Step. and GO! Turn your challenges into concrete actions.

Changing the World? Cross-cutting Issues in Participatory Science

Participatory science represents an emerging approach aimed at democratizing scientific research by involving citizens in the production and sharing of knowledge. This article provides a detailed analysis of the fundamental concepts underlying the approach "Changing the World? Cross-cutting Issues in Participatory Science."

We explore notions such as citizen engagement, democratization of knowledge, social impact, co-creation of value, interdisciplinary collaboration, open innovation, ethics and transparency, inclusion and social justice, environmental responsibility, participatory governance, strategic partnerships, awareness and education, empowerment, sustainable development, social transformation, knowledge sharing, and collective intelligence.

These concepts are examined through a literature review and case studies, with the aim of providing students with a solid theoretical framework to understand how participatory science can contribute to social and environmental transformation.



To read all the content, log in for free to the website.

Citizen Engagement / Democratization of Knowledge / Social Impact / Co-creation of Value / Interdisciplinary Collaboration / Open Innovation / Ethics and Transparency / Inclusion and Social Justice / Environmental Responsibility / Participatory Governance / Strategic Partnerships / Awareness and Education / Empowerment / Sustainable Development / Social Transformation / Knowledge Sharing / Collective Intelligence

In a global context marked by environmental urgency, social inequalities, and the transformation of political and economic systems, the question "Changing the World?" takes on a new dimension. Participatory science, by mobilizing citizen engagement in scientific research, offers a vector for change through open innovation and co-creation of value.

These approaches are based on cross-cutting issues that transcend disciplinary and traditional research boundaries. They promote the democratization of knowledge, inclusion, social justice, and environmental responsibility by integrating participatory governance mechanisms and strategic partnerships. This article provides a detailed analysis of the main concepts underlying this approach, drawing on theoretical and empirical references to illustrate their relevance in the context of participatory science.

Citizen Engagement and Democratization of Knowledge

  • Citizen Engagement:
    Citizen engagement refers to the active participation of individuals in decision-making processes and knowledge production. In the context of participatory science, this engagement helps to enhance local expertise and strengthen the legitimacy of conducted research (Irwin, 2006).
  • Democratization of Knowledge:
    This concept involves equitable access to scientific knowledge and citizen participation in research, thereby contributing to a redistribution of power between experts and non-experts (Wilsdon et al., 2004).

References:
 Irwin, A. (2006). *Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development*. Routledge.
 Wilsdon, J., Willis, R., Dobinson, R., & Jacobs, L. (2004). *Making Science Relevant: Enquiry, Evidence and Engagement*. The Royal Society.

Social Impact and Co-creation of Value

  • Social Impact:
    Social impact refers to the positive changes generated by projects, measurable through social, economic, and environmental indicators. Participatory science projects aim to generate significant impact by improving quality of life and addressing societal issues (Bugg-Levine & Emerson, 2011).
  • Co-creation of Value:
    Co-creation of value involves collaboration between various actors (citizens, researchers, institutions) to develop solutions tailored to community needs, thereby creating shared value (Vargo & Lusch, 2008).

References:
 Bugg-Levine, A., & Emerson, J. (2011). *Impact Investing: Transforming How We Make Money While Making a Difference*. Jossey-Bass.
 Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. *Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science*, 36(1), 1–10.

Interdisciplinary Collaboration and Open Innovation

  • Interdisciplinary Collaboration:
    Interdisciplinary collaboration integrates diverse perspectives and complementary skills, fostering innovative approaches to solving complex problems (Choi & Pak, 2006).
  • Open Innovation:
    Open innovation relies on the exchange of ideas and resources beyond organizational boundaries, accelerating the development of innovative solutions by involving a wide range of stakeholders (Chesbrough, 2003).

References:
 Choi, B. C. K., & Pak, A. W. P. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education, and policy: 2. Promoting integration in research and practice. *Clinical and Investigative Medicine*, 29(6), 351–364.
 Chesbrough, H. (2003). *Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology*. Harvard Business School Press.

Ethics, Transparency, and Inclusion

  • Ethics and Transparency:
    These principles ensure that participatory research takes place within a moral and open framework, fostering trust among all involved actors. The integration of ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) criteria in research is an example of implementing these values (Eccles & Klimenko, 2019).
  • Inclusion and Social Justice:
    Inclusion ensures that all voices, especially those of traditionally marginalized populations, are heard in the knowledge production process. Social justice guarantees an equitable distribution of the benefits derived from research (Freire, 1970).

References:
 Eccles, R. G., & Klimenko, S. (2019). The investor revolution. *Harvard Business Review*, 97(3), 106–116.
 Freire, P. (1970). *Pedagogy of the Oppressed*. Herder and Herder.

Environmental Responsibility and Participatory Governance

  • Environmental Responsibility:
    Addressing environmental issues is essential to guiding research toward sustainable solutions that respect ecosystems (Elkington, 1997).
  • Participatory Governance:
    Participatory governance ensures that project decisions and directions are collectively made, strengthening transparency and stakeholder engagement (Ansell & Gash, 2008).

