111111111 Dutch Science Shops National Day, 9 May 1996 "Knowledge influences/influenced" University of Groningen The Netherlands Proceedings The Science Shops A science shop is a non-commercial research bureau affiliated with a university. These bureaus mediate in research or, in other ways, provide the questioner with a scientific answer. The University of Groningen has nine science shops in five faculties. They cover the fields of biology, chemistry, economics, medicine and public health, pharmacology, history, physics, education and languages. By now, the science shops of the Dutch universities have a broad range of satisfied customers, ranging from local residents, patients associations and environmental organisations to schools, museums, city councils and starting entrepreneurs. Proceedings National Day Science Shops 1996 Knowledge influences/influenced held at the University of Groningen 9 May 1996 Editors: Henk Mulder Karin Ree Ineke de Groot Evelyn Schaafsma The national day science shops 1996 would not have been possible without the financial support of: PWT Foundation (Public, Science, Technology), Utrecht Fonger de Haan Fund, Groningen Foundation Groningen University Fund, Groningen For further information please contact the Chemistry Shop of the University of Groningen. Additional copies of this report can be ordered from the Chemistry Shop at NLG 15. Chemistry Shop University of Groningen Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen The Netherlands Tel. + 31 50 - 363 4132 Fax. + 31 50 - 363 4200 e-mail: H.A.J.Mulder@chem.rug.nl ISBN: 90 367 0657 2 (Dutch Version) Translated by M. Logtenberg (Go Translations) In this report.... Page 3 National Day Science Shops - Introduction 4 Programme 5 Welcoming speech by Geert Joosten 7 Plenary afternoon session: Knowledge influences/influenced - Introduction 9 Lecture by Dick Sclove 13 Lecture by Jose van Eijndhoven 17 Plea by Marja v.d. Sigtenhorst 19 Discussion under chairmanship of Ton Schoot Uiterkamp 21 Report Workshops 21 Workshop 1: Internal public relations of science shops: a bonus or a necessity? 24 Workshop 2: Idealism, the price tag and the quality 26 Workshop 3: Making Labour flexible 32 Workshop 4: Issues of the handicapped: A costly investment but well worth the effort. 35 Workshop 5: Internationalisation: Science shops and Eastern Europe 41 Workshop 6: Between idealism and lack of time: The development of standard methods of research. 46 Poster session 48 Open letter to the Minister of Education, Culture and Science (OC en W) 50 Reply by the Minister of OC en W, dated 8 July 1996 52 Appendices to the lecture by Dick Sclove National Day Science Shops - Introduction The national day science shops is intended for anyone who feels involved in the work of the science shops. This day is organised in rotation by the various science shops of the universities in the Netherlands. After seven years, the science shops of the University of Groningen once again took their turn on 9 May 1996. Since the seventies the Dutch science shops have been playing an important role in transferring knowledge from the universities to society. The science shops were also partly responsible for the introduction of social themes in academic research and education. Therefore, the theme of the national day science shops was: Knowledge influences/influenced . The programme for the day consisted of three parts. In the morning there were six workshops organised in parallel sessions. Posters showing research done by the science shops were on display during lunch and the get-together. During a plenary session in the afternoon two speakers examined the interaction between science and society in greater depth, paying special attention to the specific role and position of science shops. The day was rounded off with a public discussion followed by a get-together. To us the day was a success, in quantity as well as quality. There were more than 120 participants including a number of foreign guests. Besides the guest speaker from the USA, there were representatives from the Humanities and Social Sciences Federation from Canada and a delegation from the science shop from Belfast, Northern-Ireland. On the national day an open letter was sent to the Minister of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) with regard to the proposed discontinuance of the science shop of the University of Leiden. This economy measure contrasts sharply with the fact that more and more countries proceed to start science shops after the example of the Dutch science shops. In the first half of 1996 alone, initiatives can be reported in the Czech republic (a science shop in Brno since 1 January), Canada (a project by the Humanities and Social Sciences Federation to start a science shop after the Dutch example) and Israel (the Academic Community Centre finances a science shop after Dutch example; an Israeli delegation will pay a working visit to the Netherlands in August/September). The arrival of the Internet has greatly contributed to the rapid propagation of the Dutch example. In this booklet you will find the texts of the lectures and a report of the plenary discussion and the workshops. It also contains a list of participants, the titles of the posters on display, a copy of the open letter to the Minister of OCW and his reply. We hope that you will take note of this with interest. On to the next National Day! Programme National Day Science Shops Thursday 9 May 1996 in Groningen Oude Boteringestraat 19 (Premises Samen op Weg Gemeente) 10.15: Reception with coffee 10.35: Welcoming speech by Geert Joosten Chairman University Council, University of Groningen (RUG) 10.45: Six parallel workshops: (1) publicity (2) financing (3) labour issues (4) research on behalf of the handicapped (5) science shops and Eastern Europe (6) the development of standard methods of research for private research by customer groups Oude Kijk in t Jatstraat 26 (Harmoniegebouw RUG, first floor, canteen) 12.45-14.15 Lunch and poster presentation Oude Boteringestraat 33 (meeting room Doopsgezinde Gemeente) 14.15-16.30 Plenary afternoon session with: Dick Sclove Director of the Loka Institute, Amherst, USA, author of the book Democracy and Technology and: Jose van Eijndhoven Director of the Rathenau Institute, The Hague, professor of Technology Assessment, University of Utrecht. about: the interaction between science and society and the specific role of the science shops followed by a public discussion under the chairmanship of Ton Schoot Uiterkamp, professor of energy and environmental studies (IVEM), University of Groningen (RUG) Oude Kijk in t Jatstraat 26 (Harmoniegebouw RUG, first floor, canteen) 16.30: Get-together (poster presentation continued) with De Yoghurts: English/Scottish/Irish folk from Pieterburen Welcoming speech by Geert Joosten Geert Joosten, M.Sc., is the chairman of the University Council of the University of Groningen. Ladies and gentlemen. I wish to extend a warm welcome to you all to this national day of the Dutch science shops on behalf of the University of Groningen. It is gratifying to see that you have come in such large numbers to exchange knowledge and experiences, and to discuss the role of the science shops concerning the interaction between science and society in the light of the well-chosen motto of this day: Knowledge influences/influenced. The issue of the social function of the university is one of all time and place. That it is an issue of all places is emphasised by the attendance of our foreign guests. It is an honour and a pleasure to welcome especially our foreign guests from Canada, Northern-Ireland and the USA. Your attendance at this meeting is highly appreciated and it will surely enrich the results of this day. A glance at the catalogue of the university library quickly demonstrates that it also is an issue of all time. In his official speech of 1920 the Rector Magnificus of the University of Jena, the mineralogist and geologist professor Linck, speaks of Wesen und Wert der Universitaet . The Wesen of the university is that it is a community within which science can be studied in all freedom. Der Wert is that the acquired knowledge is, directly or indirectly, beneficial to society by means of training teachers. Von ihnen aus soll sich der lebendige Strom der Wahrheit ergiessen ueber das ganze Volk, soll seine seele freimachen von der Knechtschaft des Sinnlichen, sie emporheben in das Reich des Lichts, ihr eine Heimstaette schaffen im Lande der Zufriedenheit, des glueckes und der Schoenheit. Dies ist das Ziel. Aber der Weg ist weit, uneben und dornenvoll . After this, a work by F. Doellinger from 1819, Betrachtungen ueber das Wesen der Deutschen Universitaeten, is quoted with consent in which he expects a society that means well with the truth to protect, cherish and maintain its universities. Or, in the words of Karl Jaspers: (150 years later in his Die Idee der Universitaet) preserve unselfishly. These are high ideals: universities should be sanctuaries where teachers and students painstakingly work on the boundaries of knowledge motivated by the search for truth. Or, in modern jargon: a university is curiosity- driven. All this in interaction with society. As Linck puts it: So soll der Professor auch teilnehmen am oeffentlichen Leben, sich dabei aber stets ein freies und gerechtes Urteil wahren . This thought is in keeping with the quotation from Ruud Vreeman (then chairman of the Transport Union FNV) printed in the programme for this day. The proverb Wiens brood men eet, wiens woord men spreekt (He who pays the piper calls the tune) should have no place in our vocabulary. Universities are under pressure. This applies to the set-up and design of education, the programming of research as well as the arrangement of the administrative organisation. The university changes from a public organisation to a company in knowledge that has to earn an ever increasing part of its revenue in the marketplace. The government, more explicitly than in the past, expects universities to contribute to the economic development of our country. Are we witnessing the transition from a curiosity-driven university to a society-driven university whereby economic value occupies centre stage? If we look at the developments in education it is noticeable that numerical output and access to the job market are at the forefront. It seems that studying is becoming learning more and more. New forms of transfer of knowledge in a so-called active educational environment are used in an attempt to put a stop to this development. Science shops, embedded in the department, can offer students the opportunity to become acquainted with scientific research in actual stubborn practice during their study. The joining of research in separate institutions such as research schools carries the risk of putting pressure on the unity of education and research, which unity is characteristic of a university. Institutionalizing and further programming could mean that risky innovative research will have a hard time of it. Greater financial dependence of self-interested third parties could further curtail the liberty of selecting research themes. It is up to the members of the academic community, the councils and the boards to guarantee the coherence of research and education under these changing circumstances, and to take care that research will stay a critical study of science. The starting point in this should be that the findings of said research will be made available to the public. Making scientific knowledge accessible is a social task of universities. Weaker groups within society also have a right to this knowledge. The science shops make this possible and things should stay that way. After all, in order to make balanced decisions, a full democracy has every reason to ensure that the findings of the research upon which these intended decisions are based can be verified thoroughly and responsibly and, if need be, can be supplemented with contra-expertise. A university that truly wants to be embedded in society should be open to this society in all its sections. In selecting research themes, it should to some extend let itself be guided by issues that are under discussion within society: this advocates a community-driven research. Therefore, it is important for society and the universities that today the Dutch science shops present themselves collectively. Not only will the future role of the shops be considered but, and this is at least as important, it will become clear what the shops have to offer on a daily basis. The shop-window displays a large range of goods. I wish you all an informative and, above all, enjoyable day; a day to remember with pleasure. Moreover, a day that will do credit to the name of this church: Samen op weg (On the way together). Plenary afternoon session: Knowledge influences/influenced - Introduction The theme of the National Day Science Shops 1996 is: Knowledge influences/influenced. To us this symbolises the two-way traffic the science shops stand for: on the one hand, putting knowledge at the disposal of emancipatory groups with which these groups can influence the state of affairs of society and, on the other hand, influencing the development of knowledge by introducing socially relevant themes in academic research. Does knowledge influence sufficiently or should more knowledge be influenced? What is the situation? When you start to look for the word kennis (knowledge) in the titles of publications from 1995, you will frequently come upon this notion. It seems that knowledge is fashionable: Kennis verrijkt (Knowledge enriches/enriched) (NWO - Dutch Organisation for Scientific Research), Kennis in beweging (Knowledge in Motion) (EZ - Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs), Kennis en vooruitgang (Knowledge and Progress) (Stichting Maatschappij en Onderneming, Foundation Society and Enterprise), Keur van kennis (Variety of Knowledge/Assessment of Knowledge) (prof. B.M. Telder Foundation), Koersen op kennis (Guided by/Aiming at Knowledge) (Overleg Commissie Verkenningen, Consultancy Commission Explorations), Over het commercialiseren van kennis (On the commercialisation of knowledge) (Inaugural Address, C.P.A. Bartels). And this is not even the half of it. Knowledge is power; no, knowledge is business. At the moment we are in the middle of the National Debate on Knowledge (Het Nationale Kennisdebat), a nation-wide series of discussions on knowledge and education, initiated by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) under the supervision of ex-minister T. Gardeniers (who unfortunately could not come to Groningen on 9 May). During the start of the debate - at the end of March - the choice between economics and man turned out to be one of the great dilemma s. For the science shops this is a current dilemma as well. In the short twenty years that the science shops exist, the pros and cons have been weighed regularly. This did not only take place during national days, but also by means of two volumes published by Studium Generale of the University of Utrecht: Een deurtje in de toren. Tien jaar wetenschapswinkels (A small door in the tower. Ten years of science shops) (1987) and Wetenschapswinkels in de jaren 90 (Science shops in the nineties) (1991) (both edited by Jan Weerdenburg and Frans Pennings). It was not our intention to take stock of the stocktaking on the National Day 1996. We did very much want to continue the discussion and to exchange information between the various science shops and the other people involved. The metaphor for the role of the science shops - the breaking down of the door of the university s ivory tower - needs to be revised. As Henk Bodewitz remarked in the volume celebrating the tenth anniversary of the science shops (as long ago as 1987): The university of today already differs from the university of the mid-seventies when the research groups Wetenschap & Samenleving (Science and Society) and the science shops came into existence. A covered carriageway lies between society and science. Those who, at this point, enter through the door of the science shop will find out that by now it takes a lot of effort to climb the ivory tower by way of the stairwell. Meanwhile newly constructed glass elevators filled with inventive and innovative boys glide by to the top . Has the concept of the science shop outlived itself? Do the social target groups, non-commercial emancipatory groups, by now shop freely in the academic supermarket? Do the institutions of knowledge have a sufficient supply of social engagement in research and education on their shelves? And, at least as important, do they sell anything that generates an income and are they critical of their own product? Do they take up a critical dialogue with the customer? During the previous National Day in Groningen the science shops got a lashing on these points from Ruud Vreeman who at that point was chairman of the Transport Union FNV: if for the shop (or science in general) helpfulness is the first matter of importance at the cost of critical analysis, including the politics of customers, the emancipatory nature is as good as lost. The question whether the concept has outlived itself is an obligatory one. The science shops flourish and have a function in education and research. In the words of Henk Bodewitz: the door is a modern, fully automatic sliding French window. Yet, the question of the emancipatory function of science, and that of the science shops in particular, in the light of a changing society and a changing university - with the accompanying troubles of commercialising and economic measures of today, that question was worthy of a plenary session during the National Day. How do citizens and social movements get a grip on technological and scientific developments? Technology (in the broad sense of the word: practical knowledge that is used to change the natural and social environment of man) and science are unmistakably determining the environment (also in its broadest sense). Under the new liberalism citizens are reduced to consumers of technology and their directing influence on developments is determined by the marketplace. How can a more democratic development of technology and science be realized? Both speakers of the afternoon session tackled these questions. Dick Sclove focused on the possibilities that citizens have to shape their environment by means of knowledge of and involvement in technological developments and the social implications thereof. An important point of interest in comparing science shops with Community Research Centers was the degree of direct civilian involvement or participation in the research. A second point of interest was the choice of an academic or an independent form of organisation. In the second lecture Jose van Eijndhoven discussed the influence of citizens on the decision-making concerning technological and social changes. She viewed it in the light of important social trends such as globalization, enduring development and the changing role of labour. The quality of the decision-making with regard to technological, economic, and above all , normative choices should be upgraded by a broader involvement on the part of society. What possibilities do the more outgoing modern universities - and the science shops of these universities - offer in this process? Dick Sclove: Democracy and Technology. Community Research in U.S.; a comparison with Dutch Science Shops and some challenges Dr. Richard E. Sclove is executive director of the Loka Institute, Amherst, USA. The Loka Institute is an independent, nonprofit organization founded in 1987 to study the social effects of technologies, and to advocate democratizing science and technology. Currently there are 3 staff members full-time, 2 part-time. Dick Sclove is the founder of networks like FAST (Federation of Activists on Science and Technology) and CRC (Community Research Centers). He is the author of 'Democracy and Technology' (The Guilford Press, 1995). How I became interested in Dutch science shops: In 1979 I read an article by Arie Rip (University of Twente) and Dorothy Nelkin. In 1989, I was involved with abortive effort to establish a Boston area science shop, in collaboration with activist organization 'Science for the People.' I began publicly advocating emulation of the Dutch science shop system nationwide in U.S. in 1993, partly in response to Clinton administration, post-Cold War science and technology policy initiatives. October 1994 I visited with science shop staff at University of Amsterdam and University of Twente, and corresponded by e-mail with several others. I must apologize for talking English today, my Dutch vocabulary consists of about nine words. However, it may please you to know that the very first word that I learned in Dutch was "wetenschapswinkel". Ever since I keep asking myself if that is how it goes with Dutch babies, too.... (network) Loka functions as an Internet-coordinated 'virtual institute', actively networking thousands of groups and individuals worldwide. 