This paper discusses a framework to assess the quality of participatory methods (e.g. Consensus C... more This paper discusses a framework to assess the quality of participatory methods (e.g. Consensus Conference, Interactive Backcasting, Policy Delphi) to facilitate participatory assessments on complex and controversial issues. To be able to structure a complex or controversial problem, knowledge should be produced. This means that any knowledge, indifferent whose knowledge, should be communicated and understood. This requires articulation, confrontation and evaluation of (rival) points of view, and hence, an open dialogue. Methods have been developed to address mechanisms that obstruct an open dialogue. We refer to these mechanisms as biases. A bias is a distortion in the evaluation of another participant's input in the dialogue. We present an evaluation framework that is based on three biases. The bias of source concerns all distortions in the evaluation of another person's input that occur as a consequence of the (perceived) characteristics of that person. The bias of phrasi...
The introduction of new energy technologies may lead to public resistance and contestation. It is... more The introduction of new energy technologies may lead to public resistance and contestation. It is often argued that this phenomenon is caused by an inadequate inclusion of relevant public values in the design of technology. In this paper we examine the applicability of the value sensitive design (VSD) approach. While VSD was primarily introduced for incorporating values in technological design, our focus in this paper is expanded towards the design of the institutions surrounding these technologies, as well as the design of stakeholder participation. One important methodological challenge of VSD is to identify the relevant values related to new technological developments. In this paper, we argue that the public debate can form a rich source from which to retrieve the values at stake. To demonstrate this, we have examined the arguments used in the public debate regarding the exploration and exploitation of shale gas in the Netherlands. We identified two important sets of the underlyi...
... 2009 Eefje Cuppen, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. ... Methodological rigor is needed to make sur... more ... 2009 Eefje Cuppen, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. ... Methodological rigor is needed to make sure that divergent perspectives are included in a dialogue and used for learning about the problem at hand, and to make sure that the effect of dia-logue can be evaluated. ...
A transition to a bio-based economy will affect society and requires collective action from a bro... more A transition to a bio-based economy will affect society and requires collective action from a broad range of stakeholders. This includes the public, who are largely unaware of this transition. For meaningful public engagement people's emotional viewpoints play an important role. However, what the public's emotions about the transition are and how they can be taken into account is underexposed in public engagement literature and practice. This article aims to unravel the public's emotional views of the bio-based economy as a starting point for public engagement. Using Q methodology with visual representations of a bio-based economy we found four emotional viewpoints: (1) compassionate environmentalist, (2) principled optimist, (3) hopeful motorist and (4) cynical environmentalist. These provide insight into the distinct and shared ways through which members of the public connect with the transition. Implications for public engagement are discussed.
ABSTRACT This paper explores the potential of combining technological innovation systems research... more ABSTRACT This paper explores the potential of combining technological innovation systems research with a participatory stakeholder dialogue, using empirical material from a dialogue on the options of sustainable biomass in the Netherlands and several historical studies into the emerging Dutch biomass innovation system. These studies identified and analysed functions (key processes) needed for the diffusion of this system. Using the functions as a heuristic to analyse and present this material, this paper shows that combining both approaches results in a richer understanding of the Dutch biomass innovation system. Where innovation systems research has not inquired in-depth into the normative dimensions of biomass innovation, the dialogue contributes to a better understanding of these. In contrast to systems research where the researcher defines system boundaries, the dialogue allowed system boundaries to be defined along the process in a bottom-up manner. This resulted in different ideas about challenges and opportunities. Where dialogue discussions were based on somewhat anecdotal information, biomass innovation systems research provided a historical and systemic contextualisation. Furthermore, the functions served as useful categories to explore future sustainable biomass options. We conclude that triangulation, using both historic and participatory methods, provides more insight, in terms of both range and depth, in the actual functioning of innovation systems and opportunities for improvement.
Most perspectives on public participation share the notion that dialogues should be open, allowin... more Most perspectives on public participation share the notion that dialogues should be open, allowing participants to articulate and evaluate different views and knowledge claims. We hypothesize that participants' evaluation of claims may be biased because participants have a preference for a particular type or source of a claim. This would hamper an open dialogue. We tested the effect of three variables on scientists' evaluation of claims of the general public about GM food: the claim's favorability towards GM food, the phrasing, and the source of the claim. Results are based on a survey-experiment among 73 biotechnology-scientists. Biased processing occurred when scientists evaluated claims. Claims that were corresponding with the attitude of the scientists and that were phrased in a cognitive way were evaluated more positively than claims that were contrasting the attitude of the scientists and that were phrased in an affective way. Contrary to our expectation, scientists evaluated claims of the public more positively than claims of experts.
This paper discusses a framework to assess the quality of participatory methods (e.g. Consensus C... more This paper discusses a framework to assess the quality of participatory methods (e.g. Consensus Conference, Interactive Backcasting, Policy Delphi) to facilitate participatory assessments on complex and controversial issues. To be able to structure a complex or controversial problem, knowledge should be produced. This means that any knowledge, indifferent whose knowledge, should be communicated and understood. This requires articulation, confrontation and evaluation of (rival) points of view, and hence, an open dialogue. Methods have been developed to address mechanisms that obstruct an open dialogue. We refer to these mechanisms as biases. A bias is a distortion in the evaluation of another participant's input in the dialogue. We present an evaluation framework that is based on three biases. The bias of source concerns all distortions in the evaluation of another person's input that occur as a consequence of the (perceived) characteristics of that person. The bias of phrasi...
The introduction of new energy technologies may lead to public resistance and contestation. It is... more The introduction of new energy technologies may lead to public resistance and contestation. It is often argued that this phenomenon is caused by an inadequate inclusion of relevant public values in the design of technology. In this paper we examine the applicability of the value sensitive design (VSD) approach. While VSD was primarily introduced for incorporating values in technological design, our focus in this paper is expanded towards the design of the institutions surrounding these technologies, as well as the design of stakeholder participation. One important methodological challenge of VSD is to identify the relevant values related to new technological developments. In this paper, we argue that the public debate can form a rich source from which to retrieve the values at stake. To demonstrate this, we have examined the arguments used in the public debate regarding the exploration and exploitation of shale gas in the Netherlands. We identified two important sets of the underlyi...
... 2009 Eefje Cuppen, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. ... Methodological rigor is needed to make sur... more ... 2009 Eefje Cuppen, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. ... Methodological rigor is needed to make sure that divergent perspectives are included in a dialogue and used for learning about the problem at hand, and to make sure that the effect of dia-logue can be evaluated. ...
A transition to a bio-based economy will affect society and requires collective action from a bro... more A transition to a bio-based economy will affect society and requires collective action from a broad range of stakeholders. This includes the public, who are largely unaware of this transition. For meaningful public engagement people's emotional viewpoints play an important role. However, what the public's emotions about the transition are and how they can be taken into account is underexposed in public engagement literature and practice. This article aims to unravel the public's emotional views of the bio-based economy as a starting point for public engagement. Using Q methodology with visual representations of a bio-based economy we found four emotional viewpoints: (1) compassionate environmentalist, (2) principled optimist, (3) hopeful motorist and (4) cynical environmentalist. These provide insight into the distinct and shared ways through which members of the public connect with the transition. Implications for public engagement are discussed.
ABSTRACT This paper explores the potential of combining technological innovation systems research... more ABSTRACT This paper explores the potential of combining technological innovation systems research with a participatory stakeholder dialogue, using empirical material from a dialogue on the options of sustainable biomass in the Netherlands and several historical studies into the emerging Dutch biomass innovation system. These studies identified and analysed functions (key processes) needed for the diffusion of this system. Using the functions as a heuristic to analyse and present this material, this paper shows that combining both approaches results in a richer understanding of the Dutch biomass innovation system. Where innovation systems research has not inquired in-depth into the normative dimensions of biomass innovation, the dialogue contributes to a better understanding of these. In contrast to systems research where the researcher defines system boundaries, the dialogue allowed system boundaries to be defined along the process in a bottom-up manner. This resulted in different ideas about challenges and opportunities. Where dialogue discussions were based on somewhat anecdotal information, biomass innovation systems research provided a historical and systemic contextualisation. Furthermore, the functions served as useful categories to explore future sustainable biomass options. We conclude that triangulation, using both historic and participatory methods, provides more insight, in terms of both range and depth, in the actual functioning of innovation systems and opportunities for improvement.
Most perspectives on public participation share the notion that dialogues should be open, allowin... more Most perspectives on public participation share the notion that dialogues should be open, allowing participants to articulate and evaluate different views and knowledge claims. We hypothesize that participants' evaluation of claims may be biased because participants have a preference for a particular type or source of a claim. This would hamper an open dialogue. We tested the effect of three variables on scientists' evaluation of claims of the general public about GM food: the claim's favorability towards GM food, the phrasing, and the source of the claim. Results are based on a survey-experiment among 73 biotechnology-scientists. Biased processing occurred when scientists evaluated claims. Claims that were corresponding with the attitude of the scientists and that were phrased in a cognitive way were evaluated more positively than claims that were contrasting the attitude of the scientists and that were phrased in an affective way. Contrary to our expectation, scientists evaluated claims of the public more positively than claims of experts.
Uploads