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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science 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 ISI Web of Science (18) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rowe, G. Articles by Frewer, L. J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Evaluation of a Deliberative Conference

Institute of Food Research

Roy Marsh

University of East Anglia

Lynn J. Frewer

Wageningen University

The concept of "public participation" is currently one of great interest to researchers and policy makers. In response to a perceived need for greater public involvement in decision making and policy formation processes on the part of both policymakers and the general public, a variety of novel mechanisms have been developed, such as the consensus conference and citizens jury, to complement traditional mechanisms, such as the public meeting. However, the relative effectiveness of the various mechanisms is unclear, as efforts at evaluation have been sparse. In this article, the authors describe an evaluation of a two-day "deliberative conference" on the topic of radiation dose assessment. The authors detail the evaluation framework that they adopt and describe the instruments that they have developed to determine the attainment (or otherwise) of the evaluationcriteria stipulated in that framework. They then describe the participation exercise that they have evaluated. Finally, they apply the instruments to assess the effectiveness of the exercise, and discuss the results and their implications for the conduct of evaluations and the use of this particular participation mechanism.

Key Words: public participation • deliberative conference • evaluation

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. C. Powell and M. Colin Meaningful Citizen Engagement in Science and Technology: What Would it Really Take? Science Communication, September 1, 2008; 30(1): 126 - 136. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Nahuis and H. van Lente Where Are the Politics? Perspectives on Democracy and Technology Science Technology Human Values, September 1, 2008; 33(5): 559 - 581. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. de Vries What is Political in Sub-politics?: How Aristotle Might Help STS Social Studies of Science, October 1, 2007; 37(5): 781 - 809. [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]

				J. Goven Processes of Inclusion, Cultures of Calculation, Structures of Power: Scientific Citizenship and the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification Science Technology Human Values, September 1, 2006; 31(5): 565 - 598. [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, T. Horlick-Jones, J. Walls, and N. 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, October 1, 2005; 14(4): 331 - 352. [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]