Citizen Science Fiction: The Potential of Situated Speculative Prototyping for Public Engagement on Emerging Technologies

Owen R, Macnaghten P, Stilgoe J (2012) Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Sci Public Policy 39:751–760. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093 Felt U, Wynne B, Al. E (2007) Taking European knowledge society seriously. Report of the expert group on science and governance to the Science, Economy and Society Directorate, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission. Brussels Von Schomberg R (2013) A vision of responsible research and innovation. In: Owen R, Bessant J, Heintz M (eds) Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society. Wiley, Chichester, pp 51–74 Stilgoe J, Owen R, Macnaghten P (2013) Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Res Policy 42:1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008 Swierstra T, Rip A (2007) Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. Nanoethics 1:3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-007-0005-8 Selin C, Rawlings KC, de Ridder-Vignone K et al (2017) Experiments in engagement: designing public engagement with science and technology for capacity building. Public Underst Sci 26:634–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515620970 Davies S, Mccallie E, Simonsson E et al (2009) Discussing dialogue: perspectives on the value of science dialogue events that do not inform policy. Public Underst Sci 18:338–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507079760 Krabbenborg L, Mulder HAJ (2015) Upstream public engagement in nanotechnology. Sci Commun 37:452–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547015588601 Ribeiro BE, Smith RDJ, Millar K (2017) A mobilising concept? Unpacking academic representations of responsible research and innovation. Sci Eng Ethics 23:81–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9761-6 Dijkstra AM, Critchley CR (2016) Nanotechnology in Dutch science cafés: public risk perceptions contextualised. Public Underst Sci 25:71–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514528080 Lehoux P, Miller FA, Grimard D, Gauthier P (2017) Anticipating health innovations in 2030–2040: where does responsibility lie for the publics? Public Underst Sci 27:276–293. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517725715 Davies SR, Selin C, Gano G, Pereira ÂG (2012) Citizen engagement and urban change: three case studies of material deliberation. Cities 29:351–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.11.012 Kuzmanovic M, Gaffney N (2016) Enacting futures in postnormal times. Futures 86:107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.05.007 Roeser S, Alfano V, Nevejan C (2018) The role of art in emotional-moral reflection on risky and controversial technologies : the case of BNCI. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 21:275–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-018-9878-6 Kurath M, Gisler P (2009) Informing, involving or engaging? Science communication, in the ages of atom-, bio- and nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci 18:559–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509104723 Braun K, Könninger S (2018) From experiments to ecosystems? Reviewing public participation, scientific governance and the systemic turn. Public Underst Sci 27:674–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517717375 Wynne B (2007) Public participation in science and technology: performing and obscuring a political-conceptual category mistake. East Asian Sci Technol Soc 1:99–110. https://doi.org/10.1215/s12280-007-9004-7 Felt U, Schumann S, Schwarz CG (2015) (Re)assembling natures, cultures, and (nano)technologies in public engagement. Sci Cult (Lond) 24:458–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2015.1055720 Davies SR (2011) How we talk when we talk about nano: the future in laypeople’s talk. Futures 43:317–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2010.07.003 Felt U, Schumann S, Schwarz CG, Strassnig M (2014) Technology of imagination: a card-based public engagement method for debating emerging technologies. Qual Res 14:233–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468468 Bleecker J (2009) Design Fiction: A short essay on design, science, fact and fiction Bosch T (2012) Sci-Fi writer Bruce Sterling explains the intriguing new concept of Design Fiction. Slate Lindley J, Coulton P (2015) Back to the future: 10 years of design fiction. In: Proceedings of the 2015 British HCI Conference. pp 210–211 Dunne A, Raby F (2013) Speculative everything: design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA Auger J (2012) Why robot?: speculative design, the domestication of technology and the considered future. Royal College of Art, London Forlano L, Mathew A (2014) From design fiction to design friction: speculative and participatory design of values-embedded urban technology. J Urban Technol 21:7–24 Heidingsfelder ML, Schütz F, Kaiser S (2016) Expanding participation: participatory design in technology agenda-setting. 