'Loka' is a 7000 year old Sanskrit word for 'ethical thinking to try to do well for the world'. Early 1995 Loka Institute began an initiative to promote creation of a National Community Research Network (NCRN) in the U.S., modeled partly on Dutch science shop system. (I chose the term "community research" or "community-based research" partly because "science shop" tends to convey the misleading impression that the research methods used are exclusively natural science.) About 230 are currently subscribed to our "scishops" listserver (partly due to my article in the Chronicle of Higher Education of 3/31/95 now 24% of the subscribers are non-U.S.). The big surprise in the responses was: dozens of people are already involved in some type of U.S. community-based research program, centre, or routine activity. None of those who contacted me had known how much already existed--and we are continuing to learn about more Centers or programs every week. So I can't give any statistical overview yet of how many Centers or programs exist, how many projects they complete annually, or the composition of the types of research they do. (community research in U.S.) Participatory research A major difference between U.S. community research and Dutch science shops: Dutch shops generally operate on a professional researcher/client model. In contrast, U.S. community research is more often based on "participatory research (PR)" or "participatory action research (PAR)" methods. In both systems, a community group, nonprofit organization, trade union, etc. normally poses the initial problem or research question. But in PR or PAR, the group asking the question is also involved as an active collaborator in most or all stages of conducting and completing the research. Participatory action research (PAR) is not only participatory, but intended to contribute actively toward, and also learn from constructive social change movements. In the USA this participation could also offer to some extend a remedy to the common belief that you yourself are to blame if things go bad for you. The origins of PR are largely in the developing world, where it emerged as part of popular reactions against elitist, top-down development programs. Or else influenced, for example, by Brazilian educator Paulo Friere's adult education and literacy programs, oriented toward developing popular consciousness required for self-respect and effective, radical political transformation. But participatory approaches have also developed spontaneously, "from below", e.g., by residents of neighbourhoods who feared local toxic waste exposure or by HIV-AIDS activists insisting on a strong role in clinical trials for new drugs. (More examples of research groups can be found in the appendix to this report). When I visited several Dutch science shops (1994) and asked about participatory research here, I was told it is not really done. (Though community groups may be represented on the general advisory board to a science shop, or may be included on ad hoc committees set up to oversee individual science shop research project.) Indeed, the groups asking the questions are pleased to not have to conduct their own research, because that way they can put more of their scarce resources into other activities. I'm curious whether indeed the combination of government supported universities and education in the Netherlands, and your greater degree of cultural homogeneity, explains this difference between the Netherlands and the U.S. E.g., you are not entirely as homogeneous or class-free as the U.S. stereotype would have it; are science shops adequately serving the needs, for example, of immigrant workers in the Netherlands? Community research: at the university or independent Much community research in the U.S. is organized by independent, community-based nonprofit organizations, rather than by universities. Compared with the Netherlands, perhaps this, and the prevalence of participatory research methods, both reflect the greater degree of class stratification and cultural, racial, and ethnic diversity in the U.S. Many of our colleges and universities are private (i.e., not government supported) institutions, and even the public ones sometimes have fairly large tuition fees. Universities have also often operated in the U.S. in 'high-handed' (authoritarian, community-insensitive ways). Thus, when you talk with social activists or grassroots/community activists the U.S., you find a large reservoir of scepticism or outright hostility toward universities and university researchers. In this context, it is not hard to understand why independent nonprofit organizations are responsible for a healthy portion of community-based research in the U.S. And it is also easy to see what participatory research methods are appealing: they are a way for those asking the question to help ensure that the subsequent research is genuinely serving their interests. On the other hand, a major strength of the Dutch system is the extent to which students are engaged as researchers. This both introduces students to socially engaged research, and also is very economical for society as a whole. This is a central feature of the Dutch system that I would like to see copied more in the U.S. Dutch/U.S. cross-fertilization? The Dutch science shop system has, up until now, had essentially no impact on the evolution of community-based research in the U.S. -largely, I assume, because the Dutch system has not been well known in the U.S. Notwithstanding the extent of U.S. community-based research, and our different social histories and circumstances, I know there are features of the Dutch system from which U.S. can learn. However there is (to an outsider) an odd lack of relationship/interaction between the Dutch science shops and programs in Science, Technology and Society. As a result, there are relatively little recent studies that I am aware of about the evolution, structure, functions and overall significance of the Dutch science shop system. (plans and prospectives) The Loka Institute has organized a national advisory board for our effort to try to promote/create a National Community Research Network (NCRN). We are organizing a planning meeting for the NCRN on July 19-21, 1996. We are inviting members of national advisory board (who are mostly professional practitioners of PAR), representative grassroots partners, a few government officials, sympathetic journalists (maybe 50 people). As conference outcome we seek: a consensually agreed mission statement for the NCRN, description of the NCRN's proposed functions and organizational structure, a preliminary implantation plan and agreed division of labour for acting on the plan. We are currently trying to plan the agenda for the meeting openly over our scishops Internet discussion list. We believe that establishing a loosely structured network will help increase the number of participating Centers, open up the possibility for coordinated efforts, and thus broaden the availability and efficacy of community-based research. Creating such a network is particularly critical and timely now, because severe budget cuts in federal programs addressing social and environmental problems are forcing community groups and local governments to try to take up the slack. The objective of the Centers individually is to provide various constituencies with the resources to investigate social, technological and environmental concerns, and to act on them through direct voluntary effort, legal action, or public policy channels. We hope that a central goal for the Centers collectively, i.e., for the network as a whole, will be to evolve into a system that will come to represent the decentralized, democratic core of a new national laboratory system. That is, rather than acquiesce to the perpetuation of a $25 billion-per-year national lab network that is an anachronistic byproduct of World War II and the Cold War, we seek to incubate an alternative national research system that will be responsive to community and citizen concerns of the 21st century. As an interim step toward this long-range ambition, we hope that the NCRN network will also function as an organizational platform for building a national constituency concerned with diverting local, regional and national research funds and research capabilities to community-based research, and thus away from military and other anachronistic or socially dubious research endeavours. This may be politically totally irrealistic, but we will try anyway. If the current research budget allocation remains intact the established research institutes will keep causing problems at a faster rate than even well organised Community Research Institutes can cope with. The end of the Cold War now offers a historic chance for reorganisation. Propositions: 1. Should science shops take on the challenge and develop transnational collaborations in community based research? With (a) science shops (or related efforts) now established in many nations (e.g., the Netherlands, Ireland, Denmark, Austria, Germany, Czech Republic, Canada, U.S., and ???); and (b) especially with increasingly access to the Internet; are there opportunities now to try to develop popularly-based, transnational research collaborations? Could science shops in several nations: - Coordinate a joint effort to investigate simultaneously the local activities of the same multinational corporation in each nation; - Evaluate international agreements (such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) from community-based perspectives; - Conduct popular technology assessments on the evolving international division of labour, or on opportunities for local involvement in guiding the evolution of transnational technological systems (i.e., telecommunications, transportation)? How would we nurture a collective capacity to initiate such collaborations, and how would suitable topics be identified? Can we develop collaborative relations with related community-based research institutions in the developing world (e.g., via the international network of Indigenous Knowledge Centres--central to which is the Centre for International Research and Advisory Networks [CIRAN] in the Hague?) Apart from possible transnational research collaborations, what steps can we take for better transnational mutual awareness and learning among science shops, community research Centers, participatory researchers, etc.? 2. Professional/client vs. Participatory action research methodologies: Is there an appropriate role for greater use of participatory research methods in the Netherlands? 3. Can science shops play a role in a more comprehensive political effort to transform science and technology to become more democratically guided and socially responsible? My understanding is that the early interest of many of the founders of the original Dutch science shops, 1970's, was to transform science generally. That large ambition proved impractical in the early years and was abandoned on pragmatic grounds. But with a vibrant national network of some 50 science shops, and significant support from the organizations that have been your clients over the years, is it time to revisit the question of trying to play a more overtly political role in transforming the basic organization of research and innovation? Or is the social base for such an effort still too small and weak--indeed, could the attempt lead to a damaging backlash from powerful institutions against the current science shop system? I am asking the same question in the U.S., where, in principle, I would like to see our proposed National Community Research Network grow gradually into a national grassroots constituency and organizational platform for trying to reorganize the entire U.S. research and development system. But that is a huge ambition, and perhaps entirely unrealistic. Is developing such a broader transformational politics of science and technology a task that we should be pursuing in part through transnational collaboration? In my view, some of the necessary components of a more comprehensive, transformational democratic politics of science and technology would have to include, among other things: - democratic involvement in reorganizing all science and technology institutions and programs to make them more democratically responsive or accountable - democratic involvement in establishing government research-and-development priorities, and in setting and implementing other policies influencing or regulating science and technology; - worker and community empowerment in corporate strategic planning and R&D; - a system of popular oversight or early warning in all major government and university R&D programs; - participatory technology assessment (including studies of the way "unrelated" technologies interact with another to produce combined social consequences) and high-order attention to the impact of technologies on democratic values, processes, and institutions; - "civic technological empowerment"--that is, the ability of local controlled, democratically governed or accountable institutions to evolve infrastructural systems, that are more amenable to local control, and to and nurture more locally self-reliant (and, therefore, democratically governable) economies; - effective feedback among each of the above (e.g., the results of technology assessments should feed into popular deliberations and ongoing science-and-technology policymaking and institutional design.) Lecture by Jose van Eijndhoven. Prof. Dr. Jose van Eijndhoven is director of the Rathenau Instituut in the Hague and professor of Technology Assessment at the department of Science, Technology and Society of the University of Utrecht. The Rathenau Institute (Formerly NOTA: Nederlandse Organisatie voor Technologisch Aspectenonderzoek) is an independent organisation that is concerned with supporting social and political judgement in relation to scientific and technological developments. My basic assumption is that all of us are here because we are all concerned about the question how we can democratise science and technology. Dick Sclove has already pointed this out and at my institute, the Rathenau, this is one of the current questions. Of course, this applies to the science shops as well. As the emphasis of Dick Sclove s story is on participatory research, I have reflected on the role of participation as opposed to the digging up of underlying points of view. I will use this viewpoint because I think it is important to the questions which projects a science shop should take on, how to carry out these projects and what the role of participation is in this matter. As far as the subject of discussion about the transformation of research policy is concerned, and how this can possibly be taken up by science shops,: I do not have the answer to that but, coincidentally, I went to a meeting yesterday about the Groenboek voor Innovatie (Green Book on Innovation) held by the European Union and I think that this generates some questions. Both points mentioned earlier have everything to do with topical questions. Of course, a number of these questions also arose twenty years ago during the initial period of science shops - the cold war and the war in Vietnam played their part - but at this moment there are definite reasons to ask oneself: How democratic are the practising of science and technology and their developments? One of the developments of this moment in time is that a lot of affairs will take place on a global scale. Although many have doubts about this: as a number of matters are crossing borders , others become increasingly oriented towards the region. In the discussion the importance of cross-border activities that are important to countries and companies to maintain a competitive position is strongly emphasized. This clearly steers the discussion. The developments in information technology are often mentioned, developments that are responsible for the fact that the location at which activities take place becomes less and less important: If we cannot compete in the Netherlands, we will go to Korea or one of the other growing tigers of South- east Asia and therefore we will have to join the technological rat race. At the same time there are a number of objectives such as enduring development that belong to the political range of ideas as well. This means that you should not only look at the here and now but also at other generations and locations. One question that is terribly important and that should be high on the list of priorities - and indeed is, as far as the activities of the science shops are concerned - is the question which changes occur with respect to the position and role of labour. In a number of respects society is experiencing shifts, e.g. globalization, which cause a shift in objectives. The ever ongoing flexibilization is very important in that the occupational certainties are getting smaller all the time. I am deeply worried by the consequences with regard to the stability of people s lives. It is not only a question of where do we get the money from? , but also a question of What exactly is the position of labour in life in this shifting situation? . I am not merely talking about labour in the traditional sense, but also about social services and the position of those who cannot compete on the labour market for the full 100%. So, there is a whole collection of shifts and changes. I therefore believe that it is once again very important to think about the role of science and technology, the influence of their development on social developments and the various aspects that carry weight in this matter. In the discussion, for instance in newspapers and among government officials, the role of the economy is strongly emphasised. Other aspects are in danger of disappearing from the discussion altogether. This is connected with the fact that normative elements in the discussion are quickly brushed aside as soon as technological choices come into the picture, and this is nothing new for 20 or 25 years ago the science shops and departments of Science and Society already raised this matter. It is simply a choice of We are in competition, we will have to join in and lower our prices, there is no choice . Actually, there is a choice because it is all about the questions what kind of society one wants to build, what is imperative and what sacrifices does one have to make. In politics those aspects are regularly in danger of being treated as matters of detail and, particularly the discussions on the thrusting forward of the Netherlands and, for instance, the discussion about health care are in danger of drifting apart. The problem I see is that the people that are involved in one discussion are not the same as those taking part in the other discussion. During the discussion about het Groenboek yesterday, one could see any number of respectable gentlemen in grey suits saying We have to compete . On the other hand, during the discussion of health care the word economy is hardly ever mentioned. So, one is faced with two separate discussions and the problem is: how does one bring these two together? One of the problems is that relatively few people are interested in the discussion about technology. Few citizens are interested because this is about the big money and the big companies . Most people view this as not being a part of their lives . I think that it is important to balance the discussion by involving the general public again. Yet, that is not all. On the one hand people drop out and on the other hand certain aspects are simply ignored or dealt with on a very basic level. I will illustrate this with a number of real-life cases from the Rathenau Institute. In my opinion these are also of relevance to point out which choices science shops can make. The Rathenau was introduced just now as an Institute for Technology Assessment Studies. At this moment I would not even consider adding the word studies . When the Rathenau was established 10 years ago - then it was called NOTA (Nederlandse Organisatie voor Technologisch Aspecten Onderzoek - Dutch Organisation for Technology Assessment) - that indeed was the assignment but, at a certain moment, doing research and writing lengthy reports to have them disappear in some drawer did not seem the way to go and the conclusion was reached that it was about something totally different. Two years ago the mission of the Rathenau Institute changed from doing research in the field of TA to the objective to support the social debate and the political judgement of science and technology . We have described this change of mission as follows: In reality, the judgement of scientific and technological aspects is an ongoing process within society. We observe that problems arise during this process, for instance, a number of groups drop out of the discussion or only a very limited number of aspects is taken into consideration during the social debate (e.g. merely economic aspects). This is the way in which we are giving shape to our task: we exist because there is dissatisfaction with the way decisions concerning science and technology are being taken at this moment. When someone asks if one day the Rathenau can be closed down I answer: Why, certainly, as soon as the problems with regard to this decision-making are solved, you can close us down immediately . We try to determine in which way certain aspects that are lacking can still be brought into the discussion. The best way to illustrate this is by giving of a number of examples. Over the last two years the discussion about telecommunication has come up quickly in Europe and particularly in the Netherlands. Slogans such as if we do not act quickly.... and get onto the Electronic Highway as soon as possible in the wake of the USA - still the great example. The point at issue is that it has received a lot of media coverage, but that there is almost no discussion going on about the subject within society. The Rathenau is looking at a number of presuppositions of the debate. For example, the presupposition more competition is beneficial . Yet, opening the market for telecommunication does not automatically mean competition. The PTT (Dutch Post Office/Telecommunications) has all the know-how and a very strong position, therefore, a competitor can , in theory, freely enter the market but in reality this is nearly impossible. So we do not immediately start out by broadening the discussion, but point out the possible presuppositions that have a part in the proposition: anyone can join in therefore this is an open process . A second aspect of this discussion is the notion that the government should leave matters to the private sector, after all, the government is about to withdraw. Is that a valid presupposition? We took a look at history to see what had happened with the libraries, the media, the press etc. It appears that there have always been periods in which the government says this is specific for a certain group and therefore a matter of private enterprise or This is government business because these matters fall under the questions at issue in a democratic state . An example is the telephone coming within everybody s reach at a reasonable price in the Netherlands. This demonstrates that the developments in the allocation of tasks between government and private initiative is strongly dependent upon current affairs. We have tried to find out was lies behind the policies of this moment and how to make this visible. The example mentioned above illustrates two things. Firstly, in the case of the telecommunication discussion, there was a demand for a broadening of the debate while certain aspects were lacking from that debate. One can attempt to broaden the debate but when there are only a limited number of arguments available, it cannot be done. After all, in such a case one does not broaden the group of those who are interested and have the feeling that they are affected by the debate. This discussion is also related to the subject community research : is it useful to get a lot of people involved in a debate, people that have no idea what they could possibly talk about because there are no arguments, or should one find the arguments first? Secondly, there is the discussion about biochemistry. In this case the activities of the Rathenau Institute consisted of bringing together parties that have widely differing points of view, besides supporting certain arguments that are in danger of getting too little attention (e.g. the question of the ethical arguments, for or against, the genetic engineering of animals). In a later stage we came to the conclusion that there indeed was a debate in the Netherlands, but that, in fact, only experts took part in the discussion. It is true that these experts came from the social organisations concerned as well as from the industry, the government and the field of research, yet, the debate could not be broadened. At that moment we decided, by analogy with the Danish process, that perhaps it would be a good idea to broaden the scope of the discussion and to involve laymen. This could reduce the distance between the experts and the Dutch civilian. We had the example of the Danish Consensus Conference on our minds in which a number of citizens that are interested in a subject are recruited by means of advertisements. They are given the opportunity to study the subject and subsequently express their views on this development. Two years ago this method was applied