Pietro Greco

1

• Science communication
• and society

• Pietro Greco
• Bagnoli
• September 4, 2008

2
SC, born of the linear models

• The origin of Science and Technology Studies
  (STS)
• 1972
• A Conference in London
• International Sociological Associations Research
  Committee on Sociology of Science
• British Sociological Association
• 1974
• A libro
• Richard Whitley,
• Social Processes of Scientific Development
• Routledge

• The development of scientific knowledge
• Its non a question to leave only philosophers
  and historians
• We may have (also) a sociological interpretation

3
SC, born of the linear models

• The 60s are the years of conquest of space.
• The man is on the Moon.
• But 60s are also the years of
• Rachel Carson, Silent Spring.
• 68, the controversy on science neutrality.
• Club di Roma, The Limits of Growth
• In the other words, the 60s are the years of the
  science criticism

• The 60s are also the years of inside and
  outside science world public science
  communication
• Inside STS, public science communication appears
  as the communication where science shows its best
  and obtains a wide social acceptability.

4
SC, born of the linear models

• The first actions of the STS actors and the idea
  of a communication linear model between
  scientists and general publics is developing just
  in 60s and 70s.

• The researches generally are appointed to science
  popularization (divulgazione).
• And STS researchers think to have no study to do
  in such dominion

5
SC, born of the linear models

• The explicative model obtained from the general
  studies on communication - is based on the
  assertions
• Scientists produce the pure scientific knowledge
• The scientific knowledge must be communicated by
  scientists in a simple way so that it appears
  understandable and, so, acceptable to general
  public.

• The general public is described as
• As a compact and undifferentiated whole of
  unities
• And confined in the role of essentially passive
  user (receptor) of communication.

6
SC, born of the linear models

• This model contains an intrinsic hierarchic
  structure.
• There is a scientific knowledge separated from
  popular knowledge at a higher level because its
  intrinsic form and unique rationality
• In the model
• Scientific knowledge is characterized by an
  intrinsic complexity,
• Popular knowledge is characterized by an
  intrinsic simplicity.

• So, in the science and society communication
• the flux of information is mono directional
• by producer to user.
• In this play, scientist is the only expert.

7
SC, born of the linear models

• Effects
• Science communication is reduced to simple
  translation
• General public is the carrier of a knowledge
  deficit
• The gap can be partially exceeded
• The public refuses science because its knowledge
  deficit
• The alphabetization of public automatically
  determine a higher social acceptability of
  science.
• And this is good thing

8
The Amazon River Model
9
SC, born of the linear models

• Although the model is already criticized in the
  70s, STS are substantially accepted.
• So we have researches about
• The degree of scientific rationality
• The institutional character of science,
• The need of a pocket of a basic scientific
  knowledge
• In other words they search for the best quality
  of translation.
• Nobody searches for implicit and symbolic
  communication, i.e. images and metaphoric
  languages.

• Few researchers think that such a mono
  directional communication produces two unwished
  effects
• Gives to general public the (not true) impression
  that its possible to go in sancta sanctorum of
  science by a very easy way
• And, in the same time, it increases the distance
  between scientists and not scientists.

10
SC, born of the linear models

• But, already in the 70s, the linear model of SC
  is criticized.
• By environmentalists and feminists, i. e., the
  generate new views of science and of relations
  between science and society.
• They call for alternative forms of knowledge in
  the decision making processes
• The neutrality of science and technology
  expertise is criticized.
• ST studies on scientific controversies and of
  work in laboratory show how scientific
  evidences are highly constructed. The analysis
  of communication system (inside and outside
  science) show that essence and meaning of
  scientific knowledge are often negotiated.

11
SC, born of the linear models

• These and others facts show that popularizing
  science
• Is not a simplified knowledge,
• But its a very complex building process of the
  public image of science.
• Daniel Jacobi e Bernard Schiele write what is
  important is that
• Is there a public science communication system,
• Not that the information is (must be) highly
  correct.

12
SC, born of the linear models

• On the contrary, many ST researchers think
• The popularizing science is (must be) a medium to
  influence politics and society
• Or (a finest idea), a medium to produce icons of
  truth, to carry the non explicit and non
  deliberative dimensions of science.
• In any case as something that is widely dominated
  and shaped by science

• But
• But in general public is increasing demand to
  participate to technoscience governance

13
SC, born of the linear models

• So its non surprising that now linear models (as
  the Public Understanding of Science) are
  definitively criticized also in STS environment.

• Empirical studies show that the deficit model
  doesnt work
• The social acceptability of science doesnt
  necessarily increase in a more alphabetized
  public.
• Often it decrease

14
Beyond the Top-down The contextual model

• The public is not a empty bottle
• Social and psychological determinants in science
  perceptions
• Recognize the contexts

• Sometimes there is a more sophisticated version
  of top-down model
• They say transmit information in more friendly
  way

15
Beyond the Top-down The participative model or
dialogue

• Public engagement
• Guidance for not expert publics

• More politics and more information
• Processes and non simple facts of science
• Attention for small groups of persons
• Attention to anti-scientific perception

16
Search for new models, non linear

• Ulrike Felt, 2003
• We need a new model to
• Explaining and governance of processes of
  globalization of knowledge.
• Give to public science in a more wide conception
  (Public Understanding of Science and Humanities)
• To leave linear ideas
• Put science in a new agorà where are intercative
  forces with a wide types of cultural exchanges
  and creations of a context where wills, wishes,
  inclinations, needs are expressed together with
  precise questions.
• A space where criticism and also controversies
  are non only permitted, but also promoted.

17
Toward a new model

• The Venezia (Venice) Model

18
Science as a social institution

• By a sociological point of view science its
  possible define science as a social institution
  to build a rational opinion consensus in as wider
  as possible field Ziman.

• Every scientific process can be formalized only
  in two stadia
• - the scientist that watch nature
• and
• - - scientist that communicates the results of
  his observations.

19
No sciencewithout communication

• Its impossible to make science without a process
  with the two stadia
• The private stadium of observation
• The public stadium of communication

• In other words, there is no
  science without comunication.

20
The whole of science communication
21
Evolving science

• The scientific work is an evolving system

22
Three main transitionsin the Republic of
Science

• 1600 -1800 gt dilettantistic era
• 1800 1945 gt academic era
• 1945 ? gt post-academic era

23
The second transition

• After Second World War began a new transition
• Academic Science
• Post-Academic Science

24
Post-Academic Science

• Changed the structure
• More resourses
• The research (basic, also) is the lever of the
  economic development

• Bigger groups (Big Science)
• The State from Mecenate to buyer

25
New resources
26
(No Transcript)
27
Three structural changes

• In the last 15 years
• Increase funding in RD
• From 300 to 1.100 billion of dollars
• Increase private funding
• Change ratio public/private
• From a bipolar to a multipolar world
• China and other asiatic tigers
• Science is no more a transatlantic play but more
  and more an indopacific play

28
1. The world spends more

• 1.100 billions dollars a year in RD

Expense increases three times in the last 15 years
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
2. A multipolar world

• In the last 15 years
• Increase funding in RD
• From 300 to 1.100 billion of dollars
• Increase private funding
• Change ratio public/private
• From a bipolar to a multipolar world
• China and other Asiatic tigers
• Science is no more a transatlantic play but more
  and more an Indopacific play

32
2006China over Japan
33
China

• Cina
• Investimenti RS 136 miliardi seconda
• Crescita investimenti RS 20
  prima
• Export hi-tech 12,5 seconda

34
RD

• growth
• Usa 328 3,9
• Europe 240 4,8
• China 136 20,4
• Japan 129 4,5
• Germany 60 3,5
• Italy 19 0

35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
Africa, is walking

• Africa Oceania
• 6 of global RS expenditure
• South Africa
• Nigeria
• Ruanda

38
3. Private Research

• In the last 15 years
• Increase funding in RD
• From 300 to 1.100 billion of dollars
• Increase private funding
• Change ratio public/private
• From a bipolar to a multipolar world
• China and other asiatic tigers
• Science is no more a transatlantic play but more
  and more an indopacific play

39
(No Transcript)
40
New values (by Ziman)
41

• New figures
• Craig Venter
• Scientist-manager

42
The fall of Ivory Tower

• So, after World WAR II we have main change in
  Republic of Science.
• Particularly, the substantial separation between
  science (academic science) and society, begins a
  thick web of science in society and society in
  science.

