Transcript Online platform to support research projects’ PE efforts

Pilotointi vastuullisen tutkimuksen ja
innovaatioprosessien välineenä
Timo Aarrevaara, Janne Wikström, Maria Pietilä
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
1
Dynamic governance (DG)
In this framework DG refers to dynamic interactions between
scholars, citizens, industry and government as an exploratory,
inductive approach in governance
The critical point is a presence or absence of dynamics
(Gulbrandsen 2014)
Evaluation criteria are based on the concepts of anticipation,
reflexivity and transdisciplinarity
Valtio-tieteellinen tiedekunta / Henkilön nimi /
Esityksen nimi
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
2
Piloting in the framework of
dynamic governance
The PE2020 piloting and the testing of public engagement tools
in the framework of dynamic governance
In doing this we learn to know more how research organisations
may support and strengthen public engagement
We will evaluate the feasibility of using the tools to understand
the relevance of contextual factors in designing public
engagement processes
The focus is on research programmes closely linked to the
Horizon 2020 challenges
Public engagement may be classified as public communication,
public activism, public consultation, public deliberation or
public participation
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
3
Engagement framework: The
timing of engagement
Upstream engagement refers to dialogue and deliberation amongst affected
parties about a potentially controversial technological issue at an early stage of the
research and development process and in advance of significant applications or
social controversy (Rogers-Hayden & Pidgeon 2007, 346).
Benefits: the public is engaged in influencing the direction that research and
innovation take; upstream engagement may uncover power relations a technology
embodies and the balance between corporate and civil society interests and control
(Rogers-Hayden & Pidgeon 2007, 357); differences in opinion are tackled before the actual RDI
process; mutual benefits of science-society interaction – scientists learn from the
public and the public learn from scientists (Rogers-Hayden & Pidgeon 2007).
Risks: no one may feel compelled to participate at an early stage (Escobar 2013).
Valtio-tieteellinen tiedekunta / Henkilön nimi /
Esityksen nimi
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
4
Engagement framework: The
timing of engagement
Downstream engagement occurs late in the research and development process
(Rogers-Hayden & Pidgeon 2007, 346); focuses on how RDI impacts society.
Risks of downstream engagement: public engagement may become tokenistic
(public engagement itself has few impacts) (Escobar 2013, Rogers-Hayden & Pidgeon 2007),
polarisation of opinions in controversial issues (Rogers-Hayden & Pidgeon 2007).
Benefits of downstream engagement: may increase the relevance and utilisation of
evaluation findings and recommendations, increase the ownership and commitment
by stakeholders to the intervention, and reduce risks of project failure (Jackson 1999).
And in between up- and downstream: midstream
Valtio-tieteellinen tiedekunta / Henkilön nimi /
Esityksen nimi
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
5
Engagement framework:
Initiative angle of engagement
Top-down public engagement is usually initiated by the sponsors, such as
governmental or regulatory agencies, by professional Science in Society
practitioners, universities or higher education institutions, industry or civil society
organisations (Mačiukaitė-Žvinienė et al. 2014, 24)
Deliberative engagement is following the conditions defined in the FP7 “Vademecum
paper”: The process makes a difference, is transparent, has integrity, is tailored to the
circumstances, involves the right number and type of people, treats participants with
respect, gives priority to participants’ discussions, and is reviewed and evaluated to
improve practice and its participants are kept informed.
Bottom-up public engagement is typically initiated by citizens/public
representatives.
Valtio-tieteellinen tiedekunta / Henkilön nimi /
Esityksen nimi
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
6
Empowering young scientists
working on Baltic Sea research
•
•
•
•
Objective: to support the empowerment of junior scientists to
have a voice in traditionally hierarchic academic
environment; to support young scientists in communicating
about their research with stakeholders and citizens by using
online tools and through face-to-face interaction
Context: the joint Baltic Sea research and development
programme BONUS
Midstream: engagement may affect research agenda
development (upstream), focus on post-production phase of
research and the impacts of research within the society
(downstream)
Bottom-up: young researchers as active independent
knowledge producers and communicators; breaks down
traditional hierarchies of research
Valtio-tieteellinen tiedekunta / Henkilön nimi /
Esityksen nimi
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
7
Global change living lab
•
•
•
•
Objective: to deliberate on the possibilities to support and
strengthen multi- and interdisciplinary, multi-actor research
collaboration in a living lab (esp. in co-designing research
questions and projects) related to solving societal
challenges
Context: Finnish Global Change living lab, which is
coordinated by Future Earth Finland
Upstream: focus on co-creating research questions and
joint projects, creating upstream visions of research
priorities in collaboration with societal actors (researchers,
business, public sector, civil society); engagement occurs at
an early stage of the research and development process
Deliberative: aspires after a mutual understanding of
stakeholder and researcher needs and viewpoints;
stakeholder-driven co-creation; utilises invited spaces for
participation instead of being spontaneous participation
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
8
JPI on demographic change:
More Years, Better Lives
Societal interaction plan (SIP) and Societal Advisory Board
(SOAB) in research on demographic change
Deliberative: a European Union joint programming initiative based
on planning and lobbying from non-governmental organisations
and citizen organisations all over Europe.
Midstream: the SOAB is engaged in the formulation and
implementation of evaluation criteria of the SIPs used by
national funders of the JPI’s research activities.
Valtio-tieteellinen tiedekunta / Henkilön nimi /
Esityksen nimi
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
9
Engagement framework
Initiative
angle of
engagement
(X)
The timing of
engagement
(Y)
bottom-up
deliberative
top-down
downstream
midstream
upstream
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
10
Engagement framework
Initiative
angle of
engagement
(X)
The timing of
engagement
(Y)
bottom-up
deliberative
top-down
downstream
midstream
Empowering
young
scientists
working on
Baltic Sea
research
upstream
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
11
Engagement framework
Initiative
angle of
engagement
(X)
The timing of
engagement
(Y)
bottom-up
deliberative
top-down
downstream
midstream
upstream
Empowering
young
scientists
working on
Baltic Sea
research
Global Change
Living lab
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
12
Engagement framework
Initiative
angle of
engagement
(X)
The timing of
engagement
(Y)
bottom-up
deliberative
Empowering
young
scientists
working on
Baltic Sea
research
Societal
interaction plan
in research on
demographic
change
top-down
downstream
midstream
upstream
Global Change
Living lab
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20.7.2015
13