for genetic engineering and last year for predictive medical research. It is striking that citizens as it were act as a sort of lay jury: they try to be above the parties. They listen to all the experts, ask questions, and are allowed to discuss the matter and, if need be, to invite other experts to obtain additional information. From this they subsequently conclude how they judge this development. The fact that people want to feel that the scientist at the other end of the table can be trusted always turns out to be a very important factor, and that is an aspect of the debates I personally find most interesting. This strongly steers the conclusions that are drawn: experts that come across as being reliable have a great influence on the forming of opinion. A second remarkable facet is that, as I mentioned earlier, citizens indeed place themselves above the parties involved. They do not opt for one of the most extreme viewpoints, for instance that of the Dierenbescherming (Society for the prevention of cruelty to animals) or that of GeneFarm, the engineers (or should I still say breeders) of the bull Herman. They try to form a clear picture for themselves of what is actually going on. Yet, this method has a number of problems attached to it: you always have the experts on one side and the citizens on the other. This is why, at this moment, we at Rathenau are testing a number of different forms by means of the platform Science and Ethics that is housed at the Rathenau Institute. Laymen and experts are placed together in a single panel during this process. We have tried this with the theme the development of nature. The expert than ask are we here to educate the laymen? . Besides, it is very demanding to ensure that the composition of the panel is as evenly balanced as possible. The reason that I mention these examples is that I feel that different matters are under discussion during the debate on science and technology. First, in a certain situation a number of analyses can be lacking. In such a case the science shops can make a contribution in order to balance the discussion. Second, there is the analysis of which aspects are represented by groups and which are not. For instance, during the discussions about subjects concerning the environment, many ecology groups are involved, at debates on predictive genetic research countless patients associations are involved. So, specific expertise is clearly present. What is not so clear is what groups of ordinary Dutch citizens think of this. In some cases it is necessary to articulate a number of group viewpoints, while in others it is essential to create a more participatory process. In case of the latter one should also include extreme points of view. So, one can talk about participatory research as being a single activity when it is about giving a forgotten group a voice in the matter. However, in case the aim is to dig up underlying arguments, this is not always the most objective approach. My conclusion is worded in my propositions. Whether you choose one route or the other depends on what you regard as problematic in a certain situation, and both routes lead to dissimilar results. For the science shops this means - and this is probably not a new lesson but one well worth remembering - that one choice leads to a different result than the other. Let me go back to the transformation of research policy for a moment. To me this is an open question in the sense that I have not prepared myself to incorporate it into my speech. The Groenboek says: Europe should compete better and subsequently asks What are our specific problems in competing better and what changes should we make to the system? . At that meeting I wanted to make clear that it is not all about competing but that it is also a matter of choosing in which type of society you wish to live: a message hardly ever heard in those circles, if at all. There, the discussion takes place at the extreme end in the spectrum. At the same time, the issue of the competitive position, I assume, will hardly have been discussed by the participants of this National Day. I think that it is alarming that these two discussions are so far apart. I think that it is important to give some serious thought to Sclove s appeal transformation of research policy, is it of any use? . The question is, however, what definite connections are there. Taking up his remark about military research, I would like to offer a ray of hope. Last week the Rathenau was asked by the European Union (but I want to broaden it and ask the Dutch population) to investigate what we have done about defence TA. The Netherlands had or has a network on this; can the EU take a lesson from this for the conversion of the military industry? Perhaps this is a theme that can be taken up somewhere to get a grip on that transformation. I am not particularly optimistic about the speed and ease with which this process takes place, but I think that this kind of definite lead is instrumental in achieving small changes. Propositions: 1. Increasing the participation of citizens and articulating underexposed perspectives are two routes that can contribute to democratically steering the developments in technology and the study of science, and to make them function more responsibly in a social sense. 2. Science shops will have to choose participation or articulation as their primary concern. In all cases this choice will have to be made for each project. Paying an equal share of attention to both goals is of no use. Plea by Marja v.d. Sigtenhorst Marja van den Sigtenhorst, M.Sc., is co-ordinator of the science shop of the University of Leiden. In a first reaction to the presentation of both speakers, Marja van den Sigtenhorst (science shop Leiden) calls attention to the impending closure of the science shop of the University of Leiden. The introductions by Sclove and van Eijndhoven showed that the concept of the science shop is very successful and that it is copied by numerous countries. At the same time a number of science shops in the Netherlands, the birthplace of the concept, are threatened in their existence. More and more universities opt for economy instead of for society. The science shop s problem concerning knowledge is one of supply, not of demand. Recently, the science shop of the University of Leiden was, out of the blue, confronted with the university s decision to close the shop down, not because the shop did not meet the standard of quality but for mere financial reasons. In its battle against closure the science shop turned to the social rank and file, their customers, for support. A great number of social organisations have informed the university council and the Board of Governors by letter that the closure is unacceptable to them and that they feel that it is harmful to the university s social function and that it limits the possibilities of financially weak groups to have research carried out. Marja van den Sigtenhorst cites a great number of statements taken from these letters that demonstrate the appreciation and the indispensability of the work of the science shop: Stichting Down s Syndroom (Down s Syndrome foundation): You must realise that we are living in a country in which , as far as Down s Syndrome is concerned, millions and millions are spent on research, but exclusively on one aspect: prenatal diagnostics and termination of pregnancy. The government is not even willing to structurally support the syndrome-specific parents organisation, our foundation, in its own field. Obviously, having research done that takes a different perspective is, on this financial basis, absolutely impossible. Therefore, it is highly important to us that the Dutch universities have science shops for research aimed at improving the quality of life of families with children that suffer from Down s Syndrome . Nederlandse Vereniging voor Hyperaktiviteit (Dutch hyperactivity association): Have you any idea what this shop means to various grassroots organisations such as ours? The science shop is a place where people listen to what we have to say, a place where our organisation with its questions is taken seriously. A place where we are not frowned away as laymen because it is conceivable that, especially because one is a patient and is involved, one can have a better view of the matter than all sorts of administrators and members of the medical profession. A place from which important research projects with a clear social relevance are being initiated, guided and co-ordinated . Stichting Begeleidingsgroep voor Vrouwen met Masthopatie (counselling group for women with Masthopathy): Without the science shop our organisation would not have access to the information that the science shop has access to. Professional supervision is available for the inquiring student so that all information will be interpreted correctly. Such a critical supervision would not be possible for the people of our foundation that have not had a university education. To conclude, the financial side of research, generally speaking, is an obstacle for non-profit organisations such as ours. In this respect the science shop of the University of Leiden also is a unique facility because our contribution stays within reasonable limits . Stichting Vrouwengezondheidscentrum Delft e.o. (women s health-centre foundation Delft): Translating questions from everyday practice into a sound and interesting research programme requires counselling and an open mind. In this process the science shop had a distinct function. It would be a shame indeed if that function and the ability to link burning issues to well-founded scientific research would be lost . Stichting WEMOS (Foundation for Medical Development Co-operation): At this moment we are involved in formulating research questions for which we have no funding at this point. We are talking about innovative research and that is one of the reasons why it is hard for the established institutes to carry out this research. Particularly for a small organisation that wants to be socially active, the existence of an institute such as the science shop is essential. The results of an inquiry into family-planning in Bangladesh, made by the science shop on our behalf, had an important function with respect to the Dutch contribution during the recent UN conference on World population in Cairo. For us there is no substitute available for the science shop . Industriebond FNV (Dutch Trades Union Congress/industrial branch): For years the science shop has successfully carried out research on our initiative, often with great social effects. The science shop is one of the last resorts that members and executives can go to without having to worry about excessive terms of payment . Stichting Bewonersondersteuning Den Haag (residents support foundation The Hague): By closing down the science shop many organisations will no longer have access to the knowledge and expertise of the people of the University of Leiden and will thus be silenced . Samenwerkingsverband van Migrantenorganisaties Leiden (cooperation of migrants organisations Leiden): Because of its easily accessible services the science shop is playing a valuable role in signalling social changes. Closing the shop would mean an impoverishment of scientific research based on questions stemming from social needs . Vereniging Milieudefensie (Friends of the Earth Holland): The science shop offers us the opportunity to obtain scientific advice and to have research carried out. Due to our limited financial means this would otherwise be impossible for us . Stichting Greenpeace Nederland (Greenpeace Holland): Environmental organisations such as Greenpeace have a strong need for knowledge that is being acquired at universities. It has become clear that organisations such as the science shop of the University of Leiden play a very important role in making scientific knowledge accessible for social groups. These shops play an important role in the translation of scientific knowledge and function as an antenna for the university in picking up signals regarding relevant fields of research. Besides, the groups that the science shops work for usually do not have an alternative for acquiring the knowledge that the science shop makes available to them . Stichting Natuur en Milieu (Nature and Environment Foundation): In our opinion the science shop performs a bridging function to society. Through the science shop citizens and non-profit organisations get access to the knowledge that universities possess. We feel that this is an achievement that completes our democracy since the authorities and companies often do possess the financial means to have the knowledge of the universities at their disposal. Thanks to the science shops the ecology groups can, for instance, by means of scientifically funded arguments and ideas, make an invaluable contribution to the environmental policy. Therefore, the preservation of the science shop can easily be justified towards the taxpayers . Meldpunt Netwerk Gezondheid en Milieu (reporting station network health and environment): As co-ordinators of the reporting station we have the impression that of all the potential partners that we have approached, the science shops are closest to the population and are willing to think along with us without prejudice . The science shop feels very much strengthened by these letters. Propositions: 1. If universities no longer feel it their task to make research and knowledge available to organisations of limited financial means by means of the science shops, the gap between science and society is getting wider. 2. By increasing financial problems the universities are forced to opt for economy rather than for man. Discussion under chairmanship of Ton Schoot Uiterkamp Prof. Dr. Ton Schoot Uiterkamp is professor of energy and environmental sciences at the University of Groningen (department IVEM). Transition to durability and quality is the core of the research programme of this department. The chairman gives the audience the opportunity to ask question and discuss matters with the two speakers. Henk Mulder (science shop chemistry, University of Groningen) inquires after Jose van Eijndhoven s opinion on Dick Sclove s proposition that science shops should do their best to democratise science in a broad sense and that they should be involved in research policy. Jose van Eijndhoven: The opinion of the Rathenau Institute, based on experience, is that interfering in a debate on the development of knowledge can, in some instances, be useful and should be judged on the level of the concrete theme and the state of the scientific and political discussion. At the moment there is a discussion of innovation going on with the industry. There has just been a meeting concerning this debate. As regards content this debate is poorly and chiefly expresses the wish to catch up with the developments in Japan and the USA. Can the science shops and the Rathenau play a role in the realisation of a discussion with more substance? To some extent, and only on a concrete level. Conversion of the military industry is a good example of a (new and open) domain where such a role could be useful. At the moment many changes are taking place in this sphere and matters can be more easily influenced in times of change than during a standstill. In tightly shut discussions such as the one about the Betuwelijn (the much debated issue of the proposed building of a railway through the Betuwe, a relatively green part of the Netherlands) the Rathenau relinquishes a role of its own. Pieter van Broekhuizen (science shop chemistry, University of Amsterdam) endorses that science shops should look for possibilities on a concrete level. The European debate on innovation is primarily governed by the economy and not by the possibilities of innovation to, for instance, improve working conditions and the environment. On a more concrete level the science shops can apply their knowledge to organise a broad discussion as was done regarding the usage and replacement of organic solvents in printing offices, metalworks, etc. In this way - in clearly defined areas of interest - an innovation policy can be initiated within companies. Jose van Eijndhoven discerns two conditions for these small and specific subjects: 1. alternatives exist (are being developed) 2. There is a (political) basis for promoting a change. A good example is the use of pesticides in agriculture. In this case there are apparent alternatives and support for change is growing at the Ministry of Agriculture. Pieter van Broekhuizen: interference in the European debate can take place on a higher level by challenging the points of view (profit and the race with Japan and the USA). Does the Rathenau take no part in this? For the science shops that level is unworkable and abstract. Dick Sclove: Not a single organisation takes a role in the R&D policy in the USA. It seems impossible to play such a role. This also holds for the concrete level, as can be seen from the attempts made by the social (environmental; labour) organisations to influence part of the R&D policy concerning the semiconductor industry. Dick Stelder (science shop economy, University of Groningen) goes into Dick Sclove s proposition that the Dutch science shops could take better advantage of the client s participation in the research. He states that the customer is primarily involved in the development of the research issue but not in the realization of the results of the research. This is functional and usually the customer's choice: the customer wants objective results with scientific value. These can be of significance to the social problem whereas results that have been produced in cooperation, not independently, are often less valuable. Not the content but the status is the decisive factor. Dick Sclove: The value of participation depends on the question and the position of the questioner. There are good examples of successful research carried out by laymen (with support from scientists), for instance the epidemiological investigation into leukaemia in industrial settings. Henk Mulder suggests a connection between the form of organisation of Dutch science shops at universities and the limited role of participation in research. Does participation in the Netherlands take place commensurable with cooperation with organisations such as Greenpeace (who have their own researchers) and not with academic research? Dick Sclove: Participation is not about professional organisations but about laymen in scientific research. Ton Schoot Uiterkamp asks the workshops to give their comments. Maureen Butter (science shop biology, University of Groningen) mentions the workshop on making labour flexible. This is a trend with a diversity of social implication. Yet, a broad basis for discussion does not exist. Possibly, development will take place similar to that of the environmental issues, in which science specialises more and more and the social discussion fades away. How can this be prevented? Do science shops have a role in such co-ordinating discussions, in connecting social debate and scientific development? Do science shops have an individual function in signalling problems? Jose van Eijndhoven: The flexibilization of labour is a good example of a terrain where science shops can have a function in articulating the questions. It is a new subject and much too comprehensive for one scientific debate. In such cases where the problems have not yet crystallised out, specialisation can become a disadvantage. In this case, the question is what is the appropriate question in this matter? , rather than Who is the right customer in this case? . This phase of the development does not yet lend itself to participation in research. Dick Sclove: A network can have an important function, especially in such broad discussions. The FAST-web for instance, compiles the input of organisations from various quarters (environment, antimilitarism et al.) and thus creates possibilities for a broader R&D debate. This can also be used in organisations: in the USA 50% of the members of the National Council for Research Policy (of the Ministry of Education and Science) is working for organisations outside science. In Japan there are also journalists on the council. Then a short discussion about the results of the workshop Publicity follows. Ton Schoot Uiterkamp rounds off the discussion with a brief summary. He concludes that the science shops possess the experience and the connections in the world of science and society to stimulate the right questions with respect to social developments. The function of science shops is undisputed and widely appreciated and they would do wise to make this known. The science shops can create a distinct profile for themselves, not just in times of threat, as the science shop of Leiden is going through at the moment, but particularly at other times as well. Judging from the broad interest and the contribution of various foreign guests, this National Day is a good example of that. Workshop 1: Internal public relations of science shops: a bonus or a necessity? Background of the workshop. Most people probably think of public relations and information directed at the general public when they hear the word Publicity . Information on these subjects will probably always be, and stay, in demand but these subjects are rather too broad to discuss within the scope of a single workshop and besides, it would be walking the beaten tracks. Moreover, in actual practice the external pr. differs for every science shop and in many instances cooperation exists with a central public relations department (the university bureau for instance). In a word: we thought that it would be very difficult to put something for everyone into the workshop regarding this subject. After some brainstorming we came up with the idea to choose internal public relations as the theme of the workshop. Why this theme? Especially now - a time of reorganisations, economy measures, etc. - it is important that science shops become (more) strongly oriented towards internal target groups, that they work at goodwill and prove their specific value within the own organisation. In this context, the own organisation stands for: the university itself, that subsequently can be subdivided into departments, boards, councils, and also into lecturers and students. In other words: the science shops should create and/or maintain support within the own organisation. What does the individual science shop do about this and what means does it bring into action. Are there alternatives or better ways to do this? Objective The objective of the workshop was twofold: on the one hand it was about the exchange of information between the science shops themselves and, on the other hand - the main objective - we wanted this workshop to give something to hold on to, something to initiate the broadening and the substantiating of internal support. Set-up After a short introduction to the workshop by Ineke de Groot (co-ordinator of the Language Research and Information Bureau of the University of Groningen), two speakers briefly addressed the subject of internal public relations. The first speaker was Astrid Heijns, a student of communication and as a voluntary worker of the