The incident of Scanzano Jonico, in Italy's Basilicata region, has been something more than a lesson for those who handle the relationships between science and society. During November and December 2003 in this small southern Italian town a theory has been proven false. According to this theory, in the modern world, the best way to solve the problems put before society by science and technology would be for the experts to discuss them behind closed doors.
n June, the 23rd of last year, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published its Draft Report on the Environment, a report on environmental quality. The EPA is an autonomous federal agency known for its reliability on environmental studies and safeguards. Its Draft Report is considered by Science, the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the nation’s most scientifically reliable analysis on environmental quality. The latest Draft Report makes no reference whatsoever to the changes in global climate.
In the last few years, a continuous series of food alerts have caught the attention of the media and the public in Europe. First, eggs and pork contaminated with dioxins; then, "mad cow" disease, while, all along in the background, a battle against genetically modified plants has been in progress. These food alerts have had complex repercussions on the perception of risks associated with food production. Experts have often been divided over these issues, and the uncertainty of scientific data has been indicated on more than one occasion as one of the factors that influence risk perception
In recent weeks, Britain’s Better Regulation Task Force report on scientific research regulation asked the Government to evaluate the risks associated with the development of Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies. The Government was also asked to prove its implementation of a specific policy to protect human, animal and environmental safety, were it to be threatened by the development of this emerging field of knowledge. These requests may sound rather alarming. However, objectively speaking, the precautionary attitude of the Better Regulation Task Force does not differ greatly from that of the U
AAAS describes public engagement with science as intentional, meaningful interactions that provide opportunities for mutual learning between scientists and members of the public. Through the Alan I. Leshner Leadership Institute for Public Engagement with Science, AAAS empowers scientists and engineers to practice high-impact public engagement by fostering leaders who advocate for critical dialogue between scientists and the public and lead change to enable their communities, institutions, and others to support public engagement. This report, with additional work on understanding mechanisms for
This white paper discusses how out-of-school providers can inspire more underrepresented youth to become the innovators and problem-solvers of tomorrow. Boys & Girls Clubs of America convened key stakeholders from higher education, government, corporations and nonprofit organizations at the STEM Great Think, the first national thought leadership forum to combine innovation and creativity with STEM programming in the out-of-school time environment. The purpose of the STEM Great Think was to develop a plan for establishing strategic partnerships that advance STEM education during out-of-school
Despite new governmental initiatives aiming to engage the general public in policymaking related to nuclear energy, little is known about how expert stakeholders involved in the decision-making process perceive such activity. This study examines how a series of social, cognitive and communication factors influences expert stakeholders’ attitudes toward public participation in policy decisions related to nuclear energy. Specifically, using data from a survey of 557 experts identified through content analyses of public meeting records, we find that among those perceiving public opinion as being
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Nan LiLeona Yi-Fan SuXuan LiangDominique BrossardDietram Scheufele
Scientific debates in modern societies often blur the lines between the science that is being debated and the political, moral, and legal implications that come with its societal applications. This manuscript traces the origins of this phenomenon to professional norms within the scientific discipline and to the nature and complexities of modern science and offers an expanded model of science communication that takes into account the political contexts in which science communication takes place. In a second step, it explores what we know from empirical work in political communication, public
A public event series, “Ecohumanities for Cities in Crisis,” will bring humanities scholars and the public together in Miami, FL to discuss the tension between humans and nature over hundreds of years. Miami is on the verge of an environmental crisis from a warming planet and rising seas. As the region grapples with policy and science issues, humanities scholars have a unique role to play. The project will frame humanistic discussion about urban environments, risk, and resilience. The centerpiece is a public forum in March 2016 which includes a plenary of scholars from diverse humanities disciplines, a walking tour, and a panel on diversity and justice in environmental advocacy. There will be five subsequent public programs through the Fall 2016, an on online archive of all events, professional development activities for high school teachers, a graduate public environmental history course, and a curated museum exhibit.
The field of informal science learning and communication is comprised of many sectors—after school programs, science center exhibitions and programs, television and film, print and new media, to name just a few. Each of these is understood to make unique contributions, present unique opportunities, and require unique support. Science Live began with the observation that it is time to similarly acknowledge the practice of live public science events.
Public science events are live, in-person programs designed to engage publics with science in a social context that is at least as meaningful as
Chemistry plays a critical role in daily life, impacting areas such as medicine and health, consumer products, energy production, the ecosystem, and many other areas. Communicating about chemistry in informal environments has the potential to raise public interest and understanding of chemistry around the world. However, the chemistry community lacks a cohesive, evidence-based guide for designing effective communication activities. This report is organized into two sections. Part A: The Evidence Base for Enhanced Communication summarizes evidence from communications, informal learning, and
This special report describes NSF INCLUDES (Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science), a comprehensive initiative to enhance U.S. leadership in science and engineering discovery and innovation by proactively seeking and effectively developing science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) talent from all sectors and groups in our society. By facilitating partnerships, communication and cooperation, NSF aims to build on and scale up what works in broadening participation programs to reach underserved populations