Public engagement with research: Citizens' views on motivations, barriers and support

Responsible research and innovation (RRI) approaches that have emerged in the past ten years point to the importance of engaging the public in dialogues about research. The different variants of RRI share the notion that societal actors, including citizens, need to work together - that is, engage in two-way communication during the research and innovation process - in order to better align both the process and its outcomes with the values, needs and expectations of society. Yet, sponsors and organizers of dialogues about research often face difficulties in recruiting sufficient numbers of participants or ensuring a sufficient level of diversity of participants. This paper asks what motivates or hinders individual citizens as members of the broader public to participate in such dialogues. It presents empirical findings of the European Union-funded project Promoting Societal Engagement Under the Terms of RRI (PROSO), which aimed to foster public engagement with research for RRI. PROSO used a quasi-experimental, qualitative approach directly involving citizens to address this question. The core of the innovative methodology were focus group discussions with European citizens about hypothetical opportunities to take part in dialogues about research. Three hypothetical scenarios of different dialogue formats (varied by whether they seek to inform the participants, consult or enable deeper collaboration on a scientific issue) were used as stimuli to explore the participants’ willingness (motivations and perceived barriers) to engage with scientific research. Our findings show a preference towards dialogue formats that give citizens a more active role and a greater say in research policy or research funding. They further suggest that those who seek to broaden citizen participation in dialogues about research should consider the role of relevance, impact, trust, legitimacy, knowledge, and time and resources as factors that can motivate or discourage citizens to take part. Based on our findings, we discuss possibilities to promote citizen participation in dialogues about research as part of putting RRI into practice

Sustainable innovation policy advice using a citizen-expert-citizen approach to ‘aspirations’ mapping

Building upon a general conceptual debate about the nature and production of knowledge, this chapter traces the manner in which different norms, visions and experiences are mobilised when framing future sustainability outcomes, with a view to promoting the effective design of strategic public engagement mechanisms. As demonstrated, whereas citizens tend to emphasise the importance of multi-dimensional and holistic development, in which ecological, social and economic components interact in a complex manner, experts focus on the elaboration of narrower and more specific questions and challenges. The normative tension between perspectives is illustrative of the broader need for more inclusive, sustained and continuous cooperation between science and society at different stages of the policy-making and innovation processes. At the same time, it calls for the careful and proactive forging of public engagement methodologies that allow complementary (or indeed diverging) values, norms, and propositions to be acknowledged and put into context, so as to ensure greater accountability among a larger group of participants and societal stakeholders.Non peer reviewe

Sustainable Innovation Policy Advice : Introduction

Two different rationales underpin the work behind the present policy report. The first relates to the necessity of obtaining a critical perspective that can challenge the consistency and usefulness of CASI-F, namely the framework developed during the CASI project to assess and manage sustainable innovation. The second objective is to conceive and propose a set of messages that can drive policy action in the short term towards more efficient sustainable innovation-oriented governance. The sections included in this chapter represent a logical and hierarchical sequence that proceeds from a brief introduction of the CASI project, to the description of the Policy Watch activity (of which this policy report is a key part), and finally to the description of the report’s objectives and structure.Non peer reviewe

Sustainable innovation policy advice : outlooks and key messages

Grounded in theoretical assumptions on evidence-based policy-making and participatory advice research, this chapter presents a critical reflection on and discussion of different advisory activities carried out in the CASI project, namely the assessment of sustainable innovation initiatives, policy developments and citizens’ visions.Non peer reviewe

Policy priorities for climate action, environment, resource efficiency and raw materials

This chapter takes into consideration two distinct processes utilised in CASI to develop new sets of sustainable research and innovation (R&I) agendas. The first process is based on European sustainable innovators’ objectives, as gathered and analysed from more than 500 SI initiatives mapped in CASIPEDIA and led by the quadruple helix of SI stakeholders. The second draws on citizens’ preferences, as identified in two rounds (citizens-experts-citizens) of participatory workshops carried out in 12 European countries. Some mismatches are identified and the chapter reveals that gaps exist between what is currently taking place in research and innovation, and what citizens wish for. Furthermore, the analysis demonstrates the potential of cross-disciplinary approaches to make cross-comparisons of data from multiple and diverse sources.Non peer reviewe

Strategic Outline of Public Engagement in the Development of Sustainability Research Policies and Programmes : Findings of the CASI Project

CASI’s major objective is to develop a methodological framework for assessing sustainable innovation and managing multidisciplinary solutions through public engagement in the research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) system. This paper provides insights and input for the last cycle of strategic programming of Horizon 2020 (2018 – 2020) and demonstrates the added value of public participation when looking for solutions to societal challenges and sustainability concerns. To that end, it presents some of the major results and insights gained from the implementation of two particular engagement approaches within CASI, namely citizen panels in 12 EU countries and an online survey with relevant experts and stakeholders

Sustainable innovation policy advice using a policy watch approach to ‘policies’ mapping

This chapter illustrates via a piloted application how one of the five steps of the CASI Framework (CASI-F), which is designed for the management and assessment of sustainable innovation, can be applied to monitor policy developments. To this end, we reviewed 96 policy recommendations from CASI policy briefs concerning the Europe 2020 strategy, with a special focus on resource efficiency. The results show that CASI-F can provide a useful additional tool for analysing and reflecting on the outcomes of a policy watch. In particular, CASI-F provides opportunities to review how policy recommendations relate to policy levels and types of stakeholder.Non peer reviewe