232
9 Societal Dialogue on Risks and Benefits
• Tie chemistry to society: Connect the topic with wider societal issues or broader
themes. The audience is more likely to be interested if they can better relate the
topic to other issues of interest.
• Frame key messages to prompt engagement: Key messages need to be presented
in frames (or story lines) that help to simplify complex issues. Consider that
different contexts can also be viewed differently (e.g., gene-editing technology
may be viewed more positively for applications to improve human health than to
modify agricultural products).
Furthermore, the PROSO project identified a set of potential barriers to the
participation of third-sector organizations in research and innovation, and it provided specific recommendations for policy makers, research funders, and research
organizations to overcome these (PROSO Consortium, 2018). Put into the context
of a societal dialogue, the six identified barriers to the participation of citizens and
third sector actors include:
• Lack of relevance: not perceiving their engagement in a discussion as relevant to
their interests, concerns, or goals
• Lack of impact: not accepting an invitation to engage if they expect the discussion
to have not enough impact
• Lack of trust and critical views of others: not engaging when they do not trust
the agendas of the organizations running the discussion or of other stakeholders
in the discussion
• Lack of knowledge and skills: not engaging due to a fear they lack the knowledge
and skills needed to participate
• Lack of time and finances: not engaging because they do not have the time and/or
financial resources necessary to participate
• Lack of legitimacy: choosing to not engage because they doubt the legitimacy of
the discussion or their involvement in it
By exchanging and rethinking knowledge and different patterns of perception,
societal dialogue can help create a shared understanding of a risk and its corresponding benefit. This can lead stakeholders to collectively make responsible decisions
about the use of existing and, perhaps more importantly, new chemical technology
in society. Working to address each of these six barriers listed above can help to
ensure that relevant stakeholders are increasingly part of such discussions.
References
Rise of the citizen scientist (2015) Nature 524(7565):265–265, https://doi.org/10.1038/524265a
Beser A (2016) How Citizen Science Changed the Way Fukushima Radiation is Reported. https://
blog.nationalgeographic.org/2016/02/13/how-citizen-science-changed-the-way-fukushimaradiation-is-reported/
9 Societal Dialogue on Risks and Benefits
• Tie chemistry to society: Connect the topic with wider societal issues or broader
themes. The audience is more likely to be interested if they can better relate the
topic to other issues of interest.
• Frame key messages to prompt engagement: Key messages need to be presented
in frames (or story lines) that help to simplify complex issues. Consider that
different contexts can also be viewed differently (e.g., gene-editing technology
may be viewed more positively for applications to improve human health than to
modify agricultural products).
Furthermore, the PROSO project identified a set of potential barriers to the
participation of third-sector organizations in research and innovation, and it provided specific recommendations for policy makers, research funders, and research
organizations to overcome these (PROSO Consortium, 2018). Put into the context
of a societal dialogue, the six identified barriers to the participation of citizens and
third sector actors include:
• Lack of relevance: not perceiving their engagement in a discussion as relevant to
their interests, concerns, or goals
• Lack of impact: not accepting an invitation to engage if they expect the discussion
to have not enough impact
• Lack of trust and critical views of others: not engaging when they do not trust
the agendas of the organizations running the discussion or of other stakeholders
in the discussion
• Lack of knowledge and skills: not engaging due to a fear they lack the knowledge
and skills needed to participate
• Lack of time and finances: not engaging because they do not have the time and/or
financial resources necessary to participate
• Lack of legitimacy: choosing to not engage because they doubt the legitimacy of
the discussion or their involvement in it
By exchanging and rethinking knowledge and different patterns of perception,
societal dialogue can help create a shared understanding of a risk and its corresponding benefit. This can lead stakeholders to collectively make responsible decisions
about the use of existing and, perhaps more importantly, new chemical technology
in society. Working to address each of these six barriers listed above can help to
ensure that relevant stakeholders are increasingly part of such discussions.
References
Rise of the citizen scientist (2015) Nature 524(7565):265–265, https://doi.org/10.1038/524265a
Beser A (2016) How Citizen Science Changed the Way Fukushima Radiation is Reported. https://
blog.nationalgeographic.org/2016/02/13/how-citizen-science-changed-the-way-fukushimaradiation-is-reported/