[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
[Commlist] CFP: Participatory science: democratic utopia, innovation or social imperative?
Wed Apr 08 20:20:37 GMT 2020
Deadline for submission of abstracts postponed to May 2, 2020
Call for papers:“Participatory science: democratic utopia, innovation or
Scientific Journal "Études de communication"
French version: https://journals.openedition.org/edc/9100
Thematic issue coordinated by Céline Pascual-Espuny (IMSIC,
Aix-Marseille University), Andrea Catellani (LASCO, RECOM, Université
catholique de Louvain), Béatrice Jalenques Vigouroux (LERASS, INSA
In recent years, participatory research has expanded considerably in the
context of renewed interest in forging links between science and
society. While first centered on issues of research methodology,
participatory science has evolved towards a comprehensive institutional
approach. Today, participatory science programs, open science and
crowdsourcing initiatives, action research, post-normal science and
citizen science research projects are increasingly widespread. The work
of John Dewey (1927), Kurt Lewin and Talcott Parsons (1965) and Paolo
Freire -- through his contribution to the development of community-based
participatory research -- laid the foundations of participatory science
as a research paradigm characterized by significant researcher
engagement, diversity of knowledge sources and a participatory framework
which itself becomes a source of action.
Over the past twenty years, such research methodologies have posited the
principle of knowledge symmetry and have sought to foster dialogue
between so-called "scholarly," scientific or academic knowledge,
so-called "expert" or analogical knowledge and "experiential" knowledge
(Gardien, 2017, Amaré, Valran, 2017). This movement, which originated in
late 19th-century environmental science research (botany, zoology,
geography) for which citizen-collected data proved to be highly
valuable, has now become a global phenomenon.
Democratic utopia? innovation? social imperative? Participatory research
raises questions about the value accorded to different forms of
knowledge as well as the value ascribed to knowledge co-constructed
through participatory exchange. Participatory science postulates that
knowledge arising from the convergence of different cognitive worlds
transcends division and allows access to a more complete understanding
of societal phenomena (Le Crosnier et al., 2013, Amaré et al., 2017).
Some scholars have also pointed out the social usefulness of
participatory science and its profoundly political and action-oriented
nature (Billaud et al., 2017).
Beyond these considerations, participatory research practices raise
questions and issues surrounding scientific methodology, the usefulness
of science in society, the place of researchers and the role given to
laymen in the process of knowledge construction (Ravon, 2015, Callon,
1989, Bacqué, Biewerner 2015). Conversely, participatory research brings
to the fore the issue of scientific research as anchored in social
reality and as a response to social demands. Finally, the key notions of
empowerment and participation, which are directly linked to
participatory practices, have provided perspectives for research based
upon citizen engagement.
Such participatory approaches have had a significant impact on
information and communication sciences. Some scholars have explored the
processes of popularizing or translating scientific discourse (Yves
Jeanneret, Joëlle le Marec, Igor Babou). Martin’s research (2007)
focusses on issues of public participation in environmental
decision-making involving native communities. By specifically addressing
questions of transparency, dialogue and spaces for discussion, Martin’s
work has shed light on the communicative processes used for reaching
compromise through participatory exchange. Hamilton (2008) has worked on
issues of convergence and divergence with regard to nuclear weapons and
their environmental impact. Walker (2004) has studied environmental
collaboration and conflict resolution. Philippe Roqueplo (1988), using
the example of acid rain, has addressed the issues of stakeholder
involvement, controversy and conflict. Nicole d'Almeida and François
Allard Huver (2014) have developed a reflection on the dramaturgy of
risk, while Bolin's work deals with the history of meteorology and
climate change as linked to public opinion (Bolin, 2007). Other studies
have focused on how communication processes create conditions for
changing perceptions of climate change (Bostrom and Laschof, 2007;
Brisse, Oreske and O'Reilly, 2013).
More specifically, with regard to information and communication
sciences, we seek to address the following issues:
To what extent does research carried out with lay people rather
than only with peers call into question principles of scientific rigor,
veracity or validity?
How does co-constructed research articulate social needs as
expressed by public institutions or local authorities with the
principles of scientific independence?
To what extent is this type of research a reflection of
researchers’ commitment, whether it be political or social? Is such
commitment explicit, or should it be? How do researchers "recruit"
non-scientific participants? What conditions do researchers impose upon
participants to ensure that research is carried out successfully?
What discourses and communication devices are mobilized? What
semantic and ideological constructs and what justifications can be
observed? What "ethos" of the citizen (or amateur) researcher is created?
With regard to implemented methodologies, do the issues of
transparency and communication become more necessary or more important?
What approaches have been developed to accompany action research?
Scientific committee (to be completed)
François Allard-Huver (CREM, Université de Lorraine)
Françoise Bernard (IMSIC, Aix-Marseille Université)
Nicole D’Almeida (GRIPIC, Université Paris Sorbonne)
Thierry De Smedt (GREMS-RECOM, UCLouvain, Belgium)
Amaia Errecart (LabSIC, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord)
Anne Gagnebien (IMSIC, Université de Toulon)
Daniel Raichvarg (CIMEOS, Université de Bourgogne)
Bruno Takahashi (Michigan State University, USA)
Philippe Verhaegen (GREMS-RECOM, UCLouvain, Belgium)
All submissions will go through a two-part review process:
submission of a 1500-2000 word abstract which should include a
presentation of objectives and principle arguments, explain the
originality of the paper and provide key bibliographical references;
for selected abstracts, a second evaluation will be carried on
Instructions to authors are available on the journal's website:
Proposals will be peer-reviewed according a double-blind reviewing
process. Abstracts should be sent by 15 April 2020 in Word (.docx) or
OpenDocument (.odt) format to the following addresses:
(celine.pascual /at/ univ-amu.fr)
(andrea.catellani /at/ uclouvain.be)
(beatrice.jalenques-vigouroux /at/ insa-toulouse.fr)
Paper proposals and final papers (35,000 characters including spaces,
footnotes and bibliography) may be submitted in English or in French. No
commitment to publication can be made until the full text has been read.
May 2, 2020: abstract submission deadline
May 15, 2020: notification of acceptance or refusal
September 15, 2020: deadline for submission of the complete version of
December 15, 2020: deadline for receipt of final version
June 2021: publication of articles in Études de Communication thematic
issue n° 56
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please use it responsibly and wisely.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at http://commlist.org/
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]