This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Guston, D. H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Evaluating the First U.S. Consensus Conference: The Impact of the Citizens’ Panel on Telecommunications and the Future of Democracy

Rutgers University

Consensus conferences, also known as citizens’ panels—a collection of lay citizens akin to a jury but charged with deliberating on policy issues with a high technical content—are a potentially important way to conduct technology assessments, inform policy makers about public views of new technologies, and improve public understanding of and participation in technological decision making. The first citizens’ panel in the United States occurred in April 1997 on the issue of "Telecommunications and the Future of Democracy." This article evaluates the impact of this citizens’ panel. The standard criteria to evaluate the impact of analyses focus on the "actual impact" and on the "impact on general thinking." To these standard criteria, this article introduces the evaluation of two impacts related to learning: impact on the training of knowledgeable personnel and the interaction with lay knowledge. The impact evaluation is based on a nearly comprehensive set of semistructured telephone interviews with the participants in the panel.

Science, Technology & Human Values, Vol. 24, No. 4, 451-482 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/016224399902400402


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. E. W. Broerse, T. de Cock Buning, A. Roelofsen, and J. F. G. Bunders Evaluating Interactive Policy Making on Biotechnology: The Case of the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport Bulletin of Science Technology Society, December 1, 2009; 29(6): 447 - 463. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Evans and I. Kotchetkova Qualitative research and deliberative methods: promise or peril? Qualitative Research, November 1, 2009; 9(5): 625 - 643. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. C. Powell and M. Colin Participatory Paradoxes: Facilitating Citizen Engagement in Science and Technology From the Top-Down? Bulletin of Science Technology Society, August 1, 2009; 29(4): 325 - 342. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Harvey Drama, Talk, and Emotion: Omitted Aspects of Public Participation Science Technology Human Values, March 1, 2009; 34(2): 139 - 161. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. S. Carolan Democratizing Knowledge: Sustainable and Conventional Agricultural Field Days as Divergent Democratic Forms Science Technology Human Values, July 1, 2008; 33(4): 508 - 528. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Lengwiler Participatory Approaches in Science and Technology: Historical Origins and Current Practices in Critical Perspective Science Technology Human Values, March 1, 2008; 33(2): 186 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Blok Experts on public trial: on democratizing expertise through a Danish consensus conference Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2007; 16(2): 163 - 182. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. Seifert Local steps in an international career: a Danish-style consensus conference in Austria Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2006; 15(1): 73 - 88. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Rowe and L. J. Frewer A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms Science Technology Human Values, April 1, 2005; 30(2): 251 - 290. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Rowe and L. J. Frewer Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda Science Technology Human Values, October 1, 2004; 29(4): 512 - 556. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Rowe, R. Marsh, and L. J. Frewer Evaluation of a Deliberative Conference Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2004; 29(1): 88 - 121. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. E. Kelly Public Bioethics and Publics: Consensus, Boundaries, and Participation in Biomedical Science Policy Science Technology Human Values, July 1, 2003; 28(3): 339 - 364. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. W. Hamlett Technology Theory and Deliberative Democracy Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2003; 28(1): 112 - 140. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Hudspith and M. Kim Learning From a University-Cosponsored Regional Consensus Conference Bulletin of Science Technology Society, June 1, 2002; 22(3): 232 - 238. [Abstract] [PDF]