Log in to star items.
- Convenors:
-
Julie Sascia Mewes
(Technische Universität Berlin)
Britta Acksel (Wuppertal Inst for Enviro, Climate, and Energy)
Claudia Göbel (Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz)
Aurora A. Sauter (Goethe University)
Dana Mahr (ITAS - KIT)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Roundtable
- Location:
- C-7, 0.15
- Sessions:
- Tuesday 8 September, -
Time zone: Europe/Warsaw
Short Abstract
The roundtable discussion addresses current debates around methodic reflexivity and inclusivity in STS. It provides a space for reflection on how 'participation' is discussed & enacted in various participatory method(ic)s to facilitate knowledge exchange on participatory STS & its growing plurality.
Description
During the 90-minute session, the contributors give up to five short talks on the main arguments and/or calls to action of a discussion paper currently in progress concerning the current state and future of participatory STS in Germany. These talks build upon a one-day workshop held during the stsing-conference in March 2026. During this workshop, the group jointly analysed research data from various projects across Germany, focusing on the performativity of methods in practice through 'methodography', a genre of writing that encourages us to 'understand our method of ethnography (and other forms of social inquiry) ethnographically' (Greiffenhagen et al., 2011; Lippert & Mewes, 2021).
With this, ‘participatory methodography’ sets the ground for a more nuanced analysis and discussion on how, when, in what form does participation occur, how is it facilitated and/or prevented, and for whom?
First, the group interactively maps the various approaches to participatory STS research commonly used across Europe and beyond, reflecting on uncommon and marginalised approaches. The following discussion is organised in small groups over two rounds, exploring how, when and with what real-life effects participants' research methods enact and textually represent 'participation' as a shared analytical framework.
Questions include:
What is 'participatory' about our participatory research?
How can 'participation' be traced throughout the research project?
How do participatory methods navigate tensions between inclusion and expertise?
Building on the World Café approach, the discussion concludes with a collective discussion on the current state and future of participatory STS. All participants are invited to compile these reflections for a second joint discussion paper, to facilitate more targeted knowledge exchange, networking, and collaboration, taking into account the efforts of other networks and associations working on such matters in Europe and beyond (e.g. VW-Foundation, 2025; Downey & Zuiderent-Jerak, 2021; Mewes et al., 2025).
Accepted contribution
Session 1 Tuesday 8 September, 2026, -Short abstract
When participation requires facilitation techniques (to bring people together, generate interest, translate, hybridize, formalize, and disseminate newly acquired knowledge) as well as reflective observation to avoid the “in-group” effect, precisely in order to continue hybridizing diverse knowledge.
Long abstract
Three years ago, the University of Toulouse adopted a policy of “Science with and for Society” aimed at promoting exchanges and comparisons of knowledge between researchers from different scientific disciplines (focusing on disciplinary issues as well as multi- and interdisciplinarity) and a wide variety of non-academic actors (companies, associations, local authorities, media, educational and cultural institutions, etc.). Various funded initiatives have been set up (calls for collaborative research projects, science shops, laboratories with local authorities to influence public policy, etc.). The research analyzed all these forms of collaboration and showed that developing participatory and collaborative dynamics between actors with different profiles in order to enable the sharing and comparison of knowledge (knowledge from all scientific disciplines, but also the experiential knowledge of beneficiaries, stakeholders, and decision-makers from civil society) requires the development of facilitation skills and techniques (in particular the ability to bring together, engage, translate, hybridize, formalize, and disseminate new knowledge) as well as observation skills. The latter focus in particular on avoiding the “in-group” effect in order to always enable the hybridization of knowledge from diverse profiles and areas of expertise. This paper aims to describe how these skills pave the way for new engineering and therefore new professions in a world of higher education and research seeking to develop a policy of impact (academic and societal) in conjunction with a policy of partnerships.