Suchergebnisse

The Fukushima nuclear catastrophe of March 2011 created a boom in independent radioactivity monitoring among citizens in Japan. Drawing on three case studies of monitoring stations in Tokyo, Kanagawa, and Fukushima, this paper analyzes citizens' practices of monitoring radioactively contaminated food from the perspective of citizen science (CS). It explores if and how the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe challenges lay-expert relations, and assumes that there is difference between expert and lay knowledge. It does so not because the terms "lay" and "expert" are static features of those individuals involved in science, but rather because of the different contexts in which knowledge production takes place. The paper argues that lay-expert relations in Japan have changed to certain degree since Fukushima, because independent monitoring was first initiated by lay people - thereby empowering nonprofessional scientists. At the same time, independent monitoring offers professional scientists new contexts for the production of "alternative knowledge". Although it is not included in the Japanese government's policymaking decisions, this alternative knowledge has a transformative potential because it is employed by civil society organizations and the antinuclear movement in Japan. Independent monitoring therefore has a (perhaps unintended) subversive character, and should be considered when evaluating the transformative potential of independent monitoring organizations and when talking about civil society and advocacy with regard to scientific issues.

The Fukushima nuclear catastrophe of March 2011 created a boom in independent radioactivity monitoring among citizens in Japan. Drawing on three case studies of monitoring stations in TakyO, Kanagawa, and Fukushima, this paper analyzes citizens' practices of monitoring radioactively contaminated food from the perspective of citizen science (CS). It explores if and how the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe challenges lay-expert relations, and assumes that there is a difference between expert and lay knowledge. It does so not because the terms "lay" and "expert" are static features of those individuals involved in science, but rather because of the different contexts in which knowledge production takes place. The paper argues that lay-expert relations in Japan have changed to a certain degree since Fukushima, because independent monitoring was first initiated by lay people - thereby empowering nonprofessional scientists. At the same time, independent monitoring offers professional scientists new contexts for the production of "alternative knowledge." Although it is not included in the Japanese government's policymaking decisions, this alternative knowledge has a transformative potential because it is employed by civil society organizations and the antinuclear movement in Japan. Independent monitoring therefore has a (perhaps unintended) subversive character, and should be considered when evaluating the transformative potential of independent monitoring organizations and when talking about civil society and advocacy with regard to scientific issues. (Asien/GIGA)

• Summary: Within the domains of health and social care the expertise of patients, service users, volunteers and carers is becoming increasingly recognized and valued. Their involvement in various aspects of research and service development is becoming more common through 'co-production', emphasizing the social capital of these groups in contributing to new types of knowledge and service development. This article develops the notion of 'co-production' further by discussing the value of involving lay people, volunteers, service users and carers in scholarly writing and dissemination activities, and will explore ways of achieving this. Bourdieu's General Theoretical Framework is used to explore how the field of 'higher education' can embrace the social and cultural capital of those outside of the academy in both research and scholarly writing activities, and how volunteers and lay researchers can be supported in such activities.• Findings: In producing this article, two volunteers were asked to reflect on their experiences of becoming researchers, and their thoughts about disseminating the research findings through scholarly writing. The social capital of experts by experience can be valued within scholarly writing, and through this creative process different representations and understandings of the social world we live in begin to emerge.• Application: The importance of synthesizing alternate epistemologies within academic debate and discourse is centrally important when involving lay people and volunteers in research. This serves to stretch the boundaries of professional knowledge further, and contributes 'insider' perspectives to our understanding of social life.

Many societies in different parts of the world have witnessed intractable conflicts. People living in these societies construct conflict frames to understand the ongoing conflicts. Based on Lederach's (1999) pyramid approach to peace building, the current study investigates how people understand the Kurdish conflict in Turkey in three segments of society: a) politicians, b) scholars and journalists and c) lay people. The Kurdish conflict was approached based on the frame analysis of Entman (1993), which includes four domains: a) problem definition, b) causal interpretation, c) moral evaluation, and d) treatment recommendation. In a first phase, focus group discussions and open-ended questionnaires were used to explore alternative conflict understandings among lay people. In a second phase, Q methodology, a method suitable to uncover socially shared viewpoints, was used to understand the conflict frames of parliamentarians, experts and lay people. In a third phase, after analyzing each participant group's frames separately, a second-order analysis was performed to see the similarities and differences between the different segments. Five different frames of the Kurdish conflict could be distinguished. In general, the meaning of the different frames, differences and commonalities within and between the segments, the usefulness of Q methodology to explore representations of conflict, and implications for conflict resolution will be discussed.

Perceptions of energy crop production are assessed in this paper. The Görlitz district (Germany) serves as a case study area for this purpose. Semi-structured interviews with farmers and standardized surveys among lay persons were conducted. Many farmers perceive themselves being responsible for providing many ecosystem services. Farmers prefer a regional scale of energy crop cultivation based on conventional crops. Improved legal frameworks and incentives would safeguard equal competition and ecosystem services. Laypersons think that drinking water, food production, biodiversity and pollination are the most important ecosystem services of agricultural landscapes. Providing biomass for renewable energy production is not considered to be an important ecosystem service. Laypersons believe that biomass production should be restricted to fields that are not needed for food production, and the use of residues or landscape management materials. According to laypersons, more money should be spent to halt the decline of ecosystem services. ; V tomto článku je hodnoceno vnímání produkce energetických plodin. Jako případová studie slouží okres Görlitz v Německu. Byly uskutečněny semi-strukturované rozhovory se zemědělci a standardizovaná dotazníková šetření s laickou veřejností. Většina farmářů vnímá sama sebe jako poskytovatele mnoha ekosystémových služeb. Farmáři preferují pěstování konvenčních energetických plodin s podporou na regionální úrovni. Lepší legislativní nástroje a dotace by podle nich zajistily rovnou soutěž a ekosystémové služby. Laická veřejnost se domnívá, že pitná voda, produkce potravin, biodiverzita a opylení představují nejdůležitější ekosystémové služby, které poskytuje zemědělská krajina. Zajištění biomasy pro produkci obnovitelné energie není považováno za důležitou ekosystémovou službu. Laická veřejnost má za to, že produkce biomasy by měla být omezena na plochy, které nejsou potřebné pro produkci potravin, využití zbytkových produktů či management krajiny. Více peněz by naopak mělo být věnováno proti úpadku ekosystémových služeb.