Difficulties in evaluating public engagement initiatives: reflections on an evaluation of the UK GM Nation? public debate about transgenic crops

In the realm of risk management, and policy-making more generally, “public engagement” is often advocated as an antidote to pathologies associated with traditional methods of policy-making, and associated deficit-model-driven communication strategies. The actual benefits of public engagement are, however, difficult to establish without thorough evaluation of specific engagement processes. Unfortunately, rigorous evaluation is difficult, and, perhaps for this reason, it has rarely been undertaken. In this paper we highlight a number of these difficulties in the light of our experiences in evaluating a major engagement initiative, namely the GM Nation? publice debate on the possible commercialization of transgenic crops, which took place in Britain in 2003. The difficulties we identify seem likely to be relevant to many, if not most, engagement evaluations. They are concerned with both theoretical/normative (how one should evaluate) and practical (how one does evaluate) issues. We suggest a number of possible solutions to these evaluation difficulties.

[1]  G. Rowe,et al.  Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda , 2004 .

[2]  M. Morris Understanding Risk - Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society , 1997 .

[3]  W. Poortinga,et al.  A Deliberative Future? An Independent Evaluation of the GM Nation? Public Debate about the Possible Commercialisation of Transgenic Crops in Britain, 2003 (Understanding Risk Working Paper 04-02) , 2004 .

[4]  Gene Rowe,et al.  On evaluating the GM Nation? Public debate about the commercialisation of transgenic crops in Britain , 2006 .

[5]  M. Patton Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd ed. , 1990 .

[6]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[7]  R. Curnow,et al.  The BSE inquiry , 2002, Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection.

[8]  B. Wynne Knowledges in Context , 1991 .

[9]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[10]  A. Thorpe,et al.  When goliaths clash: US and EU differences over the labeling of food products derived from genetically modified organisms , 2004 .

[11]  M. Bloor,et al.  On the Analysis of Observational Data: A Discussion of the Worth and Uses of Inductive Techniques and Respondent Validation , 1978 .

[12]  Nihat Aydenz,et al.  Planning and Management , 2021, Higher Education Abstracts.

[13]  J. Morse Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction , 1996 .

[14]  Gene Rowe,et al.  Using Surveys in Public Participation Processes for Risk Decision Making: The Case of the 2003 British GM Nation? Public Debate , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[15]  Daniel J. Fiorino Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms , 1990 .

[16]  Kristen Purcell,et al.  Public Participation and the Environment: Do We Know What Works? , 1999 .

[17]  B. Wynne,et al.  Misunderstanding science? : the public reconstruction of science and technology , 1996 .

[18]  P. Rossi,et al.  Evaluation: A systematic approach, 5th ed. , 1989 .

[19]  L. Frewer,et al.  RISK PERCEPTION, SOCIAL TRUST, AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN STRATEGIC DECISION MAKING : IMPLICATIONS FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES , 1999 .

[20]  Anne Ingeborg Myhr,et al.  Genetically Modified (GM) Crops: Precautionary Science and Conflicts of Interests , 2003 .

[21]  Nigel G Halford Prospects for genetically modified crops , 2004 .

[22]  J. Berliner,et al.  Planning and Management , 2019, Higher Education Abstracts.

[23]  A C C Gibbs,et al.  Data Analysis , 2009, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[24]  Jerome R Ravetz,et al.  Risk Management as a Postnormal Science2. , 1992, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[25]  G. Rowe,et al.  A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms , 2005 .

[26]  Andrew Weyman,et al.  Critical trust: understanding lay perceptions of health and safety risk regulation , 2004 .

[27]  T. Horlick‐Jones ‘Experts in risk? … do they exist?’ , 2004 .

[28]  Roy Marsh,et al.  Evaluation of a Deliberative Conference , 2004 .

[29]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  Investigating Risk, Organisations and Decision Support through Action Research , 2002 .

[30]  C. Achilles,et al.  Evaluation: A Systematic Approach , 1980 .

[31]  Peter M. Chisnall,et al.  Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement , 1993 .

[32]  G. Rowe,et al.  Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation , 2000 .

[33]  C. Chess Evaluating Environmental Public Participation: Methodological Questions , 2000 .

[34]  A. D. B. Clarke,et al.  Evaluation Research: An Introduction to Principles, Methods and Practice , 1999 .

[35]  T. Horlick-Jones,et al.  Meaning and contextualisation in risk assessment , 1998 .