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

Gene Rowe (1) , Tom Horlick-Jones (2) , John Walls (3) , Nick Pidgeon (4)

1 Consumer Science Group at the Institute of Food Research
2 School of Social Sciences [Cardiff]
3 School of Environmental Sciences [Norwich]
4 UEA - University of East Anglia [Norwich]

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 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 () and practical () issues. We suggest a number of possible solutions to these evaluation difficulties.

Mots clés: Social Sciences & Humanities

Gene Rowe, Tom Horlick-Jones, John Walls, Nick Pidgeon. Difficulties in evaluating public engagement initiatives: reflections on an evaluation of the UK GM Nation? public debate about transgenic crops. Public Understanding of Science, 2005, 14 (4), pp.331-352. ⟨10.1177/0963662505056611⟩. ⟨hal-00571068⟩