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/2948076.2948087 Rozendaal MC, Heidingsfelder ML, Kupper F (2016) Exploring embodied speculation in participatory design and innovation. In: Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: Short Papers, Interactive Exhibitions, Workshops-Volume 2. pp 100–102 Baumann K, Stokes B, Bar F, Caldwell B (2017) Infrastructures of the imagination: community design for speculative urban technologies. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and Technologies. Chicago, pp 266–269 Heidingsfelder M, Kimpel K, Best K, Schraudner M (2015) Shaping future - adapting design know-how to reorient innovation towards public preferences. Technol Forecast Soc Change 101:291–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.03.009 Boenink M, Swierstra T (2010) Anticipating the interaction between technology and morality: a scenario study of experimenting with humans in bionanotechnology. Stud Ethics Law Technol 4(2):1–38. https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-6008.1098 MG Meij van der JEW Broerse F Kupper 2017 Conceptualizing playfulness for reflection processes in responsible research and innovation contexts: a narrative literature review J Responsible Innov 1 21 https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1326258 Krabbenborg L (2013) Dramatic rehearsal on the societal embedding of the lithium chip. In: Van der Burg S, Swierstra T (eds) Ethics on the laboratory floor. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 168–183 Kupper F (2017) The theatrical debate: experimenting with technologies on stage. In: Van de Poel I, Asveld L, Mehos D (eds) New Perspectives on Technology in Society. Routledge, London, pp 80–102 Boenink M (2010) Imagining the future: how vignettes and scenarios might improve ethical reflection on synthetic biology for health purposes. In: Szebik I (ed) Ethics and clinical applications of authentic biology: an interdisciplinary dialogue. SYBHEL project, Bilbao, pp 55–64 Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3:77–101 VERBI Software (2018) MAXQDA 2018 Broms L, Wangel J, Andersson C (2017) Sensing energy: forming stories through speculative design artefacts. Energy Res Soc Sci 31:194–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.025 NANO2ALL (2018) Responsible Innovation Agendas at national level (project deliverable) Davies SR, Macnaghten P (2010) Narratives of mastery and resistance: lay ethics of nanotechnology. Nanoethics 4:141–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-010-0096-5 Horlick-Jones T, Walls J, Kitzinger J (2007) Bricolage in action: learning about, making sense of, and discussing, issues about genetically modified crops and food. Heal Risk Soc 9:83–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698570601181623 Macnaghten P, Davies SR, Kearnes M (2019) Understanding public responses to emerging technologies: a narrative approach. J Environ Policy Plan 21:504–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2015.1053110 Ihde D (2006) The designer fallacy and technological imagination. In: Dakers J (ed) Defining Technological Literacy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 121–131 Schwarz-Plaschg C (2016) Nanotechnology is like … The rhetorical roles of analogies in public engagement. Public Underst Sci 27:153–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516655686 Van Est R, Walhout B, Rerimassie V et al (2012) Governance of nanotechnology in the Netherlands, informing and engaging in different social spheres. Aust J Emerg Technol Soc 10:6–26 Carvalho A, Nunes JA (2013) Technology, methodology and intervention: performing nanoethics in Portugal. Nanoethics 7:149–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-013-0175-5 Nordmann A, Rip A (2019) Mind the gap revisited. Nat Nanotechnol 4:273–274. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0141-z Grunwald A (2010) From speculative nanoethics to explorative philosophy of nanotechnology. Nanoethics 4:91–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-010-0088-5 van der Meij MG, Heltzel AALM, Broerse JEW, Kupper F (2018) Frame reflection lab: a playful method for frame reflection on synthetic biology. Nanoethics 12:155–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-018-0318-9 Escobar O, Faulkner W, Rea HJ (2014) Building capacity for dialogue facilitation in public engagement around research. J Dialogue Stud 2:87–111 Carvalho A, Nunes JA (2018) Assembling upstream engagement: the case of the Portuguese Deliberative Forum on nanotechnologies. Nanoethics 12:99–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-018-0314-0