مطالعه تطبیقی پیشران‌های شکل‌گیری علم شهروندان به عنوان رهیافتی نوین در سیاستگذاری بخش عمومی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار، گروه اقتصاد، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران

2 دانش‌آموخته دکتری سیاستگذاری علم و فناوری، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران.

چکیده

نوآوری در حکمرانی و استفاده از فرایندهای جدیدی برای رسیدگی به مشکلات جامعه مستلزم استفاده از رویکردی جدید است. یکی از رویکردهای نوین حکمرانی، تعامل شهروندان با دولت و نقش دادن به مردم برای درگیر شدن در تصمیمات و مشارکت در تعیین اولویت‌ها است. این مطالعه بر علم شهروندان به عنوان یک ابزار برای تحقق رویکرد مشارکتی میان مردم و دولت متمرکز شده و با مرور پیشینه و تحلیل محتوای کیفی به شناسایی پیشران‌های شکل‌گیری علم شهروندان پرداخته و پیشران‌ها را از سه منظر فراهم بودن زمینه، تمایل سیاستگذران به اتخاذ رویکرد مشارکتی و تمایل شهروندان به مشارکت بررسی کرده است. در این مرحله پیشران‌هایی مانند حفاظت از حریم خصوصی و مالکیت ایده، فراهم بودن فناوری برای مشارکت مردم، اعتماد شهروندان و شفاف‌سازی امور، کنترل تضاد‌منافع، آموزش رسمی، درآمد و میزان اوقات فراغت شناسایی شد. سپس با مطالعه تطبیقی، مبتنی بر آمارها و شاخص‌های بین‌الملل، وضعیت بالقوه کشور و توانمندی آن در اجرای پروژه‌های مشارکتی با سه کشور پیشرو آمریکا، استرالیا و آلمان مقایسه شده است. در این راستا، شاخص‌هایی به عنوان شاخص‌های بازنمای پیشرانِ علم شهروندان در چهار کشور مطالعه شد. یافته‌ها نشان داد ایران به لحاظ شاخص‌های بررسی‌شده در وضعیتی پایین‌تر از کشورهای ذکرشده قرار دارد که باعث ایجاد تعادلی نامطلوب میان شهروندان و سیاستگذاران شده است به طوری که هیچ یک از طرفین آمادگی لازم برای پذیرش رویکرد مشارکتی را ندارند و این به حفظ وضع موجود و دشواری تغییر، دامن زده است. در پایان پیشنهادهایی برای بهبود وضعیت در کشور ارائه شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

A Comparative Study of the Drivers of Citizen Science Formation as A New Approach in Public Sector Policymaking

نویسندگان [English]

  • Vahid Taghinezhad Omran 1
  • Mercedeh Pahlavanian 2
1 Associate Prof., Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2 Ph.D., Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Innovation in governance and the use of new processes to address society's problems requires the use of a new approach. One of the new governance approaches is the interaction of citizens with the government and giving people a role to be engaged in decisions and participate in setting priorities. This study focused on citizen science as a tool for the approach of public and government participation. By reviewing the literature and using the strategy of content analysis, it has identified the drivers for the formation of citizens' science and has examined the drivers from the three perspectives of availability of context, the willingness of policymakers to adopt a participatory approach, and the willingness of citizens to participate. In this step, drivers such as protection of privacy and ownership of ideas, availability of technology for people's participation, trust of citizens and clarification of affairs, control of conflict of interest, formal education, income and amount of free time were identified. Then, with the comparative strategy, based on statistics and international indicators, the country's potential situation and its ability to implement collaborative projects have been compared with the three leading countries of America, Australia and Germany. In this regard, indicators were studied as representative of citizens' knowledge drivers in four countries. The findings showed that Iran is in a lower position than the mentioned countries in terms of the investigated indicators, which has created an unfavorable balance between citizens and policy makers, so that none of the parties are ready to accept a cooperative approach, and this makes maintain the status quo and makes the change difficult. At the end, suggestions are provided to improve the situation in the country.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Public Policy
  • Citizen Science
  • Participatory Policymaking
  • Governance Innovation
  • Comparative Study

