Science and democracy II Aims and bias in science communication Adriana Valente CNR-IRPPS Via dei Taurini, 19 - Roma Napoli, giugno 2003

Public understanding of science - meanings Understanding of science literacy Science popularization divulgation Science perception awareness Participation - decision making Riflexivity- pluridirectional communication

Public understanding of science - dimensions Instrumental A certain praxis Looking for suppoprt, pretending democracy Cultural Rapporto Bodmer, 1985 Science discoveries “profundly influence the way we think about ourselves” DemocraticRapporto Bodmer, 1985 “Public opinion is a major influence in the decision-making process. It is therefore important that individual citizens, As decision-makers, recognise and understand the scientific aspects of the public issues” Economic RapportoWolfendale, 1995 Young people in scientific careers

Italian government guidelines 2002 The society should support further investments for researach only if is able to verify the potential outcomes in terms of new chances for social and productive development. Must be an incentive to innovate and qualificate products A dialectic relationship between who produces and who consumes must be established Eurobarometer 55.2: Even if it does not yeld immediate benefits, scientific research helps knowledge to progress and is necessary and ought to be supported by the government (75% inclined to agree)

Public understanding of science – Initiatives close to Public Participation Models Referendum Public hearings – cicli di presentazioni Public opinion surveys - Sondaggi d’opinione Negotiated rule making - Commissioni di lavoro integrate Consensus conferences –gruppi rappresentativi Citizen panel – tra gruppi rappresentativi di una realtà locale Citizen committee – piccoli gruppi – sponsor - interazione con industrie Focus group – piccoli gruppi con discussione libera- peer conversation

Science became too big to be understood by the general public The general public is illiterate and must be educated Higher understanding = Much support to science and technology activities “deficit model” Scientific literacy as a prerequisite for democratic participation or an informed public tend to be more supportive

Blunt instruments for exploring the range of attitudes toward public policy in a complex society May be used to construct public opinion in a way that legitimates the commercialisation of S&T applications without necessarily enabling effective public debate Oriented toward consumers rather than citizenship concerns Constrain, rather than open up, public discourse on the range of important issuesraised by S&T Limits of public opinion surveys Not clear to realise why a certain answer has been given No possible to understand small groups or active minorities points of view No interaction Risk of stereotyping

British-US surveys on Public understanding of science Centered on: Misures of interest and informedness about S& T (repeated in nowadays surveys: eg: interest in sport, politics, medical discoveries, films, invention and technologies, scientific discoveries) Measures of understanding of processes of scientific enquiry (eg: what does it mean to study something scientifically? Theory construction, experimental method) Measures of scientific knowledge (eg:natural vitamins are better for you than laboratory-made ones)

Ordinary tomatoes do not contain genes, while genetically modified tomatoes do If a person eats a genetically modified fruit, their genes could be modified as a result Genetically modified animals are always larger than ordinary ones Some questions inside biotechnology Eurobarometers and other surveys in biotechnology (eg: Poster)

The engaged public of Europe Awareness, behaviours, knowledge Have talked about frequently or occasionally Would take part in public discussion or hearing Would watch a tv programme or read an article Number of applications heard Number of correct answert o knowledge quiz Male, better educated, white collar workers, urban dwellers, younger than 55

More supportive: Those with higher engagement are more likely to judge applications be useful, morally acceptable and to agree that they should be encouraged The integrated public of Europe The judgment of risk is only marginally influenced by the level of engagement - For the engaged people the risks are apparent, but in the context of perceptions of greater usefulness and moral acceptability, such risks are tollerated

I become confused when I hear conflicting views of science and technology I don’t know what to think when I hear new stories about what we should and should not eat Other questions related to european interest in S&T

Public understanding of science - project Cnr - British Council mixed: discussion groups + conference and public debate Aims for the groups involved: Research objectives: Allow groups to have an active role during the conference Foster group debate, reflextion on science values, interest for the particular scientific subject Ogm, Elettrosmog Verify science perception Verify the extensibility of questionnaires based on the qualitative aspectsof science values

Three items on the sociopolitical embeddedness of science: 1. The trustworthiness of science A. nowadays it seems that anyone who has the money required, may purchase research on nearly any topic with the conclusion they want B. I am confident that researchers and other experts do not allow the resukts of theri research to be influenced by outsiders 2. The precautionary principle A. If it is uncertain what consequences the use of new, unknown technologies will have for humans and the environment, one should be restrictive in permitting their use B. It is wrong to put strong restrictions on the use of new technology as long as it is not scientifically proved that it will cause extensive damage to humans and the environment

3. Science in politics A. In politics, values and attitudes are at least as important as science B. Science is the best basis for policy Speed of the scientific development: A. I agree with a slower development of the applications of scientific and technological discoveries, compensated by a wide reflection on the results and verification of foreseeable risks B. I agree with a faster development of the applications of scientific and technological discoveries, not being possible to act in the full awareness of all possible risks

Conclusions Education School education - not only more science, but also which values are considered Extra curricula and lifelong learning - critical thinking Pus initiatives Different tools of Pus Not only surveys, also work with groups Science view Scientist is not an external observer Plurality of scientific theories and theories on science