In a recent article we proposed that the Republican abuse of science is embedded in a longer-term science-society split (“The Republican War on Science: An Interview with Chris Mooney,” Natural Selections. Nov 2005). In that article we also observed that this split may be symptomatic of a longer and more dangerous decline that threatens our democracy and the Enlightenment tradition of better we have inherited from Europe. Given such circumstances, science advocates seek solutions to both the short- and long-term aspects of this problem. Many, like Chris Mooney and ourselves, recognize a particular class of solutions that clears a path from abuse and its associated social decline towards better. These solutions involve an amplification of the science/public relationship or science democratization. In our interview, we noted that Chris Mooney mentioned various democratization solutions, one of which was European efforts. In a previous article, we presented one of these European initiatives, the now global movement of Science Shops (“Shopping for Science,” Natural Selections, Mar 2005). We contend that Science Shops are one cure for the conservative anti-science that Mr. Mooney has described, and that ultimately feeds the science-society split that we described in that earlier article. We thought it of value to provide more detailed information about Science Shops from their source, “Living Knowledge,” the European Commission sponsored International Science Shop Network (www.ScienceShops.org).

An understanding of Science Shops is predicated on the concept of “civil society” which itself has numerous definitions. We take civil society to refer to the “totality of voluntary civic and social organizations or institutions which form the basis of a functioning society as opposed to the…structures of a state.” Thus, civil society, whose “institutional forms are distinct from those of family and market, commonly embraces a diversity of actors that vary in their degree of formality, autonomy, and power”¹ and includes, for example, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), private voluntary organizations (PVOs), cooperatives, academia, the media, and organized religion. Further, we note from the “Living Knowledge” definition, mission and criteria statement that “There is no structure of an organization that can be seen as the ultimate construction. How Science Shops are organized and operate is highly dependent on their context. When establishing a network of Science Shops new contexts may add new organization structures. Therefore the definition of Science Shops is a working definition. The term Science Shop should be considered a brand name, including all kind of organizations that fit in the definition.” It is for these reasons that we do not present examples of Science Shop projects here. Instead, we have excerpted portions of the “Living Knowledge” Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) listing² which covers not only general issues such as the history, location, and definition of Science Shops, but also more detailed aspects such as advice on working with clients or civil society partners, scientists, and students.

What is a Science Shop?

A Science Shop is “a unit that provides independent, participatory research support in response to concerns experienced by civil society.” Science Shops use the term ‘science’ in its broadest sense, incorporating social and human sciences, as well as natural, physical, engineering and technological sciences. They provide their services on an affordable basis, free of financial barriers. Furthermore, they seek to create equitable and supportive partnerships with civil society organizations where knowledge and ideas from society are used as a cross-fertilization to the research field. Science Shop projects can include educational efforts, but are distinct from regular social/welfare based social support. These projects are not proactive, but are generated in response to particular requests and do not answer curiosity-driven questions. Thus, Science Shops are not ‘shops’ in the traditional sense of the word but rather small entities, usually university related, that carry out scientific research in a wide range of disciplines —usually free of charge—on behalf of local civil society. The fact that Science Shops respond to civil society’s needs for expertise and knowledge is a key element that distinguishes them from other knowledge transfer mechanisms. We note that in the USA there are centers for community-based research that resemble Science Shops”³. However, these centers typically interact more closely with civil society organizations than with universities.

How can Science Shops help make the research agenda more responsive to the needs and demands of civil society?

Scientific progress has created enormous gains for society and is seen as the key to economic development and international competitiveness. Yet industrial and commercial development has also given rise to numerous social and environmental problems. Both resolution of these problems and evaluation of the impact of new technologies depend upon further scientific knowledge and political and economic decisions. This knowledge is not neutral, but contested and negotiated within political frameworks. Further, economic and organizational resources for research and development are unequally distributed at the national and international level. Businesses and governmental authorities and institutions have more resources and easier access to and influence on research facilities than NGOs and citizen groups such as consumer organizations, environmental organizations, trade unions, social welfare organizations, etc. The growth of the knowledge economy and society creates pressure for universities to become more closely involved in civil society. The university can increasingly become a forum of reflection, as well as of debate and dialog between scientists and people. Science Shops were founded to provide a strategy for giving small and medium NGOs access to research capacity, which allowed them to influence the research agenda at the universities (and through this the wider societal agenda). In turn, Science Shop projects developed the perception of the NGOs about what is researchable through science, and what are the potentials and limits of research. By accumulating projects across different NGOs and over time, Science Shops can act as a knowledge repository, where knowledge about particular topics is gradually built from project to project. In this way, the otherwise individual focus of small-scale research or student-conducted projects can be moved forward from what might otherwise be a project with limited scientific value.