Language Research and Information Bureau co-responsible for public relations and information. She approached the subject from a more theoretical point of view. The second speaker, Mr. Brand (managing director of Brand Communications) made the practice of his own profession his point of departure. All this formed the initial impetus to making an assignment, the most important part of the workshop. The participants set to work in small groups with clear instructions and there was plenary feedback afterwards. Astrid Heijns (public relations assistant of the Language Research and Information Bureau and student of communication): theoretical framework and internal public relations of science shops. Astrid discussed the internal public relations of the science shops, i.e.: aimed at internal target groups (within the university), in the framework of general theoretical views on public relations. Public relations meaning the systematic promotion of mutual understanding between an organisation and its relation groups. The relation groups that the workshop dealt with are the groups that are of importance to the continuation and the well-functioning of the science shop. For convenience s sake the workshop used the term internal public relations . Astrid emphasized that in actual practice the internal and external relation groups can obviously not be regarded as unrelated entities, that there is always an interaction between the two. Internally the science shop should be confident of support to be able to attend to its customer groups. However, contacts with external customer groups can be used to indicate what the significance of the science shop is, and can be. The question that we have to ask ourselves is how we can promote the mutual understanding that we saw in the definition of public relations, between the science shop and the internal relation groups. The simple answer is: by way of well-thought out and systematic communication with these relation groups. This requires a methodically mapping of issues. Astrid used the Language Research and Information Bureau of the university of Groningen as an example to illustrate this. The following issues were systematically worked out and discussed: -The general objective of the science shop. -The (more) specific goals of the science shop. -The various target groups that can be distinguished internally. -What should be accomplished with these target groups and on what level (level of knowledge, attitude or behaviour): We want to accomplish that [target group} ..knows, thinks or is able to . -The themes that should surface during communication with the various target groups (according to the 5 W s : who, what, where, why and when). -The means that can be used on the basis of the above mentioned information, taking into account scope, available expertise and budget. The fleshing out of these matters eventually resulted in a publicity plan in the form of a matrix. This matrix was used as a framework during the fulfilment of the task by the participants of the workshop. G.J. Brand, M.Sc., managing director Brand Communications: the professional practice. Mr. Brand discussed the practical aspects of communicating with customer groups from the viewpoint of his personal experiences as managing director of a communication management centre. Mr. Brand indicated that his story is wide-ranging and that everyone can pick up what is of use to them He made clear that in the professional practice things work as follows: the customer is heard and the communication problem is analysed. Then the objectives of communication are determined and a plan is made up in which a clearly-defined ultimate goal is formulated. This involves finding the right means that can be used. Obviously, these means have to harmonise with the customer s image. Mr. Brand stated that the best communication still is personal communication. A number of other ways (means) to communicate are: -The handout or brochure. The costs depend on the number of copies, text, design, usage of photos, etc. but generally lie between florin1500,- and florin3500,-. -Direct mail. Direct mail can for instance be sent to the contacts of regional non-profit organisations. It is good practice to contact the institutions concerned by telephone some three days after the mail was sent. This latter action can also be contracted out to telemarketing bureaus that usually charge about florin10,- per address. -The newsletter. A newsletter can be directed at customer groups. Again, costs depend on, among other things, the number of copies. -The advertisement. Disadvantages of advertising are the substantial costs and the uncertainty regarding reach. Advertising in a university paper, for instance, is a possibility. Free publicity, for instance, at the occasion of the completion of research, is also an option to be considered, besides the means that were mentioned by Mr. Brand. Sending a press release to free local papers and other local media is often enough to get attention from these media. To conclude Mr. Brand gave a few pointers: -Be aware of your image when you communicate. -Keep your appointments -Present yourself in a professional manner. -Be sincerely enthusiastic. The assignment The assignment set for the participants of the workshop was as follows: formulate an (framework for a) internal communication plan for your science shop that is focused as much as possible on your circumstances. The work took place in subgroups during which the example of one science shop was worked out in detail. The (theoretical) framework of Astrid Heijns served as a guideline during the drawing up of the internal public relations plan, while the (practical) comments of Mr. Brand had to be incorporated in the execution. Review of the assignment and discussion Each group had made an (outline of an) internal public relations plan and presented this on a flip-chart so that it could be commented on by the other participants and speakers. Unfortunately, the ensuing review and discussion were limited due to lack of time. As a result of the presentation by Leiden, it was observed that the managerial decision process is not solely dependent on the pursued public relations policy. On the basis of the presentation by the VU it was emphasized that it is important to continually rethink one s activities in the field of public relations; to actively keep thinking about one s pr.-policy and to keep adjusting it. Almost at the end of the session it was observed that on none of the flip-charts the word public relations plan was mentioned. Does this mean that they, indeed, do not exist or that they do exist but not as a coherent plan, that a lot of effort is put into pr. but that possibly not enough attention is being paid to mutual fine-tuning? Evaluation and conclusion The morning is rounded off with the conclusion that there is no such thing as an instant recipe for handling internal public relations. This workshop, therefore, was meant to give the initial impetus to the science shops to critically examine and improve the current approach on their own. The outline on paper (Astrid s hand- out) offers a basis on which to draw up an internal public relations plan in a structured way. Through examining the goals that one wants to achieve step by step, while using the five W s as a guideline, one automatically comes upon the restrictions set by time, means, etc. and one is forced to make a balanced choice. The workshop was concluded by expressing the hope that the workshop will function as an impulse to drawing up an individual internal public relations plan. Workshop 2: Idealism, the price tag and the quality The science shop chemistry of the University of Amsterdam has turned out to be an organisation that in many respects can barely be distinguished from a regular (organisation) consultancy. Speaker Pieter van Broekhuizen told about the (organisational) structure and the procedure of this shop: The science shop chemistry employs ten paid workers, six of which are being paid entirely from third flow of funds activities. The staff members carry out research themselves and, at the same time, are project managers. Besides, the science shop has voluntary workers in the form of students and a conscientious objector. Paid research is carried out by the staff and the Ph.D.-students; the students and the conscientious objector and any other volunteers handle the unpaid commissions. In principle this division is rigorously observed. Yet, in some cases the unpaid workers get to do a number of extra tasks in a paid project because it is instructive to them to be part of that specific project. The science shop chemistry works with three prices, depending on the kind of customer that asks for help. In actual practice every worker handles 3 to 4 projects a year. 70 to 80 days out of the 200 effective working days should be paid, the other days are spent doing unpaid work. The science shop chemistry administers a reserve fund for a transitional payments scheme for staff members that are temporarily without a paid project. Student participation: The customers of the science shop have professionalised, and therefore, research has to be carried out in a professional manner as well. Besides, the graduation projects of students of chemistry of the University of Amsterdam may only last seven weeks. As a consequence, involving students is impossible for a great number of projects. In which instances is it possible?: 1. If a subproject can be clearly separated from the main project, students can write an concise interim report that will be used in the final report, providing that it meets the standard of quality. In these instances students are under the strict supervision of one of the permanent staff. 2. The shop s helpline. Students examine and answer relatively simple questions themselves. If an organisation of limited financial means comes to the shop with an extensive project, subsidies will be sought in cooperation. If this fails an extensive project cannot be realised. Sometimes smaller projects are carried out for free or for a small fee. Can we, in this instance, still speak of a science shop? Should the other shops in the Netherlands follow the example of this science shop chemistry? These were the questions the participants of the workshop financing asked themselves after this introduction. Van Broekhuizen s speech provided enough food for thought and that was exactly what the organisers Jeanine de Bruin (Free University Amsterdam) and Dick Schlueter had in mind. Because of the presence of guests from Canada and Ireland the official language during this part of the workshop was English. Idealism and the price tag Next the subtheme idealism and the price tag was explored. The twelve participants in this workshop - from various science shops and the national students union (LSVB) - gave their views regarding the question: How can the possibilities for student research at science shops be preserved?. Every participant wrote his or her reaction in a few keywords or short sentences on memo cards. These were clustered and put on posters. The answers to the question ranged from no possibilities to linking up with project learning . A different cluster stressed that the profits from lucrative projects can be used to support student research. After an interesting discussion in which the area of tension between idealism and commercialism played a prominent role, the participants awarded points to the various clusters. A number of participants in the workshop had a difficult time answering the question because they first wanted to discuss whether a science shop should take on paid research at all. It was argued that because of this the science shops would have to let go of their original goals. Eventually it was agreed that people with a lot of doubts would be allowed to express these doubts in the notes they posted. This resulted in a the following cluster: -critical of carrying out paid research (9 points) -hardly -no possibilities in the future -minimal -not applicable -maintaining current method -division between paid/unpaid cannot be maintained in the future -how is it possible without student research? A number of others favoured adapting the internal policy of the science shop or even the university in a way that would allow students to keep their position. The suggestions were: adapting the policies of the universities/science shops (26 points) -focus more on practical training mediation -let customers pay for the students allowance (in this scenario one can also be more demanding) -keep linking up with education -pay students in credits -linking up with or developing project learning -allow students to carry out only those aspects of a research project that connect with the curriculum (e.g. carrying out evaluations) -try to influence the policy of the university by showing that successful students (that quickly find jobs) have comparatively often carried out practical research (via the science shops) The related group of solutions suggested to look for answers mainly in the financial sphere (9 points) -apply for subsidies to at least have students supervised professionally -by means of subsidies in general -the science shop should make a bid for a financial contribution from the academic education-quality budget -establish good contacts with the Board of Governors -In general, work primarily on the internal acceptance of the science shop within the university It was also suggested to try and influence the flow of commissions instead of awaiting assignments (3 points) -set out an acquisitions policy for projects that are suitable for students -gear the customers demand to the supply of students Once the commission has been secured the staff members of the science shop can also do a thing or two to make projects suitable for students (4 points) -prepare a project properly with respect to content -let students handle a small clearly-defined part of a larger (paid) project -settle on a minimum percentage of projects for students (consequently unpaid projects) -Divide the number of projects in larger (paid) projects that the staff members work on, and smaller (unpaid) projects for students. In this way one also does justice to the customers. After the coffee break the participants were again asked to actively participate in the discussion and exploration of the subject matter. The central point was the following proposition: the procedure of the science shops should very closely resemble that of the commercial organisation consultancies . Next the supporters, the opponents and the people that had not (yet) formed an opinion had to split up into groups. The proportion, including the workshop leaders, was 3 for, 8 against and 3 abstentions. Then, the arguments for and against were discussed. The advocates of adapting the procedure pointed out how much store the customer sets by efficiency, speed, quality and expertise. The opponents also adhered to the principle the customer is always right , but had a lot of ifs and buts, pointing out that the social relevance of the question and the educational experiences of the student should also be considered. The lively discussion eventually led to a redistribution of participants. One supporter became an opponent and two of his colleagues switched over to don t know . Workshop 3: Making Labour Flexible Science shops that concern themselves with researching labour are increasingly confronted with questions about changes in the organisation of labour: flexibilization and deregulation. The aim of this workshop is to, firstly, gain a more in-depth, theoretical understanding of the subject matter and , secondly, to discuss the questions that are raised by this subject in the minds of, among others, trade unions, and how the science shops can conceivably handle this. The set-up of the workshop is as follows: As a warming-up exercise three science shops will present an example of an investigation into the flexibilization of labour. (1). Alyda Boer (Experimentele en Arbeidspsychologie (EAP), RUG) (Experimental and Industrial Psychology, at the University of Groningen) will give a theoretical introduction to the subject. (2). After which Anton Meijerman (Industie- en Voedingsbond CNV) (christian trade union executive food and industry) will clarify the issue from the viewpoint of the trade unions. (3). Next, there will be room for discussion based on the propositions of both speakers. The scheduled introduction by Pieter van Broekhuizen (science shop chemistry of the University of Amsterdam) about the relation between flexibilization and the health norms for exposure to chemical substances, was cancelled because of the limited time available for the discussion. (a summary is included in the Proceedings). Marjan de Jong (EAP) fulfilled the role of chairwoman. Science shops and flexibilization Frank ter Beek (science shop Leiden): Flexibilization seems to be an irrepressible trend, a media hype: everyone has to be involved in flexibilization. Social securities are broken down because of market forces and the competitive positions of companies. Is this process irreversible? What is it really all about? One can distinguish the flexibilization of: -manpower (temporary contracts and part-time jobs) -working hours; duration/hours (irregular shifts) -content (temporary contracts for lower positions) -conditions of employment (salary and career prospective) Despite the hype, the trade unions have asked the science shop remarkably few questions about flexibilization, even after an active approach; making up an inventory among the unions gives the impression that discussing the subject is aiming too high. Aspects of flexibilization can, among others, be found in the research of the science shop with regard to the relationship between the policy concerning working hours and the tasks of provide for children (Instituut Vrouw en Arbeid) (Institute Women and Labour), and an examination of the effects of the law governing the hours of trading on the retail trade (dienstenbond FNV) (service sector trade union). An investigation into harassment in the workplace and the effect on social securities is in the pipeline. It is argued that researching flexibilization in the broad sense is aiming too high for the science shops as well but that aspects of flexibilization can, in a meaningful way, be included in a substantial part of the investigation into labour. Noor Goedhart (science shop Rotterdam): a current example of an investigation into the flexibilization of employment contracts can be found in the research carried out on behalf of the Bouw en Houtbond Regio Rotterdam (building and wood industry trade union, region Rotterdam) with respect to so-called ZZP-ers; self- employed persons without employees. Temporary employment via an agency is not permitted in the building industry. As a result employees report themselves as self-employed , resulting in the effects on the conditions of employment. This phenomenon is on the increase: 30% of all the construction workers in Great Britain is employed on this basis. The older workers are being side-tracked, the younger ones organise their own exploitation. Science shops can play an important role in researching the spread and the social consequences of such phenomena. Manja Rijzinga (science shop education Groningen): The effects of flexibilization are also noticeable in the field of education. On behalf of the ABOP the shop researched the relationship between stress in education and new labour contracts (38 hours all-in) and the teachers perception of and voice in this matter. Particularly the increasing number of extra tasks beside the curriculum causes stress inducing problems: it is becoming increasingly difficult to plan work systematically. Intermezzo A first impression of the opinions of the participants in the workshop became apparent after a vote on the following proposition: For working conditions flexibilization means: -an improvement (3 votes) -no improvement, no decline (4 votes) -a decline (6 votes) Introduction: what is flexibilization of labour? Alyda Boer graduated in 1995 on the subject flexibilization of labour and carried out research with respect to the flexibilization of working hours and employment contracts in the chemical industry. At the moment she is a faculty member of the E&A Psychology Department of the University of Groningen and is involved in an investigation into the flexibilization of working hours in a hospital. Until recently most companies operated in a relatively stable economic environment. Today, most companies are confronted with an inconstant competitive environment that often experiences rigorous changes. The drastic decrease of economic growth, nationally and internationally, has caused a situation in which the primary competitive struggle no longer focuses on acquiring shares in new or growing markets but on maintaining shares, necessary for continuation, in slowly growing markets. The result of this development is that flexibility is becoming more and more important when thinking on behalf of, or about, companies. The notion flexibility is, in fact, a reservoir of definitions and in many instances people using this notion all take it to mean something else. The notion often is used to describe the various functional aspects of an organisation such as flexible forms of labour, flexible forms of financing or the automation of the production process. Flexibilization of labour, in which man equals the factor labour, is one of the functional aspects. Flexibilization of labour is seen as a means to react more quickly to the changes in the market. Developments are, for instance: -heightening the efficiency of the production process by just-in-time management: long term storage of raw material and final products is costly, and the products age quickly. In this case the burden is transferred to suppliers and employers. -flexibilization of the production process by way of a made-to-measure approach: the life cycle of products and the period to recover the costs is getting shorter every time. -a switch to a service economy: products are not produced in stock, labour should be available based on demand. -increasing economic uncertainty: companies are reticent about employing workers on a permanent basis and try to avoid labour costs and Social Security premiums. -labour surplus: the supply of labour offers employers the opportunity to lay down the conditions regarding flexible labour. Flexible labour can be realized in many forms depending on the goal, the level and content of the work and the term in which flexibilization has to be established. Firstly, a distinction can be made between flexibilization via the internal labour market and via the external labour market. By way of the internal market, permanent employees are deployed in those moments that they are needed. In this instance we are dealing with regular labour contracts for an indeterminate period of labour and a fixed number of working hours per annum. In the case of flexibilization via the external market, companies and employers enter into an agreement in which it is determined that people will only be employed on those moments that the employers is in need of labour. Secondly, a distinction is possible - for both internal and external flexibility - between numeric and functional flexibility. This means a flexibilization of working hours, rostrums and contracts and a flexible (re)organisation of tasks and positions respectively. The matrix shows examples of forms of labour divided on the basis of internal versus external and numeric versus functional. It can be deduced from this division that flexibilization can have both positive and negative aspects for employees, depending on the execution of the flexibilization and the true involvement of employees in this process. Internal functional flexibilization can be in keeping with the need of the employees for professional and personal growth and can increase the workers involvement in the production process and the organisation. Numeric flexibilization can meet the wishes of the workers concerning part-time jobs etc. On the other hand, a strong emphasis on numeric flexibilization, especially numeric external flexibilization, can cause a decrease in income security, an intrusion on the private life of employees and can mean risks regarding health, well-being and job motivation. Employers should bear in mind that, in the long run, companies are dependent on the professional, involved efforts of the workers. Should a short-term cut in labour costs be the only motive for flexibilization, at the cost of the workers involvement, this would mean a loss of profit in the long-term. When the interests of companies and employees coincide, both can gain an advantage. NUMERIC Overtime | Temporary work Flexible year rosters | Labour pool Part-time labour | Stand-by agreement: Lengthening of working hours | 'nuluren' ('zero-hours contract') Staggered working hours | Employment contract for a Dayshift including weekend | determined period Irregular hours | Outwork with/without weekend | Amicable lending Flexible/part-time superannuation | Stand-by agreement: min/max | INTERNAL---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXTERNAL Occupational deployment to | Posting/advicing fulfil other tasks | Contract out/freelance Multi-craft | Job-combinations | Job-rotation | | FUNCTIONAL Questions A positive as well as a negative effect of flexibilization on employees can be pointed out. Which has the upper hand? Flexibilization is too broad a notion to give a general answer to that question. The objective of the organisation and the way in which it handles the process are essential. An investigation into the chemical industry has shown that a good plan is feasible if the employer takes the workers wishes concerning tasks and distribution of hours into account, and limits the employment of temporary workers to real surplus work. Bottom-up flexibilization can have an entirely different effect than top-down flexibilization. The trick is to combine the company s interests with the workers interests. Companies should not aimlessly follow the trend. Introduction: Problems and challenges for trade union and works council regarding flexibilization Anton Meijerman is an executive of the Industrie- en Voedingsbond CNV Regio Noord (christian trade union food and industry, northern region). He is involved in the consultation concerning the flexibilization in various companies in the northern region. The dilemmas that the trade union faces with respect to the flexibilization and deregularization of labour can be demonstrated by means of a number of propositions and their explanation. 