set-dev international seminar – university of hyderabad march 29, 2011 technological...
TRANSCRIPT
SET-DEV international seminar – University of Hyderabad SET-DEV international seminar – University of Hyderabad March 29, 2011March 29, 2011
TECHNOLOGICAL RESPONSIBILITY
Guidelines for a shared governance of the processes of socialisation of scientific
research and innovation, within an interconnected world
An overview
Dr. Daniele MezzanaLaboratory of Citizenship Sciences (LSC), Italy
These Guidelines are an output complementary to other These Guidelines are an output complementary to other SET-DEV documents. They are based on SET-DEV 3 years SET-DEV documents. They are based on SET-DEV 3 years experience...experience...
Are the result of dialogue and cooperation between representatives of three major scientific cultures of the contemporary world: European, Indian and African.
Therefore can provide some indications about the development of scientific and technological research (STR) on our planet.
Are intended to be a practical contribution on how we can promote effective collective responsibility in science and technology.
In doing so, this text will offer some recommendations on how science, technology and innovation can better integrate into society and be more relevant to society’s needs.
““Socialisation” of scientific research Socialisation” of scientific research and innovationand innovation” ” (or socialisation of (or socialisation of scientific and technological research) scientific and technological research) : : a key concept to be kept in minda key concept to be kept in mind
It refers to the integration between science,
technology, innovation and society (see later....)
Objectives of GuidelinesObjectives of GuidelinesRaising awareness of the importance
of socialisation of STR for the progress of local research systems
Strengthening a collective responsibility for STR
Increasing the capacities of the actors involved in STR policies (from national institutions responsible for science and innovation to civil society organisations, from universities and research centres to private actors, from international and regional organisations to national and local media)
Providing a practical guide on how to increase the socialisation of STR
How to see and use the GuidelinesHow to see and use the Guidelines The Guidelines are the fruit of a tri-lateral
dialogue Africa-India-Europe, and keep the coexistence of different sensibilities and viewpoints
They have no intention of proposing an exhaustive vision of relationship between science, technology and society, always and everywhere
The contribution of Guidelines is to provide a “catalogue” of problems and possible solutions, on the basis of the specific SET-DEV experience
The reader is invited to take from this document what is useful for him/her to better understand the relationship among science, technology, innovation and society, within his/her specific geographical, political, institutional, cultural, social, economic, organisational context.
The sources.....The sources.....The main source of the Guidelines was the documentation produced by SET-DEV partners during the course of their activities, and which was made available to the editorial staff (reports, papers, preparatory notes, etc.) about: ◦ preliminary research in India and Kenya◦Manifestos (India and Africa)◦Pilot programmes (case studies, capacity building, focus groups)◦other seminars and networking activities.
Another source was academic and professional literature on the subject.
The Guidelines development process The Guidelines development process since May 2009...since May 2009...
Setting up by LSC a facility to collect information and documents (May 2009)
Collecting information, comments and suggestions from SET-DEV partners
Several internal notes on Guidelines structure, and feedbacks
Building an editorial board (LSC+ some SET-DEV partners from India, Kenya and Europe)
First draft of GuidelinesFeedbacks from SET-DEV partners and some
reviewers (from Africa, India and Europe)
Final draft (within May 2011)
THE APPROACH
We all need to understand the social embeddedness of S&T
and the co-evolution of science and society
… … in order to engage all social actors in thein order to engage all social actors in the benefits, opportunities and risks of STRbenefits, opportunities and risks of STR
The Guidelines adopt a constructivist approach
about the relationship / integration betweenscience/technology/innovation/society:
this means that all social actors play (or can play) a crucial role in
exercising a social responsibility about science, technology and innovation.
The Guidelines would like to provide specific tools to better play
such a role.
There are at least 8 inter-related areas
in which actors involved in STR “construct” relationships
between science, technology, innovation and society.
One may call them “areas of socialisation of STR”
The 8 areas of socialisation of STRThe 8 areas of socialisation of STRscientific practice (concerning the dynamisms of scientific groups
in the strict sense);scientific mediation (activities to promote the cooperation among
researchers and other actors inside and outside the research bodies);scientific communication (information, dialogue, building a
shared responsibility on STI);evaluation (the activities to ensure accountability in the research world,
designing policies and coordinating the allocation of funds);innovation (interactions between research and the world of production);
governance (the collective decision-making, involving governmental, non-governmental, private, international actors);
gender (considering both women’s scientific careers and the relationship between gender and the content of scientific disciplines);
“substantive” approaches (concerning the revision of the philosophical and cultural foundations of science, the critical vision of Western science, and the protection of local knowledge).