How can a Science Shop be financed?

Science Shops have different sources of funding, depending on the local situation. Those associated with universities may be either fully or partially funded by the university. Full funding provides the most readily sustainable model. Staff can be dedicated employees or university academics who conduct part of their research/teaching within the Science Shop. Alternatively, some Science Shops are part-funded by a university in combination with external funding from government programs or private and charitable grants. If the external funding covers concrete projects, overheads from such funding may be able to finance part of the day-to-day administration. Non-university Science Shops act as social entrepreneurs supporting socially beneficial research activity with NGOs by conducting profitable research or other activities with organizations and funding agencies that can pay market costs. This model can also be developed within universities where a Science Shop might be part of a research center. Science Shops may also be involved with NGOs when the latter are making application for external funding by having Science Shop research written into the bid to evidence monitoring and evaluation of services. For funders this ensures an independent scientific assessment as part of the bid, which is likely to be less expensive than commercial research and evaluation services. A further funding model would provide dedicated studentships and grants for graduate and postgraduate students or scientists in Science Shops, thus enabling research in an area for several years.

Many observers and practicing scientists may react negatively to the idea of science democratization and consider Science Shops in particular to be an unnecessary intrusion and irrelevant for science. Such people may also look at the current situation in the US as an anti-science aberration, a short-term spike in science abuse. They may believe that science is essentially OK, asserting that we can just go back to the ways things were before the current administration; in short…“If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” However, the broader view of the science/democracy symbiosis is also of concern here. Like many issues currently clamoring for our attention, science and democracy may be more ‘broke’ than is easily acknowledged.

We contend that damage to the science/democracy symbiosis is evidenced by two trends. One trend sees an increased societal dependence on a progressively more powerful scientific technocracy that exists within a steadily declining social foundation characterized by low levels of science education and social ambivalence towards science. This is a trend towards the modern equivalent of the dark ages where a “scientific priesthood” dominates a populace that is all but illiterate. The other trend is typified by increasingly powerful anti-science forces springing from deep and abiding religious conservatism coupled to a corporate agnosticism regarding science. This trend seems to lead to some kind of bumbling and incompetent theocracy. Neither option is acceptable. Better of necessity requires better of both science and democracy.

What may be blinding science advocates to the real possibility of the decline we have spoken of are the contradictory views espoused towards both democracy and the public. There is a paternalism that assumes an essentially ignorant and unreliable public in need of constant instruction as to their good. Alternatively, there is a glossy view of the public as the untarnished source of all knowledge, wisdom, and virtue. Advocates of science democratization should seek a middle ground that sees ordinary people as capable of extraordinary insight ONLY with sufficient preparation and motivation. We are thus led to a Jeffersonian view of the science/democracy symbiosis, where it is “safer to have the whole people respectfully enlightened than a few in a high state of science and many in ignorance”⁴. We suggest that a perspective incorporating such mechanisms as Science Shops has an inherent capacity to subvert any science/society split and thus holds a promise of better. As Jefferson said,“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be”⁵.

References:

¹ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_society, www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/introduction.htm.

² www.scienceshops.org/new%20web-content/framesets/fs-about-faq.html

³ See www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/cbpr/cbpr.htm.

⁴ Peterson, Merrel D. (1960). The Jefferson Image of the American Mind. New York, Oxford University Press. p. 241.

⁵ ibid. p. 89.

Related Articles:

• Shopping for Science: Paths to Science for Everyone
• World Science Festival