1. Ongoing flexibilization and deregularization (among other things the liberalisation of the laws regarding dismissal) shorten the employers timetable and will result in an even further decline in the employers investments in training, knowledge and labour market value of employees. Following up on Alyda Boer s division between external and internal flexibilization and numeric and functional flexibilization, the wishes of the trade union can be profiled as internal functional flexibilization at which the companies pay a great deal of attention to the issues of motivation, education and the preservation of knowledge and craftsmanship. The companies primarily choose for external numeric flexibilization, for temporary work, stand-by employees and contracts for a determined period of time. In this instance, the companies do not invest in training multi-employable workers, certainly not for flexworkers. Besides, the Netherlands have a very high level of worker mobility ( job-changers ) which amplifies this trend. It can be said that this trend is caused by the very limited number of career opportunities and internal flexibilization within the companies. Frank ter Beek suggested that the call for flexibilization is new and inescapable and that the trade unions will fail in this matter. The following can be said about this: flexibilization is not new, it is as ancient as labour. Flexibilization of the labour market shows a fluctuation, parallel to that of the economy. Even the Bible mentions seasonal workers that took on the jobs at hand. Moreover, in the previous century and during the depression of the thirties people were employed for weekly, daily or hourly wages. The trade unions do indeed, in various negotiations with companies, fight the excesses of present day flexibilization. They, for instance, fight against the invasion of privacy and the unreasonable (sometimes senseless) conditions dictated by companies. An example can be found in the current negotiations with a high- tech company that schedules its employees per day and insists on drawing up the roster the previous day. In this case it is obvious that the employer refuses to acknowledge the workers privacy and that the trade union should offer resistance. The trade unions can, of course, be asked to sympathise with the companies because of their economic predicament, but reasonableness beyond all reason cannot be demanded from the trade unions. The trade unions cannot go along with the kind of herd instinct with which many companies seek to introduce flexibilization. 2. 'man/woman, divorced due to incompatible rosters, seeks partner with Tuesdays and (on a regular basis) Saturdays off'. This advertisement recently appeared in de Volkskrant by way of caricature. Yet, this advertisement shows the essence of the discussion of flexibilization of working hours. Having some control over working hours, schedules, etc. is crucial for workers in order to be able to combine work, home and leisure activities and this is the ante of the Industrie en Voedingsbond CNV. The realization of favourable rosters, facilities such as day care centers etc. are tasks for the trade unions in cooperation with the works councils. A consultative agreement on changes in working hours in the CAO (collective labour agreement) is deemed desirable (based on the new legislation on working hours, ATW). Carrying out research regarding (and, by means of the works council, stimulating) favourable rosters and roster risk-profiles (scoring the effects - on leisure time etc. -of the various possible rosters) is essential in this case. It is, for example, a challenge to combine flexible working hours in the collective labour agreement with (on average) shorter working weeks. According to the ATW, the works council has a vote on all collective arrangements (working hours etc.) that do not fall under the collective labour agreement. The trade unions, in cooperation with the works councils, can realise a high degree of control for the workers in this area. 3. The labour market, the policy concerning the conditions of employment, social security and pensions will have to be adapted in the future in such a way that periods of more, less or no work will be possible. It will have to be considered that a human life may, in the future, consist of more varied industrious periods. This will result in a more complex labour market. It should, for example, be possible to work fewer hours over a certain period because of child-care, to work alternating 32- and 45-hour weeks, to take a sabbatical leave to study, etc.( Keuze in Tijd ) (Choice in Time). Adequate provisions will have to be made regarding pension schemes in this complex labour market (for instance, setting aside the gross-net surplus hours for pension rights in a period of working weeks of more than 36 hours). Flexible and shorter working hours should not be realized at the expense of unemployment benefits and other social securities. Flexible hours and flexible contracts should have no consequences for the building up of unemployment rights. This is what is happening now: research by the Bureau voor Economische Argumentatie (Bureau of Economic Argumentation) (Niet-reguliere arbeid en werknemersverzekeringen, December 1995) has shown that engagements with irregular patterns of working hours led to relatively lower unemployment benefits. Establishing Keuze in Tijd means bottom-up flexibilization from which both companies and employees can benefit. It does, however, require a long-term vision on the part of the companies. Experience shows that especially the smaller companies (< 50 employees) do not, or hardly, plan ahead and more or less follow the trend of flexibilization. Realising a win-win situation in this instance is also possible, but under strict conditions. The trade unions make out a case for this. The trade unions do more than protect the interests of their members (especially senior workers with a permanent position). However, it is, and it will stay, difficult to organise temporary workers and other flexworkers. That is why contracts on temporary work have been closed only recently. Yet, both the CNV and the FNV explicitly see it as part of their ideology to realise good employment, terms of employment etc., and the non-organised, socially vulnerable groups should benefit too. 4. Discussion Manja Rijzinga: What does the CNV expect that the consequences of flexibilization will be regarding the possibilities for schooling? An investigation into secondary education has shown a substantial need for schooling etc. Anton meijerman s first proposition points out that these possibilities are strongly reduced, especially in case of numeric flexibilization. Anton Meijerman confirms that the effects on investing in schooling can be catastrophic. Especially for the older employee (and an employee is getting old fast these days). Investing in schooling for workers is no longer advantageous for an employer if the employee is 37 years old (or above) ; he would sooner employ a young flexworker. However, this does not mean that schooling and internal flexibilization have to be realized in all instances: a worker at an assembly line does not necessarily always want combined tasks or job-rotation. Y. Visser (science shop law, University of Utrecht): flexibilization has been divided into four segments: internal/external and numeric/functional. It seems that the bottom-up approach for internal flexibilization is only possible in situations with a high level of job security. On the other hand, all the risk-groups are to be found in the segment external/numeric; the non-organised, the temporary workers, the senior workers et al. W. Mulder (industrial welfare): that is right. The question is what we can do politically. Especially people with permanent jobs in high positions should start working flexibly if we want to change the balance. They are the ones with ample opportunities on the labour market and it would give others a chance to gain experience and to be trained in those positions. Noor Goedhart: Returning to the analysis of flexibilization: Quite often the need is easily hung on the rationality of the production process and not often enough on the motives in labour relations. The thing is to oppose this with a different analysis. Anton Meijerman: indeed, the employers have no other motive than a cost reduction. Y. Visser: The question is what useful contribution the science shop can make in this area. Should they restrict themselves to questions by (organised) employees about the possibilities and consequences with respect to individual companies? Can they contribute to a broader analysis? What can science shops do for the non- organised? Maureen Butter (science shop biology, University of Groningen): By analogy with environmental issues, it can be argued that science shops should not only be subservient to organised (often quite professional) customer groups, but that they should be able to initiate socially relevant research themselves. Base movements are target group, not customer group per se. The chairwoman rounds off the workshop because of the limited time available and thanks the speakers and the other participants. Appendix Summary of the (cancelled) introduction `The development of industrial standards for exposure to chemicals, concentrated on specific working hours and -conditions'. Pieter van Broekhuizen is the co-ordinator at the science shop chemistry of the University of Amsterdam Industrial standards for exposure to chemical under working conditions have to be decreed for substances for which a MAC-value (Maximum Acceptable Concentration) has not (yet) been determined, and for those conditions that differ from the conditions for which the MAC-values have been determined. Commissioned by the European Union, the science shop chemistry of the University of Amsterdam and the department of Natural Science and Society of the University of Utrecht have submitted a proposal on this subject (Development of health-based recommended in-house occupational exposure limits, A. Stijkel et. al.). During the development of an industrial standard, longer working days, strenuous labour etc. can be taken into account. The method for determining the industrial norm has been kept simple on purpose (performable for a company): longer working days have indeed been taken into account. Yet, the differences in reaction, for instance, that the human body may display depending on whether the exposure took place during the daytime or in the night, have not been allowed for (these differences are of relevance to shift work , for example, but would severely complicate the method). So, the common ground with respect to the flexibilization of labour is that with flexible working hours, rosters etc. the effects on occupational safety and health have to be taken into account. On the other hand, if it is a matter of an essential lowering of the industrial standard in relation to the MAC-value because of a 12 hour working day, one is dealing with a situation that is highly questionable for other (social) reasons. Workshop 4: Issues of the handicapped: A costly investment but well worth the effort. Background and Set-up The objective of the workshop is the exchange of information concerning activities between consumers organisations (patients organisations and organisations in the public health sector) and science shops. Getting a clearer picture of the possibilities of science shops to handle questions of consumers organisations is an issue that will be discussed. J.A.A. Ter Haar, M.Sc., staff member responsible for conceptualisation at the federation of parents associations, recounts his experiences in dealing with science shops: A costly investment, but well worth the effort . After that, the debate will continue on the basis of problem areas. Aartjan ter Haar: Federation of Parents associations The Federation of Parents associations is a combination of five national associations of parents and relatives of people with a mental handicap. Even though there is a rank and file of 50.000 parents, it is not a wealthy organisation with a lot of resources. As is the case with many organised interest groups, research does not have a high priority. Research is meant to support the development and execution of policy. It seems to be a condition that the (policy) staff members are interested in the research themselves. The federation of Parents associations hardly ever carries out research, others are nearly always consulted in case of questions. When research is carried out directly for the purpose of policy, financial means are being traced. This is the case with large strategic research projects in which the Federation of Parents associations is asked to act as mediator, or in which it takes the initiative itself. In many instances such research assignments are placed with faculties and/or research bureaus. Examples: NISSO-research on sexual abuse, an investigation into personal budgets by the KUB (Tilburg University), an examination of conceptualisation by bureau Interview. Even though the University of Amsterdam was closely involved, the research on Vroeghulp (early aid) was conducted by the Federation of Parents associations itself. Yet, in many cases there are questions, but the usefulness of the answers is of no direct relevance to the execution of the policy of the Federation of Parents associations. In those instances very limited means are available, and one of the science shops is contacted. Examples are: investigation into needs on behalf of parents associations, market research on means of communication for Netwerk Communicatie (KUB - Tilburg University), research on conceptualisation concerning physicians (RUG - University of Groningen), conceptualisation and the neighbourhood (RUL - University of Leiden), evaluation research media campaign (UU - Utrecht University), conceptualisation and photography (UU). Moreover, the Federation of Parents associations is indirectly involved in various investigations that the science shops conduct. Examples of this are: immigrants (RUL) and sexual abuse (RUL). Research carried out by the science shops usually means an exploratory study, an introductory research of which the results are not known in advance and which do not carry political interest. Research that is used to base a policy on, not to support a policy. Research that does not have to lead to remarkable results at all costs, but that, at best, can only be partly reimbursed. Especially information about conceptualisation concerning people with a mental handicap is scarce, so that information on almost all areas is essential. The Federation of Parents associations is satisfied with the cooperation with the science shops involved. She does, however, sometimes have doubts about the research itself. When the policy with regard to conceptualisation had to given flesh and blood five years ago, it soon became clear that systematic research was not being conducted anywhere. There were a few theses to be found here and there, but that was it. Yet, an investigation into conceptualisation belongs to the policy. Exploratory studies on behalf of future activities, but also evaluative research on the effects of interventions. As a start the Federation of Parents associations set out to find organisations that could offer assistance. Some of the institutions affiliated to the university were not considered because they were charging prices based on the commercial market. Furthermore, it turned out that the various science shops could not all offer the same services. The contacts with the departments differed. Next, the Federation of Parents associations got into conversation with a number of science shops. The possibilities were examined on the basis of broadly formulated questions. These questions were more clearly defined in cooperation, so that students could be approached. Than the waiting starts. Will people react? Does the subject generate enough interest? Are people willing to deal with the subject in a way that offers sufficient chance of success? However, working with science shops in the actual practice exposes a number of bottlenecks. 1 No guarantee The first problem mentioned was that you have no guarantee that your question will be answered. This means that one does not ask questions that would immobilise the entire organisation should an answer be lacking. The information is supplementary or gives support to the realization of the policy, is not a guarantee for the actual realization of the policy. The Netwerk Communicatie policy, a collaboration of the authorities, the manufacturers and the users of specific means of communication for people with a mental handicap, wanted to know what the actual potential markets are for these books, magazines and videos. One of the science shops was willing to mediate with regard to this question and a researcher started on the project. Yet, before phase one was completed, the researcher was offered a job elsewhere. Even though a report on this exploration could still be written, it turned out to be impossible to find students or volunteers that could complete the research. 2 Swiftness of results The second problem is one of swiftness. How quickly can the results be produced? Basically only questions without a deadline are being asked. At one time there was to be a mini-symposium on people with a mental handicap and photography, at which the research results were to be presented. In actual practice this turned out to be impossible to achieve. 3 Freedom of researchers The third problem that was mentioned was the freedom that researchers have. Starting from a general phrasing, a personal phrasing is formulated. As an organisation one cannot lay down too many rules because the approach should agree with the researchers involved. This means that it is not always clear whether or not one will get the answer one is looking for. Obviously, this is a problem during any investigation, yet, and this is especially true for organisations that have limited (financial) means, one is still dependent on the insight and consideration of the researchers. During the presentation of a concept it is hard to express that this is not what was expected. Anyway, as far as we are concerned, things have always turned out for the best. The people I deal with have always chosen creative and good approaches. 4 Customer s time investment The fourth problem is the amount of time it requires. Because one usually deals with people that lack experience in the field of research, and because the university is often failing in its duty regarding supervision, one often has to supervise the involved researchers oneself. It often seems as if the students are thrown in at the deep end without the advice from the bath superintendent. Ter Haar has, for instance, had to explain statistical methods of analysis, has had to correct and supplement research reports and has had to give a course in presentation skills. Besides, experience has taught that conferring with researchers sometimes takes up a lot of time, especially when there are no new facts to discuss. Ter Haar does not specifically refer to the cooperation and expertise of the science shops in this instance. 