For each area of socialisation of STR
some frames of responsibility (FR),
related practical options (PO),and
lessons learnt (LL)
at national level (India and Kenya)are identified
P PO1, PO2, PO3 …
LESSONS LEARNT INDIA
LESSONS LEARNT KENYA
idem
idem
Area 1Scientifi
cpractice
Area 2Evaluatio
n
Area …x
FR 1
FR2
FR …x
Frames of responsibilityFrames of responsibility
By frame of responsibility we mean a set of risks and problems for STR and its relationship to society, for which it
is essential to take a stand, make a commitment
(at a personal ethical level and as regards the choices of the community),
and especially to act in terms of strategy, policies and concrete actions.
For instance, for the Area 1 (scientific practice) 4 frames of responsibilities are identified:
Contextualisation of research Quality of the researchResearcher’s identityGenerational change
Example – Frames of responsibilityExample – Frames of responsibilityArea 1 – Scientific practice
FR “Contextualisation of research”
RATIONALE: There is a risk of a dangerous split between science/technology and the needs of society:
- the "ivory tower" model of scientific research; - the adoption of imitative research designs uncritically
based on Western research procedures and agendas; - the difficulty of establishing an open relationship
between academics and local communities.
The need to "embed" the research in a given social and cultural context. This can lead to effective dialogue, "learning from people", between researchers and stakeholders at local level.
Practical optionsPractical options
For each of the frames of responsibility
a set of practical options was also identified.
A practical option is a concrete action that can be taken to strengthen science and technology
in its relationship with society.
For instance, for the FR “Contextualisation of research”, 6 practical options are identified:
PO1: Sensitizing researchers towards dialogue with stakeholdersPO2: Promoting meetings and exchanges with civil society organisationsPO3: Joint defining of research objectives with stakeholders PO4: Disseminating participatory methodologies PO5: Sensitizing researchers towards dialogue with disadvantaged social groups PO6: Mapping and enhancing local expertise
Example – practical optionsExample – practical optionsArea 1 – Scientific practice / FR “Contextualisation of research”
PO “Promoting meetings and exchanges with civil society organisations” (excerpts from Guidelines)
To overcome the climate of mutual mistrust that sometimes exists between researchers and civil society organisations, meetings and exchanges of views should be promoted, such as workshops and working groups on specific issues. Some such initiatives were studied and partially tested under SET-DEV both in India and Kenya.
Practices (box)
Under SET-DEV, a number of initiatives were examined involving interactive meeting between researchers and civil society organisations, for example: collaboration between researchers and NGOs to disseminate Methods of Non-Pesticidal Pest Management (NPM) in India; the joint submission of projects for sustainable post-tsunami reconstruction in Tamil Nadu (India); cooperation between research institutions and local NGOs in the fight against food plant pests in Kenya; cooperation between a Kenyan university and grassroots organisations in local sanitation projects in urban areas.
Another exampleAnother exampleArea “Governance”
FR “Dialogue and participation in policy making”
RATIONALE: The risk is that research is governed by technocratic criteria unrelated to the needs of society and dependent on choices made by foreign political and economic actors without or little consideration of the interests of local communities.
The central role of STR in social and economic life increasingly requires the adoption of responsible and shared policies, involving stakeholders such as: politicians, researchers, interest groups, civil society organisations, business organisations, international bodies.
Area “Governance” - FR “Dialogue and participation in policy making”
7 practical options are identified
PO138: Encouraging broader participation in STR in sectors not yet sufficiently open to the public
PO139: Promoting and disseminating national and local maps of STR actors
PO140: Involving scientific communities in setting policies at local level
PO141: Promoting the involvement of private actors in S&T PO142: Involving new generations of young researchers in
S&T decision making PO143: Enhancing the role of young civil servants who are
interested in S&T issues PO144: Involving civil society organizations in decision
making
Example – practical optionExample – practical optionArea “Governance” - FR “Dialogue and participation in policy
making”
PO “Encouraging broader participation in STR in sectors not yet sufficiently open to the public “
As SET-DEV initiatives in India and Kenya have demonstrated, it is important to encourage broad participation of stakeholders in the debate about the purposes, risks and opportunities of technology in some key areas of research (nuclear energy, biotechnology…).
