Paper short abstract:

It is generally assumed that citizens would like to be more involved in the scientific process and that this would generate more trust in science. But is this really always the case? The paper sheds light on this question based on data from seven participatory events with citizens across Europe.

Paper long abstract:

It is generally assumed that citizens would like to be more involved in the scientific process and that this would generate more trust in science. But is this really the case? Do people want to participate in discussions about science that affect their lives? And if so, in which topical areas do citizens feel that public participation makes sense? When might public participation even have a negative effect on citizens' trust in the scientific process and its results?

This paper presents answers to these questions based on empirical data collected in seven citizen participatory events in Germany, Portugal, France, UK, Greece, Spain and Denmark in 2023. Citizens in each country spent an afternoon discussing cases of scientific discoveries and the public role on it, aimed at investigating trust in science and the influence they believe public participation might have on it.

The results show the wide range of public perceptions of participation and that the call for ever stronger participation of citizens in the scientific process is not always desired by them in practice. The analysis identifies topical areas and formats of public participation in the scientific process that citizens perceive as particularly suitable or particularly unsuitable.

The citizen participatory events were organised as part of the POIESIS project (https://poiesis-project.eu/). POIESIS is a European collaborative project funded by Horizon Europe asking how trust in science is influenced by issues of research integrity and public participation in the scientific process. The project’s topical foci are climate change and the coronavirus pandemic.