5. Complexity of conceptualisation. The last problem that was mentioned was the complexity of conceptualisation. Research projects of this kind have to be simple out of necessity. Research that is too simple, however, does not provide information, and when the research becomes too complex, nothing will come of it because the researchers try too much at once and will get stuck. This means that good phrasing and a correct definition of the problem are essential. In fact, a lot of research in this area results in a confirmation of that which is already known. Nevertheless, new information actually turns up. It is remarkable though that researchers often do not realise this. Primarily because they do not have an overall view of the broad field but, under the force of circumstances, have had to restrict themselves to their own subject. In a clause in one of the reports it was stated that photo press agencies would rather not have photos sent in. They would rather send a photographer of their own. Yet, a lot of guidebooks about publicity explicitly state that press releases should include photographic material. So, this was something new because these widely-used books were based on the situation in which photographers were mainly freelancers instead of employees of the newspapers. This is something one has to know in order to appreciate such a remark. The last problem is in fact a summary of the other ones. Sometimes you think to yourself that things would have turned out better if you had done it yourself. If you do not have the time, the knowledge nor the opportunities, and it does not fit in the list of priorities of the interest group, this is not an option. Besides, one also has to wonder whether research conducted by the science shop is worth the investment. The success However, one day the report arrives and you think, Yes!, this is what all the fuss was about . The investigations that were conducted on our behalf have had an effect. Internally, on the organising of conceptualisation activities, but also externally. People write about it, it is mentioned in newspapers, magazines and on the radio. Moreover, some of the researchers have explained their conclusions during workshops within the public health sector. Conclusions Socially relevant healthcare research is feasible, but there certainly are a lot of snags for the customers. It is about supplementary research, not strategic research. It is about small-scale research that cannot endanger the policy of the organisation. It is about research for which only very limited means and manpower is available. It is about research that requires a relatively high investment and the usefulness of the results of this research is not evident from the start. Socially directed research would be more feasible if the supervision of the universities (not that of the science shops) would be better. Socially directed research would also be more feasible if the various consumer organisations would have more members that are interested in research. It takes time and that means that you have to be convinced of the importance yourself. If you do not believe in research, you are not very likely to contact a science shop. Of course, science shops could also take their own measures to break down barriers by providing knowledge (through universities), and by reducing the amount of time that has to be invested. Actively approaching organisations with propositions, organisations that do not ask for help when they have questions concerning research, would also work. Although I wonder whether the science shops are at a loss for work. To conclude, Ter Haar is very satisfied with the results. Satisfied to such an extent ,in fact, that he asks if there are , at this moment, not more people interested in doing research in his particular area. Spontaneous research based on their own themes or in connection with current questions. It would be a loss if the science shops were to disappear. The science shops play an important role, especially for organisations of limited means, such as ours, that want to have research carried out to support the developments in health care for handicapped people. Workshop 5: Internationalisation: Science shops and Eastern Europe A lot has changed in Eastern Europe. Borders disappear but distances grow; the gap between the underprivileged and the privileged is getting larger and larger. Science shops are active on behalf of the weaker groups and are, and not just for that reason, a welcome addition to society. Introducing (environmental) science shops fits in the spearhead action of the E.U. and Agenda 21 (the agreement on sustainable development during the summit of Rio de Janeiro). Education in Eastern-Europe is strongly mono-disciplinary and research is heavily academic . Project learning is unknown. Social groups are weakly organised. There is a great deal of distrust between the various parties in society. By means of a sample project in which students of Brno and Utrecht worked together, the science shop chemistry of the University of Utrecht has demonstrated what thematic interdisciplinary research is all about and what science shops can mean to universities as well as environmental groups. Eventually this has led to the foundation of the (environmental) science shop in cooperation with the three universities of Brno. This project has been made possible, among other things, by the fact that there exists a bond between the cities of Utrecht and Brno, and by consulting Milieu-Contact Oost-Europa. This workshop was conducted in English. Beside the representatives of the Dutch science shops there were representatives of: the Science shop for Northern Ireland (Queen s University Belfast), the Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada and the Loka Institute (Amherst, MA, USA). The co-ordinator of the science shop of Brno could, unfortunately, not attend due to lack of time. The Czech representative of Milieu- Contact Oost-Europa and representatives of the science shop Vienna were also unable to attend. The programme of the workshop was as follows: 1) A word of welcome by Ir. Paul Absil (Project Eastern-Europe science shop chemistry, University of Utrecht) and an introduction of the participants 2) Presentation of an inventory of international projects by Dutch science shops 3) Different approaches to dealing with foreign questions 4) Discussing (in groups) the three sample projects and a plenary feedback session 5) Scholarships and financing, introduction by Han Borg, M.Sc., (Foreign Department, RUG) 6) Final discussion 1. Opening Paul Absil starts by stating the fact that this is the first international workshop on science shops ever. International projects have been dealt with before, but never in a structural sense. We are on the threshold of a period in which the international aspect of the work of the science shops can be shaped. An important tool in this matter is the easy way of communicating by means of the Internet. The objective of this workshop is to make an inventory of the motives to work at providing service , to exchange experiences, to give an account of the unexpected aspects of international cooperation and to find out what the role is of the various intermediary organisations. 2. Inventory of international projects of science shops It has become clear that, at this point in time, only a few Dutch science shops are active in foreign countries. Generally speaking, these activities are of an incidental and non-structural nature. Questions always come in by way of intermediary organisation, not via individuals. In most cases the intermediaries are Dutch organisations (e.g. environmental organisations). International service does not seem logical to organisations whose primary task has a regional character and whose budgets are small. The following reasons for not doing international projects were mentioned: -It does not fit in with the policy of the science shop -it is too hard to support lobbying in other countries -it requires special skills (in the areas of language and culture) -the pressure of work is too heavy as it is -distance is a practical problem -the possibilities for providing service should exist in the country itself However, a number of reasons is being mentioned why cooperation indeed does take place: -it is interesting to work together with people in a different country. -demand is slackening off in the Netherlands because, among other things, an increasing number of organisations have developed their own expertise. -the questions come in by way of intermediaries -there are funds available for the international exchange of students and knowledge -working internationally can be part of a survival strategy -students are interested in gaining international experiences -the Netherlands have a tradition of giving international support In the Dutch science shops research is usually carried out by students, supervised by staff members. Every now and then staff members conduct research themselves. 3. Approaches to dealing with questions from abroad There are roughly two approaches: a) Employing the Dutch research capacity for solving foreign problems: A Dutch science shop is asked a question by an intermediary; if the shop possesses the know-how, the question will be dealt with and the results will be presented, directly or by way of the intermediary, to the foreign customer. b) Making use of Dutch experience in order to release research capacity abroad: the know-how of managing a science shop is shared with the aim of establishing a similar organisation in the other country, so that society can benefit from the research capacity of the university involved. In this way, students from the country in question are given the opportunity to gain experience in actual practice. An example of the latter method is the project Eastern Europe of the science shop chemistry of the University of Utrecht in order to establish science shops in Central- and Eastern Europe. 4. Discussion about sample projects A number of sample projects were discussed in three separate groups. These should give an indication of the problems that have to be overcome when working from a distance, with a different culture and without direct feedback. The following sample projects were discussed: a) Better living conditions for homeless children (Romania). b) Nuisance caused by a waste disposal site in Brno (Czech Republic). c) The pollution in Baia Mare (Romania). The projects differed considerably regarding content, approach and history. A concise description of the projects was handed out to each group. A project proposition has to be made, based on the question that was put to the science shop, focusing on the following points: -the research question -what can the science shop contribute to the project -who are the parties that are/ should be involved -how will the results be used -at what intervals should the consultations with the intermediary/customer/sister organisation take place -how can the actual use of the results be guaranteed a) Better living conditions for homeless children Angela Groothuizen was once a pop idol in the time of the Dolly Dots. Now she hosts a show about charities on Dutch television. In one of the shows money was raised for an orphanage in Romania. In those days the centre was an abomination even though the building was modern: clogged up toilets, neglected children and bad food. The charitable organisation spent money on new sanitary fittings, carpeting, toys and a new kitchen. However, they did not leave it at that: they promised the viewers to return after one year to see how the children and the staff were dealing with the new situation. This return visit turned out to be even more of an abomination than the first visit had been. The sanitary facilities were broken, the carpeting was in shreds and the toys had been stolen. The children looked even more pitiful than the year before, if possible. The initial reaction of the viewers at home could well have been: isn t it terrible what they've done with our contributions . Yet, are the staff or the children really to blame? After all, neither were used to fancy carpeting, so how could they know anything about cleaning it? Something must have gone wrong in the execution of this project .. Assignment: it is up to you to rewrite the project proposition, paying attention to the earlier mentioned points of interest (NB In reality this project has never been proposed to a science shop!). Project proposition: Better living conditions for Romanian orphans Description: Angela Groothuizen Research question: How can the living conditions of orphans in the city of X in Romania be improved? Customer: A Dutch broadcasting corporation Short introduction to the problem: On the whole the standard of living in Romania is low. The average wage does not exceed 250 guilders a month. Especially people in the bottom layers of society have a difficult time surviving. Children without parents are dependent on charity. By means of donations by the Dutch viewers we want to contribute to the improvement of the living conditions of the orphans of X. People involved: - a camera-crew for publicity in the Netherlands -upholsterers, carpenters and plumbers for the kitchen, the sanitary fittings and the plumbing -an interior decorator -company Y (interior design; is co-sponsor, provides materials and toys) Guarantee for the success of the project: all new materials are of the finest quality. Discussion and options for improvement: The most important conclusion was that only the technical problems were solved and not the institutional. Help, financially or in the form of materials and equipment, should only be given after some preliminary investigation. This means that it is necessary to visit Romania and to assess the situation and talk to the local people involved. The close cooperation with these people is one of the key contributions of the science shop. We (the participants of the workshop) also need Romanian partners that can assist us and that can give advise on the priorities and the limiting conditions. Extra funds and time will be needed to successfully finish this project. It is a pity to have to establish that this is always a hindrance for the science shops. b) Nuisance caused by a waste disposal site in Brno (Czech Republic) This project is a good example of the first time that Dutch experience was used to open up the capacity for research in Eastern Europe. It was not the knowledge of scientific subjects that was used but the know-how with regard to managing student projects and research questions. We are in Brno where the science shop Utrecht has assisted in the setting up of a science shop. This shop received a question concerning the potential dangers of a waste disposal site in a densely-populated district of Brno. The questioner is an inhabitant of the district (private). He used to be involved in the policy on treatment of waste and now works for the university. At first the question seemed suitable for an interdisciplinary project; there are legal, technical and social aspects. However, not enough data is available. Now, a proposition has to be written that has sufficient didactic substance as well as a reasonable chance of a successful completion. Merely showing our colleagues the Dutch mode of operation is not enough. We have explained to them the notion of customer groups so that feedback on the results has become possible, but: how do you find customer groups if citizens are not organised, as is the case in Brno? We have described to them our successes in fighting bureaucracy with research results. However, in Brno there is no explicit need for public participation yet, which makes the implementation of the results rather doubtful. Assignment: Which information is still needed to make a project proposition and what should be done to make a suitable project possible? Discussion: The group has not found an adequate solution to the problem, just more questions. The problem is how to get people to organise in this country; the question came from an individual not from an organisation. Maybe the explanation lies in the difference between a country with a long tradition of democracy and a country in which democracy is a new phenomenon. Maybe it lies in the difference in standards of living. The problem of the waste disposal site is too wide-ranging for mere research. There is a lot more to it. Our group cannot advice the science shop in this matter. There is no well-organised environmental group in Brno. It may be structural that people are afraid to organise in order to fight heavy problems. It is very important to the science shop not to become part of the problem. c) Pollution in Baia Mare (Romania) Four kilometres from Baia Mare there are two large metal factories (copper and lead). They employ, directly or indirectly, half of the region s population(some 100.000 workers). Life expectancy in this region lies 10 years below the Romanian average. The soil is polluted: the concentration of lead lies above 3000 mg/kg. The air is also heavily polluted by sulphurdioxide, copper and lead. Problems could grow this big because the previous regime did not give priority to the environment at all. The customer: The Dutch association Sunshine for Baia Mare . The association s chairwoman was born in Baia Mare, her husband is the other moving force. The couple is very concerned about the health of the people in the city. They have already contacted the local and national environmental authorities. The authorities told them that they shared their concern, but that they did not have the means to lower the emissions or to clean up the soil pollution. The association has also contacted an expert at the Amsterdam Medisch Centrum (Hospital/Medical Research Centre Amsterdam). This expert visited Baia Mare and he ascertained that the average concentration of lead in the blood of children was six times that of the Dutch norm. Finally, with the help of a Dutch meteorologist they found out that the predominant wind direction is from the factories towards the city. The request to the science shop chemistry Utrecht: We do not trust the government findings. We would like you to analyse the soil and to write a report on it. We already carry a sample. We will take the results of these analyses to the local and national authorities in order to convince them to change the situation. They have to take care of soil sanitation and a reduction in emissions. Assignment: It is clear that the customers ask for something that is too wide-ranging to be tackled by anyone single-handedly. They have a limited view of the problems that Baia Mare faces. Therefore, start by formulating an integral question. Help with establishing priorities so that the association will know where to start. Propose potential partners and identify possible opponents in solving the problem. Discussion: First of all we would want to analyse - on the basis of talks - what other problems possibly exist in the region. If so desired, soil samples can be analysed in the Netherlands; financing will be needed to cover the cost. However, first we should try to find possibilities to have this done in the region, for instance by a sister university. In this way a collective student project could be realized. If a report were to be written (a translation cost money!), it should not just offer technological solutions but should also go into social conditions. Support will have to be given to the implementation of the results at Baia Mare. Without financial support (e.g. from the Dutch government) a little help from a distance is all that can be given. The most important task of the science shop is to find solutions in principle and to point out possible institutions/opportunities for implementation. If needed, know-how can be found in the Dutch business circles; companies might acquire orders or subsidies, so they could well be interested. 5. Scholarships and financing, an introduction by Han Borg (Foreign Department, RUG). In 1990 the University of Groningen started a cooperation programme with universities in Eastern Europe. At the moment there are six official partners: the Eoetvoes Lorand University of Budapest (Hungary), the Budapest University of Economic Sciences (Hungary), the Comenicus University in Bratislava (Slovakia), the University of Wroclaw (Poland) and the University of St. Petersburg (Russia). At this moment, cooperation with the University of Tartu (Estonia) is being started. The most important objective is to further the development of these universities and the National Academies of Sciences. This entails the development of curricula, management, staff and the exchange of students. From time immemorial the universities have taken care of education in Eastern Europe, while research has always been the responsibility of the academies of sciences. Excellent professors are involved in both. The financial means for this programme consist of: private capital of the University of Groningen and national and European funds. The RUG, for instance, contributes 200.000 guilders a year. The most important goal of this contribution is to attract further financing. It is not a very large sum but, when spent effectively, can be of great benefit. For example, a staff member of Biology can visit a university in Poland and a staff member from Budapest can visit his colleague in Groningen. These funds are also open to science shops. National funds are rather difficult to acquire due to bureaucracy. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Sciences regularly changes the application rules. Money from NWO/KNAW (Dutch Organisation for Scientific Research/Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences) can be obtained more easily, but their funds are limited. European money is easier to obtain, especially within TEMPUS (specifically TEMPUS-Phare aimed at Central and Eastern Europe, excluding the ex-USSR, which is catered for by TEMPUS-Tacis). INCO/Copernicus is a more bureaucratic fund. On average, 50% of all TEMPUS applications for travelling grants and projects are honoured. Projects require a partner in another European Union country (private orientating travelling grants do not). If a partner is found in a country that does not send in many applications ( a southern country of the E.U. or Ireland; Northern Ireland is covered by the United Kingdom), chances of acceptance increase. TEMPUS covers the total cost of a journey or project, no co-financing is required. In case of INCO/Copernicus, co-financing is needed. The objective of TEMPUS is to support the quality, the innovation and the development of Higher Education in partner countries and to stimulate cooperation with countries of the E.U. So, subjects might be: renewal of the curriculum, innovating educational structures, institutions and management and the developing of specific knowledge to solve problems concerning economic reform. Thus, the development of project learning and the introduction of science shops can fall under this heading. The Foreign Department can help with the application procedure. One can also learn from others within the university that have already made use of a certain fund. Joining in existing cooperation programmes is important. By means of the lists of TEMPUS applications one can, for instance, check at the Foreign Department whether or not a certain type of research is already being conducted by a certain Eastern European university. 