References:
 Elkington, J. (1997). *Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business*. Capstone Publishing.
 Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. *Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory*, 18(4), 543–571.

Strategic Partnerships, Awareness, and Education

  • Strategic Partnerships:
    The success of participatory science projects relies on forming strong partnerships among academic institutions, government agencies, NGOs, and the private sector, facilitating access to necessary resources and expertise (Huxham & Vangen, 2005).
  • Awareness and Education:
    Public awareness of scientific and social issues is crucial for mobilizing broad and lasting citizen engagement. Education plays a central role in developing an informed and engaged public (Bonney et al., 2009).

References:
 Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2005). Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. *Routledge*.
 Bonney, R., et al. (2009). Citizen science: A developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. *BioScience*, 59(11), 977–984.

Empowerment, Sustainable Development, Social Transformation, Knowledge Sharing, and Collective Intelligence

  • Empowerment:
    Empowerment aims to enable citizens to actively participate in research and contribute to decisions affecting their environment (Sen, 1999).
  • Sustainable Development:
    This concept refers to meeting present needs without compromising those of future generations. Participatory science, by integrating environmental and social perspectives, aligns with this approach (Brundtland, 1987).
  • Social Transformation:
    Social transformation seeks to induce profound changes in societal structures and practices, promoting more inclusive and participatory governance models (Galtung, 1996).
  • Knowledge Sharing and Collective Intelligence:
    Knowledge sharing enables a broader diffusion of knowledge and strengthens collective intelligence, the ability of a group to solve complex problems through the synergy of individual contributions (Wenger, 1998).

References:
 Sen, A. (1999). *Development as Freedom*. Knopf.
 Brundtland, G. H. (1987). *Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development*. Oxford University Press.
 Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means: Peace and conflict, development and civilization. Sage.
 Wenger, E. (1998). *Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity*. Cambridge University Press.

Discussion

The integration of participatory science into the teaching of curriculum objectives and social transformation is based on a multitude of interdependent concepts. On the one hand, citizen engagement and the democratization of knowledge enable a broad audience to take part in research projects that address societal and environmental challenges. On the other hand, co-creation of value and interdisciplinary collaboration foster the emergence of open innovations that transcend the traditional boundaries of academic research.

Ethics, transparency, and inclusion ensure that these projects align with social justice and environmental responsibility, while participatory governance and strategic partnerships support the collective and sustainable management of initiatives. Finally, concepts such as empowerment, sustainable development, and collective intelligence illustrate the potential of participatory science to drive long-term social transformation by mobilizing and valuing shared knowledge.

The practical implications of these concepts are numerous. For example, implementing participatory science projects in a school setting can serve to illustrate scientific concepts in a concrete way while helping students develop transversal skills such as critical thinking, collaboration, and civic engagement. Moreover, these projects offer an experimental ground for innovative pedagogical approaches, thereby strengthening the link between school and society.

Conclusion

The analysis of cross-cutting issues in participatory science demonstrates that they serve as a powerful lever for changing the world by integrating citizen engagement, the democratization of knowledge, and the co-creation of value into collaborative and interdisciplinary projects. For students, understanding these concepts is essential to grasp how participatory science can contribute to social transformation, promote sustainable development, and build a more just and inclusive society.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Registering with the site Personal identifiers

Enter your name and email address here. You will receive your personal identifier shortly by email.

Personal information

Terms of use

References

1. Bonney, R., et al. (2009). Citizen science: A developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. *BioScience*, 59(11), 977–984.
2. Brundtland, G. H. (1987). *Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development*. Oxford University Press.
3. Choi, B. C. K., & Pak, A. W. P. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education, and policy. *Clinical and Investigative Medicine*, 29(6), 351–364.
4. Dewey, J. (1938). *Experience and Education*. Macmillan.
5. Freire, P. (1970). *Pedagogy of the Oppressed*. Herder and Herder.
6. Galtung, J. (1996). *Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization*. Sage.
7. Habermas, J. (1984). *The Theory of Communicative Action*. Beacon Press.
8. Irwin, A. (2006). *Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development*. Routledge.
9. Kolb, D. A. (1984). *Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development*. Prentice Hall.
10. Putnam, R. D. (2000). *Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community*. Simon & Schuster.
11. Rosenberg, M. (2003). *Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life*. PuddleDancer Press.
12. Sen, A. (1999). *Development as Freedom*. Knopf.
13. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. *Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science*, 36(1), 1–10.
14. Wenger, E. (1998). *Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity*. Cambridge University Press.
15. Wilsdon, J., et al. (2004). *Making Science Relevant: Enquiry, Evidence and Engagement*. The Royal Society.
16. World Economic Forum. (2016). *New Vision for Education: Fostering Social and Emotional Learning through Technology*. World Economic Forum.

Any message or comments?

Forum registration required

You must be registered before participating in this forum. Please enter your personal identifier . If you have not yet registered, you must register.

Connection | Sign up | password forgotten?