Browsing by Author "Goldschmidt, Rüdiger"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Open Access
European citizens' consultations project : final evaluation report
(2008) Goldschmidt, Rüdiger; Renn, Ortwin; Köppel, Sonja
The report summarises the findings of the evalaution project focused on the European Citizens Consultations Project. The evaluation was conducted on behalf of the King Baudouin Foundation, Brussels. Its major objective was to review the methodological concept and design, but also the organisational and process-related qualities of the European Citizens’ Consultations (ECC) project. The evaluation especially focused on the conditions, the promoting and impeding factors for initiating, conducting and sustaining a constructive dialogue among citizens from all EU member countries. The evaluation was mainly based on four criteria: fairness, competence, efficiency and transparency. The ECC dialogue process (www.european-citizens-consultations.eu) was initiated by the Agenda-Setting Event in Brussels in October 2006 with 200 citizens from all EU countries. In February and March 2007, national consultation events took place in each member state of the European Union. The purpose of the national consultation processes was to further elaborate the topics that were developed and selected during the Agenda-Setting Event. The final report was adopted in May 2007 during the final event in Brussels (Synthesis Event) by citizens from all European countries. The evaluation team of DIALOGIK used three main methods for data input and processing: ·Direct observations during all events at European level and 12 selected national consultation events (documentation of general and specific features of the dialogue process by using a pre-structured observation sheet) ·Personal/telephone interviews with key actors (coordinators, facilitators, stakeholders and involved citizens) as well as ·Written surveys among the participants during all events at European level and the selected national consultations to elicit participants’ perceptions and assessments regarding the process and the results developed. In addition, the evaluation team analysed the project’s website and other documents of the ECC-project as well as “external” websites. For getting impressions on the repercussions in the media, the evaluation team conducted a media analysis of a number of sources.
Open Access
Meeting of minds - European citizens' deliberation on brain sciences : final report of the external evaluation
(2006) Goldschmidt, Rüdiger; Renn, Ortwin
The major objective of the external evaluation is to review the methodological concept, the procedural design and the actual performance of the ECD-Project. The focus of the evaluation lies on the European process level, i.e. the two Citizens’ Conventions were the focal events for the external evaluation. After these events, the team of Dialogik accumulated the interim results in form of two reports, which are attached to this volume. The following conclusions are based on the insights described in these interim reports. They convey a more holistic picture of the overall process without getting lost in each detail. The main research question of the evaluation is how the dialogue processes were initiated and how they were sustained during the whole project. The development of communication and deliberation leading to a common statement of European citizens about brain science was one major concern of this analysis, which focused on process-related and organizational issues. The task to evaluate the ECD-Project was an inspiring but also demanding endeavour. A lot of data was collected during the process and an enormous n umber of sources for additional information was available for further analysis. One problem to be solved was to find an adequate theoretically appropriate and practically feasible perspective for the examination of all important activities. The other problem was to find the right balance between measuring subjective impressions and evaluations based on a set of objective criteria or benchmarks. Subjective aspects such as the assessments of the participants are relevant, but a comprehensive assessment also needs additional information sources, which can be used as benchmarks for assessing successes or failures of the process. The methods used in this evaluation include both aspects. The acronym ECD stands for “European Citizens’ Deliberation”, which is the description of the basic method of the Meeting of Minds-Project. Both terms were used synonymously in this report. Meeting of Minds is an initiative of the partner consortium comprising the King Baudouin Foundation, the University of Westminster, the Flemish Institute for Science and Technology Assessment, the Danish Board of Technology, the Cité des Sciences et de l’Industrie, the Stiftung Deutsches Hygiene-Museum, the Fondazione IDIS Città della Scienza, the Rathenau Institute, the Science Museum, the University of Debrecen, the Eugenides Foundation, the University of Liège, SPIRAL. The initiative has the support of the European Commission under the 6th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development in the European Union.
Open Access
Zur Wirkung und Effektivität von Dialog- und Beteiligungsformaten
(2012) Goldschmidt, Rüdiger; Scheel, Oliver; Renn, Ortwin
Der Forschungsbericht untersucht mittels quantitativer und qualitativer empirischer Methoden die Wirkung von sieben Dialog- bzw. Beteiligungsformaten im Bereich der Wissenschaftskommunikation. Dabei geht es erstens um die Wirkungen auf Veranstaltungsteilnehmende. Dem Format entsprechend waren das entweder Bürgerinnen und Bürger oder Schülerinnen und Schüler. Für diese Gruppen wird untersucht, ob die Veranstaltungsteilnahme das Sachwissen und die Urteilsfähigkeit sowie das Interesse am Thema bzw. an wissenschaftlichen Fragen allgemein beeinflusste. Ein weiterer Analysebereich sind Einstellungen zum Beispiel in Bezug auf Wissenschaftler und Wissenschaft. In einem zweiten Schwerpunkt werden die Wirkungen auf die Wissenschaftler untersucht, welche die Dialogveranstaltungen als Berater der Teilnehmenden begleiteten. Drittens werden für einige Formate die projektexternen Effekte, zum Beispiel Institutionalisierungseffekte, näher beleuchtet. Das aus den empirischen Befunden entwickelte Entscheidungsschema soll Organisatoren bei der Auswahl von Formaten unterstützen. Zudem gibt der Bericht dezidierte Empfehlungen, wie die einzelnen Formate ausgestaltet werden sollten.