6. Conclusion In the near future the science shops of Groningen will consult with the Foreign Department to draw up a plan of action in order to achieve cooperation with the partner universities. The science shop chemistry of the University of Utrecht is looking for a new parent organisation for their Eastern Europe project (the project is taking up too much of the shop s capacity). This new organisation will mainly focus on the continuation of the success of Brno. A project proposal for the MATRA (Maatschappelijke Transformatie - social reform) programme of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is in preparation. There will always be many bottlenecks with respect to setting up science shops in Eastern Europe. The project Eastern Europe hopes to contribute to the ongoing development of science shops in Eastern Europe by means of publications and the preservation of knowledge. The distribution of knowledge and power remains an important issue. To round things off, Paul Absil remarks that he would very much like to see their experiences in Eastern Europe be utilised to their full extent by existing initiatives, or by new initiatives that may possibly bubble up from this workshop. They hope to form an information network that should enable future cooperation between science shops at home and abroad. They welcome any suggestions on the subject. You can read more about the project Eastern Europe in the brochure Science shops for Central and Eastern Europe which can be requested from the science shop chemistry of the University of Utrecht (Chemiewinkel Utrecht, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands, Tel: +31 30 253 6985). The report by the international studentprojectgroup of 1995 on waste-disposal management in Brno (Separation of chemical waste from households: making the citizens participate) can also be ordered from the shop. In the near future a report on the first year of cooperation between Brno and Utrecht will be presented during the introduction of a science shop. Workshop 6: Between idealism and lack of time: the development of standard methods of research The goal of this workshop was to make an inventory of the possibilities and limitations of the (possible) use of standard methods for staff members of science shops or their customer groups. A general introduction on possibilities, advantages and disadvantages of standardization marked the beginning of the workshop and was followed by four introductions with examples from different science shops. In conclusion a discussion was held. 1. General introduction by Frits van den Berg (science shop physics, RUG - University of Groningen) A standard method is a kind of recipe on the basis of which one can conduct actual research. Research is much broader than scientific research, there is, for instance, neighbourhood research and research done by consultancies. However, in scientific research - and this also holds for research carried out by science shops - every discipline has its own criteria that have to be met and that have generally been accepted by the scientific community (e.g. reproduction and verification). Examples of standard methods are: -arithmetic method concerning traffic noise. The core of the arithmetic method consists of one basic formula; if the formula is used accurately the outcome is the traffic noise level. So, the noise level can be accurately determined by calculation. This seems simple enough, but only experts can use the method because of the large amount of jargon. However, there are other ways: -The five-steps-test of the Nederlandse Stichting Geluidshinder (Dutch Foundation against Noise Pollution), used to determine the quality of the sound insulation of houses. This is an outline that has been devised in such a way that non-specialists can determine the quality of the sound insulation of their houses themselves without equipment. A problem with such standard methods is their limited applicability because there will always be circumstances that cannot be incorporated in a scheme. Standard methods can be developed for various target groups: for colleagues (experts), students (inexperienced assistants) and for customer groups (citizens). The developing of, and working with, standard methods offers a number of advanta ges: -it is efficient: knowledge and expertise can be collected on behalf of others. -it is objective: it can be used for various situations, independent of the person using the method. -it is democratic: it is of no relevance who is using the method; everyone is treated the same and the method is (in principle) workable and applicable in all situations. - it can be profitable: the acquired expertise can be valuable. The pros and cons of the standard method for the developer are: -it forces one to expel vagueness and subjectivity, to account for the accuracy and the scope. -it offers a framework for checking; with each new application the method can be improved, adapted or added to (and this can be done by others as well). -developing a standard method requires a great deal of time and effort. -not all knowledge can easily been made explicit. The pros and cons for the user are: -independence; the user determines when and where research will be conducted. -time-saving; everything has already been worked out (especially relevant to students). -understanding; this is how the investigation works. -strangeness; reality is being formalized and abstracted. -straitjacket; reality has to comply with the standard; the standard entails a certain interpretation of reality and that does not always harmonise with the actual situation. To conclude: standard methods for customer groups/citizens are a) desirable: -because they are democratic -because they are supplementary to the researchers abstraction -because research would otherwise not be carried out at all because of , for instance, insufficient means b) difficult: -the use of jargon can in most cases not be avoided -it entails an abstraction and therefore causes an alienation of the own situation c) possibly unnecessary: -is research a task of the ordinary citizen? -reality is too wide-ranging; research is always a simplification of reality Conclusions: standard methods are desirable in instances where they are usable. Standard methods are always based on a model of reality. 2. Introduction by Ricus Timmer (science shop, KUB - Tilburg University): surveying as standard method. The formulations of problems that play a role in the social sciences differ from those of the natural sciences; a standardization of research methods is probably more difficult because one cannot - as one can in physics - create a formula that can subsequently be properly worked out to produce a result. In Tilburg a great deal of questions regarding surveys are asked by organisations ( such as community- and youth centres, local papers and broadcasting corporations), that want to gain an insight into the background, composition, wishes, etc. of their target groups. It is useful for these organisations to plan and conduct the research themselves because, in this way, they learn a lot. Yet, drawing up rules for the setting up and carrying out of a survey proved to be too much for the customer groups. They need assistance with the planning of a survey, as well as with the execution and the analysis of this survey. The science shop has solved this problem by bringing in a methodologist from the university who will assist the customer group during the entire investigation. The methodologist should be practically-oriented and should be willing to think along with the customer group. Quantifiability is a greater problem in sociological research than it is in, for instance, physical research with respect to noise pollution and, consequently, there is less to standardize. 3. Introduction by Hielke Freerk Boersma (science shop physics, UU - Utrecht University) The science shop physics in Utrecht conducts most of the research itself because the questions are such that the departments hardly possess the required expertise, if at all. The three most important areas of expertise are: -vibrations, and their effects on buildings (e.g. vibrations caused by rail transport or traffic) and people (e.g. people that regularly drive agricultural machinery or work with pneumatic hammers). -indoor climate: humidity, (un)comfortableness, sick building syndrome. -acoustics: transport noise (traffic-, railway- and air traffic noise), industrial noise, domestic disturbances. These investigations are very suitable for standardization. Examples are: - damage to houses caused by trains continually thundering past switches. In this case the standard method is: a guideline set up by the Stichting Bouwresearch (construction research foundation) that exactly prescribes what should be measured and how this should be done; eventually the measurements result in a number that can be tested against the guideline. - complaints about dampness by a group of tenants while the renter does not respond or denies the complaints. Problems concerning dampness can be caused by inadequate insulation. This can be checked by measuring the temperature inside and outside the house, followed by a measurement of the temperature of the indoor side of the wall: If the temperature of the wall is close to that of the outside temperature, this indicates that the heat is directly flowing out which means that the insulation is inadequate. Such a measuring procedure can easily be standardised. -A number of norms with regard to traffic noise, which can easily be tested, have been laid down by law. The measurements taken under the conditions mentioned in the law, result in a number that can directly be compared with the numbers mentioned in this law. What should a science shop do when such standard questions are being asked? There are three possibilities: a) Not taking up the matter; a university is primarily engaged in innovative research, it is not a firm of consulting engineers. b) Answering part of the question by developing a standard method of research and subsequently limiting supervision to assisting the customer group that conducts the research itself. c) Developing a standard method with which students or the shop s volunteers can set to work. The science shop physics Utrecht has opted for the third possibility because it is practicable and offers great advantages: 1. the possibilities for providing services are increased 2. students get an excellent chance to conduct research in actual practice (as an optional subject or as part of a practical) 3. besides presenting the research results, the method offers the possibility to inform on a level that exceeds that of the abstract method; the research results can be fitted in the concrete situation of the customer. How did this standardization come about? A number of manuals have been written (mainly for students) that describe , for instance, how to conduct research, what the guidelines are and how a report should be written. Yet, they have been written in such a way that they are of interest to the well educated lay person too. There are also subjects that are hard to standardize, complaints about draft, for example, to which some people are more susceptible than others. One can solve this by, for instance, making a survey in order to find averages as a basis for establishing norms. 4. Introduction Mia Willems (science shop pharmacology, UU - Utrecht University) Mia is especially concerned with recording patients experiences regarding medicines. These can consist of physical effects, i.e. side effects: effects on state of mind (varying degrees of depression), effects on social life, effects of a practical nature (for instance, a pill is hard to swallow or tastes very bad), economic effects, personal significance of using medication (for example, the stigma that one is ill). At the faculty, the experiences of patients regarding medication are often interpreted along the lines: is it effective and are there any side effects? The patients perspective does not come into it. Therefore, the science shop has developed a model from the patients perspective and has written a manual about it. The manual can be used to fill out the model for a specific question from, for instance, a patients association. This has been done because: 1st there is no expertise within the faculty 2nd experiences of patients are often not taken seriously 3rd people want to draw attention to the problem that experiences of patients carry no weight with doctors and the pharmaceutical industry. A number of problem were involved at this: -it turned out to be very difficult to lump everything together -customer groups can do very little themselves. The great advantage in case they can do something is that it is clear to the customer groups what they can expect and how they themselves can achieve something. -it takes a lot of time to draw up something like this -customer groups often want very concrete, yet, different things; this makes it hard to incorporate everything in a single model. 5. Introduction by Nico Haselager (science shop chemistry, UU - Utrecht University) The aim of the science shop is: 1. people should have more control over their own housing conditions and social circumstances. 2. students should be given the opportunity to use the knowledge that they have acquired to solve social problems. The science shop chemistry of the university of Utrecht is a volunteer organisation: students who conduct the research do not receive studiepunten (credit-points). Work takes place according to the participation model: volunteers and members of the customer group form a project group that will look into the problem. In all cases attention is focused on the problem of the customer group, not on the research. If a customer group can conduct the research itself, this indeed saves time and money, but the customer is interested in the solution to his problems, not in the research as such; the research results is what he has to work with. This is why the science shop chemistry often works with a customer group on a long-term basis and does by no means always conduct research. What the science shop does do in these cases is this: -compare the specific situation with the general situation. -measurements -provide the customer with know-how to tackle the problem -give a second opinion -support: how does one deal with authorities, how does one unearth facts, legal matters, how does one handle publicity, etc. Standardization comes into it when dealing with students and volunteers since the turnover is considerable. Matters that lend themselves to standardization are: a) providing knowledge to customers to make a problem clear and manageable. b) support: specific manual for volunteers (e.g. on environmental law). Research itself is hard to standardize because of its specific nature, as is the execution of research by customer groups (which is not advisable by the way). Giving a second opinion is primarily a matter of experience. An example of standardization is the Basisboek Bodem (Basics on Soilpollution) made by the science shop chemistry Utrecht that was initially intended for volunteers, but which should also be of use to customer groups. This basic book only provides essential knowledge, information is presented in logical units and the book is practice-oriented i.e. is not based on traditional scientific theories and models. 6. Discussion In this report the discussion is presented (albeit condensed) as it developed, which means that certain elements can be mentioned more than once, and that issues have not been categorised. -It is said that physicists have it easy because they work with numbers. Something can be stated against this. The models that the authorities use work with averages and not with extremes. This is a bad representation of reality. The model as such can be accurate while a great number of aspects are ignored. -A number gives a sense of objectivity, however, this is rather relative. The authorities say: look, it is below the norm, so there is no problem . Yet, experiencing discomfort is also about subjectivity. As a scientist, one should distrust a correlation between the experiencing of discomfort and the measuring of levels (which is so handy with regard to legislature) of, for instance, noise. -On the other hand, the customer very often reacts pragmatically. He will tell you: I ve got a problem and I m not interested in how something can be done about it, as long as something is done about it . If one can prove that the legal limits have been exceeded, the customer - science shop s report in hand - does have a strong case. -Standardization can also have a veiling effect. The results that are produced by a method of measurement suggest certainty, but the interpretations of a result may differ. Therefore, one should not leave the interpretation to the customer group exclusively, but one should also bring in experts that know what a certain number signifies. -It is good to realise that, in an actual situation, people will be confronted with such numbers. Measurements have taken place and the authorities say: You see, there is no problem because the results comply with the norm . In such a case, it is useful to show that the norm that has been complied with gives, in fact, a very limited description of reality, and that there sometimes are definite demonstrable influences that cause more discomfort than is indicated by the measurement. In such instances it is good to have a considerable amount of scientific knowledge to back one up, knowledge that may already be known, but that has not yet made its way into legislature. -If customers say they have a problem, they indeed do. Whether or not there is a legal norm is not important. Testing against a legal norm can be a method to tackle a certain situation, but it need not be. -Really, is it always like this? In social sciences the situation is quite different. Research may yield results that the customer group does not want to know about. If this is the case, you are faced with another problem: what to do next? For example, the customer groups has a problem, the science shop looks into it and reaches the conclusion that there is no real problem..., do you tell the customer group: listen, we re sorry but... ? -Yes, that has happened. However, in 90% of the cases a problem indeed exists. One may also look into a complaint and find that there indeed is a problem, but that no demonstrable cause can be detected and that, therefore, no solution can be offered. In these instances one has to be honest and say science fails in this respect . -One should also make use of the information that only the customer possesses, for instance, at what times the inconvenience is at its worst. Should you ignore this and measure at random, the outcome can be quite different. This is also one of the dangers of standardization. -With standardization, checking will in all cases be necessary to ascertain the quality-level. -Standardization can also veer the wrong way. One can think of all those specialised decrees that exist to register the effects on the environment. In days past it perhaps was a lot easier to meet the requirements of the Nuisance Act that stated that there was to be no danger or damage to the environment: how to interpret that was up to the individual. Nowadays, one has to judge things according to very specific methods, even with risk factors up to 10-6. If you go about things this way, how do you know whether or not you are still representing reality? Most people look at it differently and the level of unsafety that is being determined in such a way, as is the case with, for instance, nuclear power plants, is not geared to their perception. -However, one also has to adopt a serious attitude in this. This entails co-operating with the existing standardised norms, but also indicating that these norms have been established in a certain way and that there may exist elements that have not been considered during the determining of said norms. That is also one of the science shop s tasks. -Does one also have to take into account that subjective motives play a role in perception? In case of odour nuisance, for example, one will find that the smell of dung is not considered a problem in the country since it is part of rural life, while at the same time measurements would indicate that it exceeds all norms. Experiencing discomfort is dependent on the circumstances, one has to acknowledge that. For instance, an environmental investigation shows that a certain airport produces too much noise, whereas the inhabitants of a nearby village ask the science shop to show that the noise levels are not all that bad. Behind this lies the villagers realization that, should the noise pollution regulations be observed, they have no other option than to resort to replacement building, so that their village will slowly be deserted. That is a much bigger problem to them than noise pollution. -This should be determined on a political level, although one can contribute information to enable sound judgement. In fact, the experiencing of discomfort in this instance, is part of an entirely different problem. -So, this is another danger of standardization that requires things to be the same throughout the Netherlands. POSTER SESSION During the National Day the following posters were presented: Communication essential to effective soil clean-up A.C.I. v.d. Vusse Science shop of the TU (Technical University) of Delft Maakbare natuur, verrijking of floravervalsing? (Makable nature, enrichment or false flora?) G.J. Berg, M.E. Butter, R.J. Strijkstra Science shop biology, University of Groningen Huiszwam: een ware ramp! (Dry rot fungus (Serpula lacrymans), a true disaster!) A.F. Bos, M. Hesseling Science shop biology, University of Groningen Schoon zwemmen in chloor? (Clean swimming in chlorine?) L.Harbers, P. Dubbelhuis Science shop chemistry , University of Groningen How green is Green Chemistry?: Environmental lifecycle analysis of potato sprout inhibitors R.P.V. Kerstholt, C.M. Ree, H.C. Moll Science shop chemistry , University of Groningen Luchthaven Eelde, het investeren waard? (Eelde Airport, worthy of investment?) A. Berkhout, E. Meijer Science shop economics, University of Groningen Seksueel misbruik van mensen met een verstandelijke handicap (Sexual abuse of mentally handicapped people) E.P. Sevenhuijsen, M.J. Dekker, T. Scheers Science shop medicine and public health, University of Groningen Zware metalen en aangeboren afwijkingen (Heavy metals and congenital defects) J. Visser, M.J. Dekker, F.Duijm Science shop medicine and public health, University of Groningen Aandacht en begrip schieten te kort voor ouders van kinderen met een verstandelijke handicap (Attention and understanding fail parents of children with a mental handicap) E.E.E. van Wijck Science shop medicine and public health, University of Groningen Onderzoek naar voormalige bedrijfsterreinen in de provincie Groningen (An investigation into former factory grounds in the Province of Groningen) History Bureau (= Science shop history), University of Groningen Lawaai van wegverkeer (Traffic noise) Science shop physics, University of Groningen Waar zijn de allochtonen? (Where are the immigrants?) S. Tjadema, M. Herzenberg Science shop education, University of Groningen Het project Grensmaas: Besluitvorming over grote infrastructurele processen in Nederland (The Grensmaas project: Decision-making in the Netherlands with regard to large-scale processes affecting the infrastructure) W. Bijker e.a. Science shop of the University of Limburg Vrouwen over vaginisme (Women on