Various tools can be used including information campaigns; seminars to increase awareness of specific targets; creation of networks; portals and web sites; roundtables between policy makers, researchers and stakeholders, etc.
Lessons learntLessons learnt
While frames of responsibility and practical options
(even if formulated in reference to
SET-DEV experiences in India and Africa) may have a general significance
outside these contexts,some specific lessons learnt
were also formulated for the Indian and Kenyan readers.
Area 1 - Scientific practice Area 1 - Scientific practice
Lessons learnt (examples)Lessons learnt (examples)INDIA
Need for an increased interaction (through meetings, forums) between the researchers, stakeholders and the CSOs
Improving the quality of the research (by evolving guidelines, regulatory systems, reducing bureaucratic burdens on researchers, etc.)
Improving the social and economic status of researchers (by attractive pay, perks, subsidised housing, health care, children’s schooling, etc.)
KENYA Fostering a multidisciplinary and participatory
approach to scientific practice Greater equality between local researchers and their
international counterparts
Area 3 - Scientific communication Area 3 - Scientific communication
Lessons learnt (examples)Lessons learnt (examples)INDIA
Enhancing and democratizing the public debate on science and technology
Need for communication on the part of the academia and policy makers to interact with CSOs
Sensitizing young people to the science and technological responsibility
Propagating working tools and meetings for science journalists in newspapers and magazines
KENYA Need for both scientists and non-scientists to build
skills necessary for better understanding between the two groups
Applying innovative and interactive approaches to scientific communication
Area 5 - InnovationArea 5 - Innovation
Lessons learnt (examples)Lessons learnt (examples)INDIA
Better linkages between the world of research and the world of production in specific sectors at any level
Enhancing research and experimentation on sustainable technologies
Supporting small and medium-sized enterprises in promoting innovation
KENYA Popularising the economic benefits of new technologies Building partnership between STR community and the
informal business sector
Area 6 - GovernanceArea 6 - Governance
Lessons learnt (examples)Lessons learnt (examples)INDIA
Enhancing the dialogue and democracy in policy setting (above all for strategic issues: drugs, genetic manipulation, etc.), adopting the principles of plurality of expertises, justice, equity (see Manifesto)
Involving the scientific communities in the policy making through dialogue
KENYA Mainstreaming principles of good governance into
STR processes (effectiveness, sustainability, transparency and accountability, participation and inclusion)
Transparency at the international level (e.g. about research, experimentation and drug testing)
Area 7 - GenderArea 7 - Gender
Lessons learnt (examples)Lessons learnt (examples)INDIA
Supporting women researchers (by services, mentoring, flexible work timings, etc.)
Raising awareness on importance of increasing role of women scientists
KENYA Interaction between gender-sensitised
scientists and secondary school studentsAdopting a gender-sensitive approach in
science, technology, innovation programmes
Area 8 – Substantive approachesArea 8 – Substantive approaches
Lessons learnt (examples)Lessons learnt (examples)
INDIANeed for Indian scientists to focus on
problems that are specific to India
KENYAPromoting research which facilitates the
emergence and formalisation of indigenous knowledge
An appendix is devoted to:An appendix is devoted to:Lessons learnt – Europe, including…Lessons learnt – Europe, including…
The sense and the perspectives of the trilateral dialogue Europe-India-Africa around the relationship science, technology, innovation and society
The importance of two Manifestos for Europe
The trans-cultural approach to the impact of new technologies
The theme of science, technology, innovation in a plural world
The idea of a European Manifesto to be developed
General structure of GuidelinesGeneral structure of GuidelinesIntroductionGeneral summaryFor each of 8 areas of
socialisation of STR:◦frames of responsibility and related
practical options◦lessons learnt for India and Kenya
Appendix: lessons learnt – EuropeBibliography
Some perspectivesSome perspectivesElaborating and adapting Guidelines
themes at the national and regional level, together with Manifestos and other SET-DEV outputs
Putting the socialisation of STR at the core of scientific communication and policy-making
Strenghtening the SET-DEV political, scientific and cultural network
... And all what the afternoon discussion groups will suggest...
