expert Group, accessed 10 March 2010.
68. Science and Trust Expert Group. (2010) Starting a national conversation about good science, [Report] accessed 3 April 2010.
69. Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
70. Scottish Government. (2009) Community: Scottish community empowerment action plan, accessed 5 January 2010.
71. Smith, G. (2005) Beyond the ballot. 57 Democratic innovations from around the world, accessed 11 March 2010.
72. Smith, G. (2009) Democratic Innovations. Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. New York: CUP.
73. Spano, S. J. (2001) Public Dialogue and Participatory Democracy. The Cupertino Community Project. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
74. Start, D. (2010) Ethical dimensions in Sciencewise. A review of public perceptions of ethical issues from the Sciencewise dialogues, accessed 10 March 2010.
75. Stilgoe, J. and Wilsdon, J. (2009) In: Holliman, R., Whitelegg, E., Scanlon, E., Smidt, S. and Thomas, J. (eds) , 'The new politics of public engagement with science', in Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age: Implications for Public Engagement and Popular Media, pp. 18-34. Oxford, UK: OUP.
76. Warburton, D., Wilson, R. and Rainbow, E. (2006) Making a difference: A guide to evaluating public participation in central government, accessed 5 January 2010.
77. Wilsdon, J., Wynne, B. and Stilgoe, J. (2005) The Public Value of Science. London: Demos.
78. Warren, M. E. and Pearse, H., eds, (2008) Designing Deliberative Democracy. The British Columbia Citizens' Assembly. Cambridge, UK: CUP.
79. Young, I. (2002) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford, UK: OUP.