مراجع

[1] Davies, G. K., & Phillips, W. J. (2006). Scientific citizenship and Good Governance: Implications for Biotechnology. Trends in Biotechnology, 24(2).
[2] De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L. (2016). Innovation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda. Public Administration, 94(1), 146-166
[3] Walker, R.M. (2014). Internal and External Antecedents of Process Innovation: A Review and Extension, Public Management Review, 16, 1, 21-44
[4] Osborne, S.P. and L. Brown. (2011). Innovation, Public Policy and Public Services Delivery in the UK. The Word that Would Be King? Public Administration, 89, 4, 1335-1350.
[5] Damanpour, F. and M. Schneider. (2009). Characteristics of Innovation and Innovation Adoption in Public Organizations: Assessing the Role of Managers. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 3, 495-522
[6] Memarzadeh G, Rostami Kia S, MohamadZadeh Kalati M. Developing a Citizen-Centered Model in the Iranian Public Sector Based on New Public Service Approach. JMDP 2021; 34 (3) :3-21 URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4227-fa.html. {In Persian}.
[7] Pahlavanian, M., Shirkhodaie, M., Razeghi, N. (2021). Theoretical Processing of Citizen Science Projects Implementation in Iran. Journal of Science and Technology Policy. Vol 14, Issue 2. 19-34 Doi:10.22034/JSTP.2021.14.2.1294. {In Persian}.
[8] Federica Cornali. (2017). Talking with the scientists: Promoting scientific citizenship at school through participatory and deliberative approach. University of Turin, Italy. Studies in Media and Communication, 5(2).
[9] McKinley, C.D., Miller-Rushing, J.A., Ballard, L.H., Bonney, R., Brown, H., Cook-Patton, C.S., et al. (2016). Citizen Science Can Improve Conservation Science, Natural Resource Management, and Environmental Protection. Biological Conservation. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.16/j.biocon.2016.05.015
[10] SiS.net. (2017). Citizen Science Policies in the European Commission: Research Agendas Towards Issues of Concern to Citizen. Science with and for Society. Policy Brief, No. 3.
[11] Arundel, A., Bloch, C., & Ferguson, B. (2019). Advancing Innovation in the Public Sector:
Aligning Innovation Measurement with Policy Goals. Research Policy, 48(3), 789-798.
[12] Sorensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2015). Enhancing Public Innovation through Collaboration,
Leadership and New Public Governance. In New frontiers in social innovation research (pp.
145-169). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
[13] Poister, T. H. (2003). Measuring Performance in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Published by Jossey-Bass
[14] Looy, B. V., Gemmel, P., Desmet, S., Dierdonck, R. V., Sarneels, S. (1998). Dealing with Productivity and Quality Indicators in a Service Environment: Some Field Experiences. International Journal of Service Industry Management. Vol 9. No 4. Pp 259-376
[15] Bold, T., Svensson, J., Gautheir, B., Maestad, O., Wane, W. (2011). Service Delivery Indicators: Pilot in Education and Health Care in Africa. Publisher by Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI)
[16] Meijer, A. (2018). Public Innovation Capacity Developing and Testing a Self-Assessment Survey Instrument. International Journal of Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2018.1498102
[17] Neresini, F., Bucchi, N. (2011). Which Indicators for the New Public Engagement Activities? An Exploratory of European Research Institutions. Public Understanding of Science. Vol 20. Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510388363
[18] Criscuolo, L., Lastorina, A., Wal, R., Gray. L. C. (2023). Recent Contributions of Citizen Science on sustainability Policies: A Critical Review. Environmental Science and Health. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2022.100423
[19] Ghazinoory, S., & Aghaei, P. (2021). Differences Between Policy Assessment & Policy Evaluation; A Case Study on Supportive Policies for Knowledge-Based Firms. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 169, 120801.
[20] Dunn, G., Bos, J, J., Brown, R, R. (2018). Mediating the Science-Policy Interface: Insights from the Urban Water Sector in Melbourne, Australia. Environmental Science and Policy.82. (2018).143-150.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.02.001
[21] Sokolovska, N., Fecher, B., Wagner, G, G. (2019). Communication on The Science-Policy Interface: An Overview of Conceptual Models. Publications.7.64. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/4/64
[22] Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., Wilderman, C. (2009). Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. Washington, D. C.: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE). P58
[23] Conrad, C., Hilchey, K. (2011). A Review of Citizen Science and Community-Based Environmental Monitoring: Issues and Opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 176.P 273-291. Doi: 10.1007/s10661-010-
1582-5
[24] Shaebani, M., Razeghi, N. (2020). Scientific Citizenship: A Study of the Understanding and Public Engagement of Science and Technology. Journal of Science and Technology Policy. Vol 13. No 46. 41-53 Doi: 10.22034/JSTP.2020.12.2.1200 {In Persian}.
[25] Shirkhodaie, M., Pahlavanian, M. (2021). Factors Affecting the Implementation of Citizen Science in Iranian Universities. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education. Vol 26. No 98. 29-55 {In Persian}.
[26] Shirkhodaie, M., Pahlavanian, M. (2021). Facing with Ethical Challenges in Citizen Science with a Soft System Methodology Approach. Iranian Public Administration Studies. Vol 14. No 13. 91-116 Doi: 10.22034/JIPAS.2022.304210.1234 {In Persian}.
[27] Momenirad, A. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis in Research Tradition: Nature, Stages and Validity of the Results. Educational Measurement. 4. (14). 182-222{In Persian}.
[28] Shokri, H., Sadatrasoul, S. M., Asadifard, R., Fartash, K., Sahebkarkhorasani, S. M. (2023). A Comparative Study of South Korea and Iran’s Technological Collaboration Development Policies. Improvement Management. Vol 16. Issue 4. 10.22034/JMI.2023.376793.2875{In Persian}.
[29] Moghadami, M., Khandan, M., Naghshineh, N. (2022). Investigation of Digital Citizen Science and its Challenges in Iran. International Journal of Digital Content Management. Vol 3. No 5. Doi: 10.22054/dcm.2022.66330.1056
[30] League of European Research Universities (LERU). (2016). Citizen Science at Universities: Trends, Guidelines and Recommendations
[31] Paige, K., Hattam, R., & Daniel, B.C. (2015). Two Models for Implementing Citizen Science Projects in Middle School. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 14(2),4-17.
[32] Vahidi, H., Taleai, M., Yan, W., Shaw, R. (2021). Digital Citizen Science for Responding to COVID-19 Crisis: Experiences from Iran. International Journal of Environment Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189666
[33] Eames, M., & Egmose, J. (2011). Community Foresight for Urban Sustainability: Insights the Citizen’s Science for Sustainability (SuScit) Project. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 78,769-784. 
[34] Resnik, B.D., Elliott, C.K., Miller, K.A. (2015). A Framework for Addressing Ethical Issues in Citizen Science. Environmental Science & Policy.54.475-481
[35] Vries, D. M., Zandstra, L.A., Smeets, L. (2019). Citizen Scientists' Preference for Communication of Scientific Output: A Literature Review. Citizen Science.  Theory and Practice. 4, (1), 1-13. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.136
[36] Bowser, A., shilton, K., Preece, J., Warrick, E. (2017). Accounting for Privacy in Citizen Science

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار