State of the art Rationale Sample Clauses

State of the art Rationale. The focus of the evaluation of DITOs is on feedback from the project’s activities for public engagement in science with a focus on citizen science. Literature on traditional citizen science studies to date identifies the need for: improved and targeted evaluation of participatory processes (including the process of facilitation and communication strategies); processes of creativity and learning in science; advice for evaluating the costs and benefits of citizen; and long-term impacts of engagement activities (including acceptability and relevance to a wider audience). However, literature on the larger field of Public Engagement in Science has offered more critical guidance on not only the evaluation of engagement exercises but more broadly, on the impact on science, governance, and policy. As Xxxxxxx et al. (2014) note, the main critiques focus on the exercises of engagement themselves and tend to question legitimacy of their inputs - “what goes into engagement?” – and the scale of impact. Xxxxxxxx et al. (2010) for example, draw on the European Commission’s (EC) report “Taking the European Knowledge Society Seriously” to ask how legitimate efforts to “democratize” scientific expertise (such as citizen deliberation) really are; they note that these processes seem legitimate only for the people who are involved in them (Xxxxxxx et al., 2014, p. 5). Additionally, while research on motivation on engagement in citizen science project is wide-ranging and growing (from online engagement (e.g. Oreg and Nov (2008) and Xxxxxxx et al. (2010)) to nature conservation (x.x. Xxxxxxxx et al., (2014) and Xxx et al., (2012)), there has been little research on the motivations of individuals to move from “informal settings such as pubs, festivals and cafes to effective lobbying on issues such as libel law and science funding”. As Xxxxxxx et al. (2014) note, “such activities break down any clear distinction between informal, policy-free engagements and politically motivated activities”. The alleged impact of citizen science approaches have also been scrutinised in terms of their democratising power (x.x. Xxxxxx (2013)) and in terms of their perpetuation of power relations between scientists and publics, and between scientific/technical practices and gender divides (x.x. Xxxxxx-Xxxxxx (2014)).