Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Participatory Technology Assessment
- Creators: Bennett, Ira
Description
Advancements in science and technology, particularly in the field of genome editing, hold significant potential to change how future generations will treat disease and may fundamentally change what it means to be human. There are concerns by scientists and non-scientists about how to explore the values and perceptions of the public regarding the implications of new technologies. Use of participatory Technology Assessment (pTA) has arisen as a type of interactive group discussion to disseminate information about technology and collect non-scientists' perceptions of the value, impact or usefulness of a technology and potential ethical issues or consequences to be considered. There is no one size fits all model of pTA; several are discussed in this paper, but there are similarities between them such as the structure of engagement or recruitment criteria. It is important to note a difference in public understanding of science and public engagement with science as it relates to the structure and execution of pTA. This study was undertaken to evaluate pTA as a tool to explore perceptions, values and opinions regarding a case study of CRISPR-Cas9, a tool for genome editing, among ASU Barrett undergraduate students.
ContributorsChapin, Natalie Ann (Author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis director) / Bennett, Ira (Committee member) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
Description
Participatory approaches to policy-making and research are thought to “open up” technical decision-making to broader considerations, empower diverse public audiences, and inform policies that address pluralistic public goods. Many studies of participatory efforts focus on specific features or outcomes of those efforts, such as the format of a participatory event or the opinions of participants. While valuable, such research has not resolved conceptual problems and critiques of participatory efforts regarding, for example, their reinforcement of expert perspectives or their inability to impact policy- and decision-making. I studied two participatory efforts using survey data collected from participants, interviews with policy makers and experts associated with each project, and an analysis of project notes, meeting minutes, and my own personal reflections about each project. Both projects were based one type of participatory effort called Participatory Technology Assessment (pTA). I examined how project goals, materials, and the values, past experiences, and judgments of practitioners influenced decisions that shaped two participatory efforts to better understand how practitioners approached the challenges associated with participatory efforts.
I found four major themes that influenced decisions about these projects: Promoting learning; building capacity to host pTA events; fostering good deliberation; and policy relevance. Project organizers engaged in iterative discussions to negotiate how learning goals related to dominant ideas from policy and expert communities and frequently reflected on the impact of participatory efforts on participants and on broader socio-political systems. Practitioners chose to emphasize criteria for deliberation that were flexible and encompassing. They relied heavily on internal discussions about materials and format, and on feedback collected from participants, policy makers, and other stakeholders, to shape both projects, though some decisions resulted in unexpected and undesirable outcomes for participant discussions and policy relevance. Past experience played a heavy role in many decisions about participatory format and concerns about deliberative or participatory theory were only nominally present. My emphasis on understanding the practice of participatory efforts offers a way to reframe research on participatory efforts away from studying ‘moments’ of participation to studying the larger role participatory efforts play in socio-political systems.
I found four major themes that influenced decisions about these projects: Promoting learning; building capacity to host pTA events; fostering good deliberation; and policy relevance. Project organizers engaged in iterative discussions to negotiate how learning goals related to dominant ideas from policy and expert communities and frequently reflected on the impact of participatory efforts on participants and on broader socio-political systems. Practitioners chose to emphasize criteria for deliberation that were flexible and encompassing. They relied heavily on internal discussions about materials and format, and on feedback collected from participants, policy makers, and other stakeholders, to shape both projects, though some decisions resulted in unexpected and undesirable outcomes for participant discussions and policy relevance. Past experience played a heavy role in many decisions about participatory format and concerns about deliberative or participatory theory were only nominally present. My emphasis on understanding the practice of participatory efforts offers a way to reframe research on participatory efforts away from studying ‘moments’ of participation to studying the larger role participatory efforts play in socio-political systems.
ContributorsWeller, Nicholas, Ph.D (Author) / Childers, Daniel L. (Thesis advisor) / Bennett, Ira (Committee member) / Coseo, Paul (Committee member) / Klinsky, Sonja (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019