Title: Undone Science and Smart Cities: Civil Society Perspectives on Risk and Emerging Technologies
This study contributes to the analysis of civil society and knowledge by examining mobilizations by civil society organizations and grassroots networks in opposition to wireless smart meters in the United States. Three types of mobilizations are reviewed: grassroots anti-smart-meter networks, privacy organizations, and organizations that advocate for reduced exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. The study shows different relationships to scientific knowledge that include publicizing risks and conducting citizen science, identifying non-controversial areas of future research, and pointing to deeper problems of undone science (a particular type of non-knowledge that emerges when actors mobilize in the public interest and find an absence or low volume of research that could have been used to support their concerns). By comparing different types of knowledge claims made by the civil society organizations and networks, the study examines the conditions under which mobilized civil society generates positive responses from incumbent organizations versus resistance and undone science. more »« less
Finch, Kelsey; Mattmiller, Michael
(, G20 Global Smart Cities Alliance)
null
(Ed.)
The Future of Privacy Forum (FPF) co-led a task force of experts to develop a Model Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) Policy for governments and communities that are considering sharing personal data collected from “smart city” solutions. This Model PIA Policy was developed as part of the G20 Global Smart Cities Alliance on Technology Governance, a partnership of leading international organizations and city networks working to source tried-and-tested policy approaches to govern the use of smart city technologies. Its institutional partners represent more than 200,000 cities and local governments, leading companies, startups, research institutions, and civil society communities.
D’Ignazio, Catherine; Cruxên, Isadora; Martinez_Cuba, Angeles; Suárez_Val, Helena; Dogan, Amelia; Ansari, Natasha
(, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space)
Feminicide is the gender-related killing of cisgender and transgender women and girls. It reflects patriarchal and racialized systems of oppression and reveals how territories and socio-economic landscapes configure everyday gender-related violence. In recent decades, many grassroots data production initiatives have emerged with the aim of monitoring this extreme but invisibilized phenomenon. We bridge scholarship in feminist and information geographies with data feminism to examine the ways in which space, broadly defined, shapes the counterdata production strategies of feminicide data activists. Drawing on a qualitative study of 33 monitoring efforts led by civil society organizations across 15 countries, primarily in Latin America, we provide a conceptual framework for examining the spatial dimensions of data activism. We show how there are striking transnational patterns related to where feminicide goes unrecorded, resulting in geographies of missing data. In response to these omissions, activists deploy multiple spatialized strategies to make these geographies visible, to situate and contextualize each case of feminicide, to reclaim databases as spaces for memory and witnessing, and to build transnational networks of solidarity. In this sense, we argue that data activism about feminicide constitutes a space of resistance and resignification of everyday forms of gender-related violence.
Abstract Despite widespread interest in science communication, public engagement with science, and engaged research, a large gap exists between the theories behind science engagement and how it is practiced within the scientific community. The scholarship of science engagement is also fractured, with knowledge and insights fragmented across discourses related to science communication, informal science learning, participatory research, and sustainability science. In the present article, we share a planning tool for integrating evidence and theory from these discourses into effective programs and projects. The ECO framework promotes three distinct and interacting modes of science engagement practice: formative engagement (listening and relationship building), codesign and coproduction (action-oriented partnerships), and broader outreach (expanding networks and dissemination). By planning engagement activities with attention to these three modes of engagement, scientists and scientific research organizations will be better poised to address urgent needs for stronger connections between science and society and increased use of scientific research in decision-making.
As the scientific community, like society more broadly, reckons with long-standing challenges around accessibility, justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion, we would be wise to pay attention to issues and lessons emerging in debates around citizen science. When practitioners first placed the modifier “citizen” on science, they intended to signify an inclusive variant within the scientific enterprise that enables those without formal scientific credentials to engage in authoritative knowledge production (1). Given that participants are overwhelmingly white adults, above median income, with a college degree (2, 3), it is clear that citizen science is typically not truly an egalitarian variant of science, open and available to all members of society, particularly those underrepresented in the scientific enterprise. Some question whether the term “citizen” itself is a barrier to inclusion, with many organizations rebranding their programs as “community science.” But this co-opts a term that has long referred to distinct, grassroots practices of those underserved by science and is thus not synonymous with citizen science. Swapping the terms is not a benign action. Our goal is not to defend the term citizen science, nor provide a singular name for the field. Rather, we aim to explore what the field, and the multiple publics it serves, might gain or lose by replacing the term citizen science and the potential repercussions of adopting alternative terminology (including whether a simple name change alone would do much to improve inclusion).
Zarychta, Alan; Benedum, Michelle_E; Sanchez, Emily; Andersson, Krister_P
(, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory)
Abstract Decentralization reform has both advantages and risks. Bringing service delivery “closer to the people” can improve information flows and strengthen accountability, but it may also leave systems vulnerable to elite capture and corruption by municipal government officials. While past research has acknowledged the possibility of corruption under decentralization, relatively little work has connected those risks to features of these reforms or specific local institutional arrangements. To explore the conditions that can help mitigate the risks of corruption under decentralization, we study the case of health sector reform in Honduras where municipal governments, associations, and NGOs each serve as intermediary-managing organizations under a common decentralized health service delivery model. We argue that three types of institutional arrangements reflecting local accountability practices serve as checks on the authority granted through decentralization and can help guard against corruption: external supervision, civil society engagement, and public participation. Empirically, we draw on data from more than 600 street-level bureaucrats, valuable but under-utilized informants about municipal corruption, across a matched sample of 65 municipalities with contrasting forms of administration. We find that reported corruption is highest under decentralization led by municipal governments, as compared to association- or NGO-led varieties. Both external supervision and civil society engagement help attenuate the positive association between decentralization and corruption, but public participation does not. Overall, this research highlights the importance of considering reform features and local conditions when designing policies to help manage risks and support effective social sector decentralization.
Hess, David J. Undone Science and Smart Cities: Civil Society Perspectives on Risk and Emerging Technologies. Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10356665. Knowledge and space 17. Web. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-71147-4_4.
Hess, David J. Undone Science and Smart Cities: Civil Society Perspectives on Risk and Emerging Technologies. Knowledge and space, 17 (). Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10356665. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71147-4_4
@article{osti_10356665,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {Undone Science and Smart Cities: Civil Society Perspectives on Risk and Emerging Technologies},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10356665},
DOI = {10.1007/978-3-030-71147-4_4},
abstractNote = {This study contributes to the analysis of civil society and knowledge by examining mobilizations by civil society organizations and grassroots networks in opposition to wireless smart meters in the United States. Three types of mobilizations are reviewed: grassroots anti-smart-meter networks, privacy organizations, and organizations that advocate for reduced exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. The study shows different relationships to scientific knowledge that include publicizing risks and conducting citizen science, identifying non-controversial areas of future research, and pointing to deeper problems of undone science (a particular type of non-knowledge that emerges when actors mobilize in the public interest and find an absence or low volume of research that could have been used to support their concerns). By comparing different types of knowledge claims made by the civil society organizations and networks, the study examines the conditions under which mobilized civil society generates positive responses from incumbent organizations versus resistance and undone science.},
journal = {Knowledge and space},
volume = {17},
author = {Hess, David J.},
editor = {Glückler, Johannes and Meyer, Heinz-Dieter and Suarsana, Laura}
}
Warning: Leaving National Science Foundation Website
You are now leaving the National Science Foundation website to go to a non-government website.
Website:
NSF takes no responsibility for and exercises no control over the views expressed or the accuracy of
the information contained on this site. Also be aware that NSF's privacy policy does not apply to this site.