mdh.sePublikationer
Ändra sökning
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Issues Mapping: A problem structuring method for addressing science and technology conflicts
Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research New Zealand Ltd..
Mälardalens högskola, Akademin för innovation, design och teknik, Innovation och produktrealisering.
University of Victoria, Canada.
2014 (Engelska)Ingår i: European Journal of Operational Research, ISSN 0377-2217, E-ISSN 1872-6860, Vol. 233, nr 1, s. 145-158Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

There are new opportunities for the application of problem structuring methods to address science and technology risk conflicts through stakeholder dialogue. Most previous approaches to addressing risk conflicts have been developed from a traditional risk communication perspective, which tends to construct engagement between stakeholders based on the assumption that scientists evaluate technologies using facts, and lay participants do so based on their values. 'Understanding the facts' is generally privileged, so the value framings of experts often remain unexposed, and the perspectives of lay participants are marginalized. When this happens, risk communication methodologies fail to achieve authentic dialogue and can exacerbate conflict. This paper introduces 'Issues Mapping', a problem structuring method that enables dialogue by using visual modelling techniques to clarify issues and develop mutual understanding between stakeholders. A case study of the first application of Issues Mapping is presented, which engaged science and community protagonists in the genetic engineering debate in New Zealand. Participant and researcher evaluations suggest that Issues Mapping helped to break down stereotypes of both scientists and environmental activists; increased mutual understanding; reduced conflict; identified common ground; started building trust; and supported the emergence of policy options that all stakeholders in the room could live with. The paper ends with some reflections and priorities for further research.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
2014. Vol. 233, nr 1, s. 145-158
Nyckelord [en]
Dialogue, Genetic engineering, Issues mapping, Problem structuring methods, Risk communication, Science and technology conflicts
Nationell ämneskategori
Teknik och teknologier Samhällsvetenskap
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-22329DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2013.08.012ISI: 000326359600014Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84885575317OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-22329DiVA, id: diva2:661252
Tillgänglig från: 2013-11-01 Skapad: 2013-11-01 Senast uppdaterad: 2017-12-06Bibliografiskt granskad

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltext saknas i DiVA

Övriga länkar

Förlagets fulltextScopus

Sök vidare i DiVA

Av författaren/redaktören
Midgley, Gerald
Av organisationen
Innovation och produktrealisering
I samma tidskrift
European Journal of Operational Research
Teknik och teknologierSamhällsvetenskap

Sök vidare utanför DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetricpoäng

doi
urn-nbn
Totalt: 45 träffar
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf