population when we talk of care & family health, but often have little availability for classical social action - certainly for monoparental families. Foreigners and newcomers might be excluded because of their limited proficiency in the language spoken by the others, or because they feel less legitimate to take part in citizen actions. People lacking a minimum understanding of the issue at stake, or acquaintance with the technology used in the inquiry (e.g. because of low education level, or age) are also at risk of exclusion from or of limited participation.
78
Citizen science inquiries that are inclusive of all relevant groups are virtually impossible, but there are concrete ways to minimise exclusion. In particular, given the diversity of the exclusion, different strategies need to be put in place. First of all, all citizen science project should include an explicit and ongoing reflection on the desired outcomes, the potential causes of exclusion, and the context specific solutions. While many causes of exclusion might be structural and impossible to resolve within a single citizen science project, moreover, it is possible and necessary to minimise their impacts by carefully designing the micro-practices of the inquiry. Broad inclusion can be enhanced by making targeted calls for participants, through the most adequate channels and formulations. Socio-professional networks can be activated to identify better representation when gathering citizen groups. In our experience, indeed, pre-organised groups on community-health, or neighborhood participation groups, have shown longer lasting interactions. During the project, solutions range from the
choice of venue and schedules for a group’s meetings, to the language and the style of the moderation, to all sorts of capacity building activities. Technological fixes can also be useful, such as providing the necessary tools to the participants who do not have them (e.g. smartphones, computers, pollution monitoring devices…). Last, opportunities of self-mediatisation and other forms of recognition of the participants’ agency and role, promote inclusion inasmuch as they trigger a sense of ownership vis-a-vis the project and of pride for the work done.
First of all, all citizen science projects should include an explicit and ongoing reflection on the desired outcomes, the potential causes of exclusion, and the context specific solutions. Overall citizen science can be and should be a way to democratise and enhance knowledge, not just by engaging “citizens”, but by specifically engaging those citizens whose voice is rarely considered. And this does not only mean to help marginalised groups ‘learn the language’ needed to engage in a scientific and societal discussion ; but more fundamentally to make society learn to listen to, and understand the concerns of these groups however they are voiced.
NL Bu r ger wetenschap, u itsl u iting en r echtvaardigheid Het draait ons bij burgerwetenschap uiteindelijk om twee dingen: democratie en sociale rechtvaardigheid enerzijds en de kwaliteit en relevantie van kennis anderzijds. Door zelf te onderzoeken, begrijpen meer mensen de wereld beter en kunnen ze hun (politieke) claims beter onderbouwen. Langs de andere geven burgers nieuwe perspectieven op onderzoek en verbeteren ze zo de kwaliteit van de kennis. Helaas, zelfs als de deur open staat voor iedereen, wordt de stem van sommige mensen niet gehoord. Projecten van burgerwetenschap riskeren zo de onevenwichten en blinde vlekken over te nemen die ook in de maatschappij bestaan. Deze drempels kunnen heel praktisch zijn zoals de taal, beschikbare tijd of het gebrek aan voldoende zekerheid om op lange termijn deel te nemen aan een project. Het is dan aan ons als organisatoren van burgerwetenschap om zij die uitgesloten worden op te zoeken en burgerwetenschap nog sterker te vertalen naar hun leefwereld. En het is dan aan de maatschappij om te luisteren naar de bezorgdheden van deze groepen en ze te erkennen.
79