3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Juggling Roles, Experiencing Dilemmas: The Challenges of SSH Scholars in Public Engagement

      , ,
      NanoEthics
      Springer Science and Business Media LLC

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The progressive introduction of emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology, has created a true testing ground for public engagement initiatives. Widespread experimentation has taken place with public and stakeholder dialogue and inclusive approaches to research and innovation (R&I) more generally. Against this backdrop, Social Science and Humanities (SSH) scholars have started to manifest themselves differently. They have taken on new roles in the public engagement field, including more practical and policy-oriented ones that seek to actively open the R&I system to wider public scrutiny. With public engagement gaining prominence, there has been a call for increased reflexivity among SSH scholars about their role in this field. In this paper, we study our own roles and stakes as SSH scholars in a European-funded public engagement project on responsible nanotechnology. We introduce a general role landscape and outline five distinct roles (engaged academic , deliberative practitioner , change agent , dialogue capacity builder , and project worker) that we—as SSH scholars—inhabited throughout the project. We discuss the synergistic potential of combining these five roles and elaborate on several tensions within the roles that we needed to navigate. We argue that balancing many roles requires explicit role awareness, reflexivity, and new competencies that have not been examined much in the public engagement literature so far. Our role landscape and exemplification of how it can be used to reflexively study one’s own practices may be a useful starting point for scholars who are seeking to better understand, assess, or communicate about their position in the public engagement field.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Developing a framework for responsible innovation

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                NanoEthics
                Nanoethics
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1871-4757
                1871-4765
                August 18 2021
                Article
                10.1007/s11569-021-00394-8
                dc471089-6996-4876-81ef-67f8b5eac187
                © 2021

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article