Yoshizawa - Understanding the plurality of public interests for open strategy in science and innovation

Embed Size (px)

Text of Yoshizawa - Understanding the plurality of public interests for open strategy in science and...


Understanding the plurality of public interests for open strategy in science and innovationGo YoshizawaMakiko SugaMitsuru KudoEri MizumachiKei KanoOECD BlueSky III, Ghent21 September 2016

IntroductionWhy public engagement? It may guarantee the diversity of evidence in the sense that public opinions are qualitatively different from expert knowledge

What type of publics we need to engage?Who are the publics? STI policymakers do not have a clear idea while most citizens have never thought about participating in public policy

Segmentation MethodsDemographics-basedE.g. Science Indicators, Eurobarometers, PIAACSegments the targeted population a prioriStatistics-basedE.g. Public Attitudes to Science (PAS), UKSegments the population a posterioriImpossible to predict with which segment a respondent will be clusteredQuestion-basedE.g. State of Victoria in Australia

Victorian Segment ModelSix population segments using a combination of the three questionsCan you please tell me how interested you are in science?Do you actively search for information about science and/or technology?When you have looked for information about science and technology in the past, have you generally been able to find what you were looking for?See Kano et al. at poster sessions

PESTI Segment ModelFramework for Broad Public Engagement in Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (PESTI) project (2012-15)We assume that a persons interest in STI does not necessarily and clearly correspond to his/her willingness to engage in STI policyTwo strategiesMaking an achievement in public segmentation for policymakingFacilitating citizens to make them consider engagement in STI governance

Method and AnalysisNationwide face-to-face interview survey in 2013 collected 887 samples (44.4%) from Japanese citizens aged 16+ using a two-stage stratified random sampling methodThe factor analysis identified the STI-facilitating factors, the scientific-literacy factors, and the policy-influence factorsTwo stepwise multiple linear regression analyses identified four explanatory variables

Factors in Public EngagementIndependent variableCoefficientSignificance Q10(1): Deregulation.099.000 Q10(3): Access to comprehensible science information.163.000 Q10(4): Public comments to the government.223.000 Q10(6): Public support and engagement in STI policy.427.000 Q6: Current level of your own influence on policy related to S&T.059.014 Q7: Ideal level of your own influence on policy related to S&T.095.032R2.661R2 adjusted.658F value284.3380.000

Decision Tree for Segmentation

Q. Which do you think would advance STI?

Population Segments1DiscouragedLess confident about their ability to access the information and policy process on STI25.0%2Independent EngagersIndependent but keen about interaction between the government and the public5.8%3UninterestedIgnorant of and unconcerned about any issues6.3%4Empowered ScepticsAware of their own policy influence but negative about public engagement3.9%5Trustful EngagersPositive about STI policy and reliant on all the stakeholders38.0%6Interested FollowersAttracted to the development of government policies and respectful to professional experts21.0%


Summary and DiscussionOnly four questions are sufficient to characterise the six population segments for public engagement in STI policyThis research suggests that the government should take different approaches to different population segments for the public engagementHope for numbers and narratives

AcknowledgementsNoriko Suzuki (Tezukayama University)Nobuya Fujiwara (Onomichi City University)