43
Participation to choices

• In the new post-academic era,
• Scientists take relevant decisions for science
  development
• not in integral autonomy,
• but more and more
• in participation
• with a series of social groups (publics)
  of
  not-expert.

44
A new role for SC

• In the post-academic era
• the
• public communication of science
• gets a new role

45
SC in the post-academic era of science

• In the post-academic era of science the public
  communication is no more an optional for
  scientists and begins a professional necessity

46
The post-academic scientist

• must
• (to know)
• communicate
• to public
• (to publics)
• of not-experts

• The public communication is an ineludible
  complements of the research

47
The relevant communication
48
Science communicationand (is) democracy

• In the post-academic era of science
• The public of not-experts need
• science communication

• Because
• Increase social impact of science and technology
• Technoscience enters in daily life, at individual
  and collective levels, of people
• So, scientific information for general public
  begins a primary need of democracy

49
The PSC needsThe scientific citizenship

• This is the new
• public communication of science is a diffuse
  social need
• Expression of the right to scientific
  citizenship

• In the new post-academic era of science the flux
  of communication between scientific community and
  society is more and more bidirectional.
• Society, in its different dimensions, (politics,
  economics, cultural), communicates its
  needs to scientific community.
• Take relevant choices.

50
The scientific citizenship

• ì

• Four dimensions
• Cultural
• Social
• Political
• Economic

51
Public communication of science
52
Public communication of science

• No more tinsel, but relevant element for science
  development
• No more tinsel, but relevant element for
  cultural, economic, social and political
  development of whole society

53
Crisis of linear model

• Public Understanding of Science (PUS)
• Out the science world is the public of
  not-expert.
• The public has a scientific knowledge deficit
• The more the public knows science, the more take
  the scientific values and begins a friend of
  science

• New Venice Model
• There are many and many publics of science
• Every public participates with its culture to
  take relevant decisions for science
• Every public in the normal dynamics of society is
  carrying different but legitimate interests

54
From Amazon River Model to Venice Model
55
A complex modelThe archipelago of SC

• We can imagine the science public communication
  system as an archipelago of social islands
  connected by many and many different bridges

56
The archipelago of SC

• with a bidirectional flux of
• information,
• cognitions,
• emotions,
• values,
• themata

• Relevant Islands
• Scientists
• Technicians
• Politicians
• Managers
• NGO
• Artists
• Mass Media
• General public

57
Communication Communications
58
Media All News
59
MediaScience and technology
60
Specific scientific issue
61
(No Transcript)
62
Arts disseminates science

• The Fuga in Egitto The galilean sky of Adam
  Elsheimer

63
Arts and science take The spirit of time

• Picasso, 1906/1907
• Damigelle dAvignone
• The end of concept of absolute space
• Einstein, 1905

64
Arts inspire science
65
Science and advertisingThe building of public
perception
66
The image of Aids
67
The Venice modeldifferent bridges between the
islands
68
Venice, a complex systema

• The science communication is a complex social
  system
• Many elements
• Many connections

69
(No Transcript)
70
The complex and adaptive system of SC
71

• An exemple
• The third stream
• or third mission
• of university

72
The (possible) mission of a science meuseum
73
The science museuma possible mission

• To build the scientific citizenship
• Political
• Cultural
• Economic
• Social networks with
• University
• School
• Society

74
In the archipelago of SC

• In the archipelago of communication of science
• No absolute limits
• No absolute laws
• No absolute models

75
Only a special difficulty

• science, specially mathematized science, uses a
  language that is not a common language and
  principally a logics far from common sense.
• In science communication rules an indetermination
  principle
• ?R x ?C k
• R rigour
• C communicability
• k costant

76
Every bridge a K

• Every bridge between islands in the archipelago
  of science communication is characterized from a
  specific K
• Every bridge a K

77
The value of k

• The best practices in communications must
  minimize - in every context
• The value of k
• The value of quality of science
  communication
• The smallest is K, the greatest is culture
  and/or democracy

78
Il sistema Venezia dalla metafora alla teoria

• Non bastano le buone pratiche
• Occorre capire
• Una teoria della comunicazione
• Una teoria nasce anche dal confronto di ipotesi
  diverse e persino opposte
• Un modello utile per la simulazione
• Ricerche empiriche
• Un istituto nazionale per lo studio dei rapporti
  scienza e società