vagnismus) E. Kemkes Science shop KU (Catholic University) of Nijmegen Verantwoord kiezen: Een onderzoek naar voorlichting over alternatieve middelen (Making well-founded choices: An investigation into public information concerning alternative medicines) M. Dettingmeijer e.a. Science shop pharmacology, University of Utrecht Farmaceutische hulpverlening aan Roemenie (Pharmaceutical aid for Romania) Science shop pharmacology, University of Utrecht Overwogen medicijngebruik (Considered use of medicine) Science shop pharmacology, University of Utrecht Milieuvriendelijk gebruik van TL D lampen (Environmental friendly use of fluorescent lights type D) Science shop physics, University of Utrecht Further information about the presented studies can be obtained from the science shops concerned. Open letter to the minister of Education, Culture and Sciences Groningen, 9 May 1996 Attn. His Excellency Mr. J. Ritzen, Minister of Education, Culture and Sciences (OC en W) Re: Open Letter Dutch Science Shops Sir, One of the themes of the National Debate on Knowledge that you have initiated, relates to the social relevance of scientific research. Your introductory remarks on this theme are an indication that this aspect of research should be increased. As an assembly - owing to the National Day Science Shops in Groningen - we inform you that we wholeheartedly support this policy plan and we would also like to draw your attention to the following. The science shops in the Netherlands perform a bridging function between the universities on the one hand, and the social organisations on the other. As easily accessible organisations, the science shops provide information, conduct research and give advise to a broad range of non-profit organisations, individuals and, under certain conditions, small and medium-sized businesses. This research is in keeping with the expertise existing within the universities. These (social) organisations are assisted by the shops in defining the problem, in locating subsidies for research and they are being involved in the realization of the research and are supported in the presentation as well as the implementation of the results. This works both ways: social organisations benefit from a scientific answer to their question; the university gives shape to its social task and offers students the opportunity to acquire extra skills and learning experiences by doing research. The science shops perform their duties in the sphere of research, project learning and social service to everyone s satisfaction, as can regularly be read in publications and can be heard during celebrations of anniversaries. Nevertheless, the science shops are, in varying degree, threatened in their existence by the pressures of economy measures. This development is alarming for many social groups and individuals as well as the impecunious part of the small and medium-sized businesses (including starting en trepreneurs), are in danger of losing access to scientific research because of it. Moreover, if the science shops were to disappear, we would lose an instrument that has an eye for the social relevance of research. In this respect, the National Debate on Knowledge that was opened by you, comes too late for a number of science shops, or so it seems. The science shop of the University of Leiden is in danger of being discontinued on 1 January 1998, while the science shop of Rotterdam is under great pressure. The central science shop of the University of Amsterdam was discontinued on 1 January of this year. Therefore, we urgently request that, in your contacts with the individual universities as well as with the VSNU (Association of Dutch Universities), you emphasise the importance of the science shops on the basis of their social function with regard to scientific research. Thus signed by the representatives of the science shops of the: Vrije Universiteit Universiteit Utrecht Technische Universiteit Delft Universiteit Twente Rijksuniversiteit Limburg Rijksuniversiteit Leiden Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen Katholieke Universiteit Brabant Landbouwuniversiteit Wageningen Rijksuniversiteit Groningen Universiteit van Amsterdam Contact address Chemiewinkel RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Reply by the Minister of OC en W Ministery of Education, Culture and Sciences Europaweg 4 Postbus 25000 2700 LZ Zoetermeer Telefoon (079) 323 23 23 Telefax (079) 323 23 20 Nederlandse Wetenschapswinkels p/a Chemiewinkel RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Uw brief van Ons kenmerk Behandelend ambtenaar 9-5-96 OWB/MLV-96013629 Onderwerp Doorkiesnummer Zoetermeer open brief 079-3233532 8 juli 1996 wetenschapswinkels I have read your collective open letter with interest. The subject of social relevance of research receives a lot of attention. It is a part of the National Debate on Knowledge, as you point out, and also a part of the international debate with reference to the Groenboek Innovatie (Green Book on Innovation) by the European Commission. Besides, the subject receives attention in the policy regarding sciences and technology through, for instance, the activities of the Overleg Commissie Verkenningen (consultative committee on studies) that I have set up and by way of the policy document Kennis in beweging (Knowledge in motion) that I published last year, in cooperation with my colleagues of Economische Zaken (Economic Affairs) and Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij (Agriculture, Nature Conservancy and Fisheries). The policy is aimed at improving the link between research and society. All parties, including the universities, are tackled on their responsibility. This subject also comes up for discussion during the consultations with the institutions on the efficiency and the level of quality with which they perform their tasks in the areas of education, research and the transfer of knowledge. Point of departure at this is the individual responsibility of the institution as expressed in the Wet op het Hoger onderwijs en Wetenschappelijk onderzoek (law concerning higher education and scientific research). This, in fact, means that it is up to the institutions themselves to shape their link to society. The choice of instruments to accomplish this is also part of it. I cannot, nor want to, get involved in this. The emphasis placed on the social aspects of research, makes great demands on the institutions of research. It will take a lot of effort of all those involved to meet those demands. However, it is, at the same time, an enormous challenge for the Boards of Governors, as well as for the science shops. The science shops can build on their valuable expertise. In any case, the experience in translating questions asked by society into research questions that are of interest to researchers as well, is important. Besides, the science shops have a sound grasp of the need for research of parties of limited financial means. The mutual aspects can play a role in determining the orientation of research (programmes). Indeed, with respect to policy, a lot of attention is paid to the link between research and questions from trade and industry, but the social orientation of research should not be identified with that. This would be a too limited interpretation of the social need for research. This also holds for the instruments and rules that are employed within the universities to achieve a better reciprocity between supply and demand with reference to research. To conclude, I hope that you will make use of the possibility to participate in the Debate on Knowledge. Because of their specific expertise, I expect that the science shop can provide a valuable contribution to the debate. I hereby include a complimentary copy of the first Kenniskrant (Knowledge Paper) in which information is given about participating in the Debate on Knowledge. By order of the Minister of Education, Culture and Sciences, dr. P.A.J. Tindemans director Research and Science Policy. Appendices to the lecture by Dick Sclove Annex 1: Some U.S. examples of participatory research centers: Applied Research Center, Oakland, California Conducts PAR projects (e.g., racial discrimination in housing and employment); trains community activists in PAR methods and in PAR's usefulness in social change efforts. Dickinson College, Pennsylvania Prof. Michael Heiman and colleagues (environmental chemists and geographers) train 50 undergraduates each year how to do studies of corporate production and management of toxic chemicals. Advanced undergraduates train lay citizens to do environmental monitoring (statewide network of 500 citizen monitors), and then work with those citizens to analyze the results. Heiman advocates "science *by* the people." Highlander Research & Education Center, Tennessee Danish "folk schools" had some influence in Myles Horton's establishment of Highland Research & Education Center, Tennessee, USA, in the 1930's. Highlander was very influential in U.S. civil rights movement--1950's and 1960's--and today in using/promoting participatory research, e.g., on regional environmental problems and on regional economic dependence on military production Policy Research Action Group (PRAG), in Chicago Collaboration among professors from 5 universities and grassroots organizations. E.g., places 45 undergraduates each year in Chicago-area community organizations, where they conduct participatory research projects. (PRAG-like models are operating in Ohio and Minnesota) Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Has organized several international conferences on "participatory design"--especially collaborative design with workers or end-users in computer systems or software development) Center for Neighborhood Technology, Chicago Studies ways that large urban manufacturing and infrastructural systems (e.g., transportation, energy) can be redesigned to better serve low income neighbourhoods, create more jobs, operate in more environmentally sound ways. Does not always use participatory research methods. Jacksonville Community Council, Inc., Florida Coalition of local civic organizations, government officials, workers, business leaders, public-interest groups, interested citizens. Identifies and conducts research projects on issues of local concern. E.g., recently conducted research used to create an "equity index" that measures the distribution of city services. As a result the police reorganized patrols to more evenly serve all neighbourhoods. John Snow, Inc., Boston Nonprofit organization that supports "popular epidemiology"--lay citizen initiated and conducted studies of environmental sources, and extent, of community diseases. E.g., popular epidemiology by residents of Woburn, Mass. who identified an abnormal childhood leukaemia cluster resulted in U.S. $8 million out-of-court settlement with W.R.Grace Company. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Massachusetts Requires *every* student to participate in a project that applies newly learned technical knowledge to an issue of social or environmental concern University of Wisconsin School for Workers (also related programs at University of Massachusetts at Lowell and at the Universite de Quebec a Montreal, in Canada). Supports worker/union participation in developing and managing workplace technologies (e.g., to try to maintain safe, creative, high-paying jobs) Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC), Washington, DC Has assembled a database of 8,000 U.S. researchers and social activists concerned with race & poverty issues. Organizes regional workshops across the U.S. to try to promote research collaborations. Pratt Institute Center for Community & Environmental Development (Brooklyn, New York) Supports participatory urban planning. Annex 2 A few readings on community-based research in the U.S., or on participatory research in the developing world: Brown, Phil, and Edwin J. Mikkelsen (1990): No Safe Place: Toxic Waste, Leukaemia, and Community Action. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press. Cassidy, Kevin J. (1992): 'Defense Conversion: Economic Planning and Democratic Participation'. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 17, no. 3 (Summer): 334-48. Fals-Borda, Orlando, and Muhammad Anisur Rahman (1991): Action and Knowledge: Breaking the Monopoly with Participatory Action-Research. New York: Apex Press. [Third-world focus] Hollander, Rachelle (1984): 'Institutionalizing Public Service Science: Its Perils and Promise' in Citizen Participation in Science Policy. Ed. James C. Petersen, Amherst: Univ. of Massachusetts Press., pp. 75-95 [Describes a short-lived U.S. government program to establish public-interest science centers, 1977-1981.] Park, Peter, Mary Brydon-Miller, Budd Hall, and Ted Jackson, eds.(1993): Voices of Change: Participatory Research in the United States and Canada. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey. Sclove, Richard E. (1995): Democracy and Technology. New York and London: Guilford Press (especially chapters 3, 11, and 12). Thrupp, Lori Ann, guest editor (1994): 'Participation and Empowerment in Sustainable Rural Development'. Agriculture and Human Values 11, no.s 2-3 (Spring-Summer): 1-182. Trigg, Randall, Susan Irwin Anderson, and Elizabeth Dykstra-Erickson, eds. (1994): PDC '94: Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference. Palo Alto: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. Whyte, William Foote (1991) Participatory Action Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. To subscribe to the Loka Institute's science shop Internet discussion list, send e-mail to with a blank subject line and "subscribe scishops (your name)" as the message text. The server will then ask you for confirmation and will give you a users manual (including ways to get off the list again). LIST OF PARTICIPANTS NAME INSTITUTE ADDRESS POSTCODE CITY (+ Country if not The Netherlands) Angela van Aalst Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Paul Absil Chemistry Shop UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht Hans Altena Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Fried Anepool Sci.Shop Biology UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht M.A. Aukema Groningen Knowledge Centre Damsterdiep 38 9711 SM Groningen Sylvia Bakkers Science Shop KUB P.O. Box 90153 5000 LE Tilburg Frank ter Beek Science Shop RUL P.O. Box 9500 2300 RA Leiden Frits van den Berg Physics Shop RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Arnold Bergstra Science Shop TUD Kanaalweg 2b 2628 EB Delft Marjan Blom Chemistry Shop UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht Susan Bod Science Shop KUB P.O. Box 90153 5000 LE Tilburg Alyda Boer Exp.& Labourpsych.RUG Grote Kruisstraat 2/1 9712 TS Groningen Hielke Freerk Boersma Physics Shop UU Leuvenlaan 21 3584 CE Utrecht Rene Bolt Physics Shop RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Han Borg Foreign Dept. RUG P.O. Box 72 9700 AB Groningen Attie Bos Biology Shop RUG P.O. Box 14 9750 AA Haren G.J. Brand Brand Communications P.O. Box 835 9700 AV Groningen Pieter van Broekhuizen Chemistry Shop UvA P.O. Box 20242 1000 HE Amsterdam Jeanine de Bruin Science Shop VU De Boelelaan 1105 1081 HV Amsterdam Maureen Butter Biology Shop RUG P.O. Box 14 9750 AA Haren Mark Dalmulder Science Shop KUB P.O. Box 90153 5000 LE Tilburg Marjolein Dekker Tellus Care Consultants P.O. Box 7053 9701 JB Groningen Martha Dekker Sci.Shop Medicin and Publ. Health RUG Ant. Deusinglaan 1 9713 AV Groningen G.H. van Diepen Support Group Welfare Friesland P.O. Box 295 9200 AG Drachten Els Dik Sci.Shop. Pharmacology UU Sorbonnelaan 16, N811 3508 TB Utrecht Jose Dobbelsteen Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Marijke Dohmen Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Josien Doornink Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Nick Duinhof Science Shop UT P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede Irene van Eerd PR Bureau UvA P.O. Box 19268 1000 GG Amsterdam Annette Eggen Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen A.A. Eijgermans Sci.Shop Law UU Janskerkhof 3 3512 BK Utrecht Jose van Eijndhoven Rathenau Institute P.O. Box 85525 2508 CE Den Haag Petra van Ellen Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Louki Ennik Transfer+Liaison RUG Zernikepark 2 9747 AN Groningen Brigit Fokkinga Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Arie Fokkink Chemistry Shop UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht Larissa Folman Chemistry Shop UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht E.A. Goedhard Science Shop EUR P.O. Box 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam Kor Grit Philosophy Dept. RUG A-weg 30 9718 CW Groningen Esther de Groot PWT Foundation P.O. Box 171 3500 AD Utrecht Ineke de Groot Language Bureau RUG P.O. Box 716 9700 AS Groningen J.A.A. ter Haar Fed.of Parents Associations P.O. Box 85276 3508 AG Utrecht Jo Haesen Sci. Shop RU Limburg P.O. Box 616 6200 MD Maastricht Nico Haselager Chemistry Shop UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht Janika van der Heijden Science Shop KUB P.O. Box 90153 5000 LE Tilburg Astrid Heijns Language Bureau RUG P.O. Box 716 9700 AS Groningen M. Hendriks Sci.Shop RU Limburg P.O. Box 616 6200 MD Maastricht Elizabeth Hendron Science Shop 111, Botanic Avenue BT7 1JP Belfast, N.Ireland Maria Hermsen Sc. Shop Medicin and Pub. Health RUG Ant. Deusinglaan 1 9713 AV Groningen E.A. Hessels Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Ans Hobbelink Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Els Hofman Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Jannus Hommes Chemistry Shop RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Henk Janssen Physics Shop RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Jeanny Jonathans Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Marjan de Jong Exp. and Labourpsych.RUG Grote Kruisstraat 2/1 9712 TS Groningen C. Jonkers Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Geerst Joosten University Council RUG P.O. Box 72 9700 AB Groningen Gregory Kealey Hum. Soc. Sci. Fed., 660 Lansdowne Av. H3Y 2V8 Montreal, c/o P. Roman Canada Leen Kemeling Science Shop EUR P.O. Box 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam M. van Kerkhoven PWT Foundation P.O. Box 171 3500 AD Utrecht Judith van der Kleij Science Shop RUL P.O. Box 9500 2300 RA Leiden Marlou Kleve Science Shop VU De Boelelaan 1105 1081 HV Amsterdam Menno van der Klooster Science Shops UU Bijlhouwerstraat 6 3511 ZC Utrecht Roy Knuiman Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Marijke Kohinor Health & Env. Telephone Joop IJisbergstraat 7 1063 EJ Amsterdam Loes Koning Women's health Centre Oude Boteringestraat 60 9713 ZK Groningen M. Koning Sci.Shop RU Limburg P.O. Box 616 6200 MD Maastricht Yolanda Kuis Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Anita Kuppens Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Marcel Lauziere Hum. Soc. Sci. Fed., 660 Lansdowne Av. H3Y 2V8 Montreal, c/ P. Roman Canada M. Lieshout Sci.Shop RU Limburg P.O. Box 616 6200 MD Maastricht Ingrid Links Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Maria Litjens Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Klaas-Gert Lugtenborg History Bureau RUG P.O. Box 716 9700 AS Groningen Maaike Luersen Sci.Shop Biology UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht Eileen Martin Science Shop 111, Botanic Avenue BT7 1JP Belfast, N.Ireland P. van Mechelen Science Shop VU De Boelelaan 1107 1081 HV Amsterdam Anton Meijerman Chr.Ind./Food Union CNV Boelensstraat 82 9203 RP Drachten Joost Meilof Science Shop TUD Kanaalweg 2b 2628 EB Delft Jaap Mellink Sci.Shop Medicin VU vd Boechorststraat 7 1081 BT Amsterdam Karin de Moel Science Shop UT P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede Henk Mulder Chemistry Shop RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Woutje Mulder Company Welfare Work Boterdijk 15 8072 DK Nunspeet Martin Navrath Science Shop Panska 9 60200 Brno, Czech Rep. Ingeborg v. Oorschot Chemistry Shop UU Padualaan 8 3584 CH Utrecht Noelle Poetgens Science Shop RUL P.O. Box 9500 2300 RA Leiden R. Puite N.V.S.M.C. Zenegroen 80 8935 KM Leeuwarden Karin Ree Chemistry Shop RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Arjan van Rheede Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Sjef van de Rijke Physics Shop RUG Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Manja Rijzinga Sci.Shop Education RUG Grote Rozenstraat 38 9712 TJ Groningen Lizanne Roeleven Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Alphons Rommelse Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Myra de Rooy Sci.Shop Environment VU De Boelelaan 1115 1081 HV Amsterdam Evelyn Schaafsma We.Wi. Pharmacology RUG Ant. Deusinglaan 2 9713 AW Groningen Liesbeth Schellen Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen Dick Schlueter Science Shop UT P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede Ton Schoot Uiterkamp IVEM Nijenborgh 4 9747 AG Groningen Dick Sclove Loka Institute P.O. Box 355 01004 Amherst, MA, USA Danie Seers Science Shop EUR P.O. Box 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam Marja v.d. Sigtenhorst Science Shop RUL P.O. Box 9500 2300 RA Leiden Frank Sijtsma Sci.Shop Economics RUG P.O. Box 800 9700 AV Groningen Jelle Smit Science Shop UT P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede Mirjam Smulders Science Shop KUN P.O. Box 9044 6500 KD Nijmegen W.H.M. Snoeren Science Shop KUB P.O. Box 90153 5000 LE Tilburg M.M. Splinter Science Shop FSW UU Heidelberglaan 2 3584 CS Utrecht Dirk Stelder Sci.Shop Economics RUG P.O. Box 800 9700 AV Groningen Zuzana Stroufova Hnuti Duha Jakubske Namesti 7 60200 Brno, Czech Rep. Ricus Timmers Science Shop KUB P.O. Box 90153 5000 LE Tilburg Wim van Veelen Science Shop RUL P.O. Box 9500 2300 RA Leiden Marjan Verduijn Nat. Stud. Union P.O. Box 1335 3500 BH Utrecht Els Verhagen Science Shop LUW P.O. Box 9101 6700 HB Wageningen Karin Vermeulen Sci. Shop Medicin and Publ. Health RUG Ant. Deusinglaan 1 9713 AV Groningen Carla Versluis Science Shops UU Bijlhouwerstraat 6 3511 ZC Utrecht Jacobje Visser Sci. Shop Medicin and Publ. Health RUG Ant. Deusinglaan 1 9713 AV Groningen Y. Visser Sci.Shop Law UU Janskerkhof 3 3512 BK Utrecht J. Wachelder Sci.Shop RU Limburg P.O. Box 616 6200 MD Maastricht Barbara Warme Hum. Soc. Sc. Fed. Minervaplein 39 1077 TM Amsterdam Y. Wesselius Science Shop EUR P.O. Box 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam Nicolien Wieringa Pharmacology Dept. RUG Ant. Deusinglaan 2 9713 AW Groningen Esther van Wijck Sci.Shop Medicin and Publ. Health RUG Ant. Deusinglaan 1 9713 AV Groningen Mia Willems Sci.Shop Pharmacology UU Sorbonnelaan 16, N811 3508 TB Utrecht Hilka Wolschrijn Sci.Shop Pharmacology UU Sorbonnelaan 16, N811 3508 TB Utrecht Manon Wolters Language Bureau RUG P.O. Box 716 9700 AS Groningen EUR = Erasmus University Rotterdam, KUB = Tilburg University, KUN = Catholic University of Nijmegen, LUW = Wageningen Agricultural University, RUG = University of Groningen, RUL = University of Leidien, RU Limburg = University of Limburg, TUD = Tecnical University Delft, UT = University of Twente, UU = Utrecht University, UvA = University of Amsterdam, VU = Free University Amsterdam