10 Fakultät Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/handle/11682/11
Browse
11 results
Search Results
Item Open Access Wahrnehmung und Bewertung von Risiken : Ergebnisse des "Risikosurvey Baden-Württemberg 2001" ; gemeinsamer Arbeitsbericht der Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden-Württemberg und der Universität Stuttgart, Lehrstuhl Technik- und Umweltsoziologie(2002) Renn, Ortwin; Zwick, Michael M.; Heinßen, Marcus; Sautter, Alexander; Höhle, EsterAls Fazit bleibt festzuhalten: Es gibt eine Reihe von konkurrierenden Ansätzen in der Risikowahrnehmungsforschung, die sich nicht gegenseitig ausschließen, sondern als Elemente eines multifaktoriellen Zugangs zu einem vielschichtigen Phänomen betrachtet werden können. Umso wichtiger ist es deshalb, diese vielen Facetten des Phänomens auch durch ein entsprechend komplexes empirisches Forschungsdesign abzubilden. Da ein Großteil der empirischen Forschung in der Risikowahrnehmung in den siebziger Jahren stattgefunden hat und wenige Studien vorliegen, die den Anspruch erheben, den vollen Umfang psychologischer, soziologischer und kultureller Variablen zu erfassen, hat die Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden-Wrttemberg im Jahr 2001 eine repräsentative Umfrage zum Thema Risikowahrnehmung in der Bevölkerung Baden-Württembergs durchgeführt. Daran wurde eine qualitative Untersuchung auf der Basis eines Samples mit 62 Befragten angeschlossen. Das Ziel der Studie war die Bestimmung der relativen Wichtigkeit psychometrischer, stigma-bezogener, gesellschaftlich wertbezogener, vertrauensbezogener und kultureller Variablen bei der Erklärung von Risikowahrnehmung und -akzeptanz. Der folgende Bericht faßt die zentralen Ergebnisse dieser Untersuchungen zusammen.Item Open Access Stuttgarter Projektergebnisse zum Thema technisch-naturwissenschaftliche Wissensvermittlung an Kinder und Jugendliche(2011) Schulz, Marlen; Hiller, Sylvia; Keierleber, Verena; Renn, Ortwin; Pfenning, Uwe; Schulz, Marlen (Hrsg.)Die Förderung technischer und naturwissenschaftlicher Interessen bei Kindern und Jugendlichen ist eine wichtige gesellschaftliche Aufgabe. Das Institut der Deutschen Wirtschaft stellt in einer Studie von 2009 eine Ingenieurslücke von 44.000 offenen Stellen fest. Ursächlich hierfür sind u.a. geringe Studierendenquoten in wichtigen klassischen technischen Disziplinen, der demografische Wandel sowie die Altersüberhänge in der Erwerbstätigenstruktur von Ingenieuren in Deutschland. Die Gründe für die Zurückhaltung junger Menschen, sich für diese Studiengänge einzuschreiben, sind mittlerweile relativ gut erforscht. Zu den wichtigsten Gründen gehören: • mangelndes Basiswissen im mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Bereich • es gibt in vielen Schulen bislang kein Schulfach Technik • das Prinzip „learning to the test” im regulären Schulunterricht erschwert die Kompetenzentwicklung • Möglichkeit während der Schulzeit vermeintlich schwierige Fächer (oftmals MINT-Fächer) abzuwählen • Strukturwandel in der Familie („vaterlose Gesellschaft“) • gesellschaftliches Image von Technik als Männerdomäne • fehlende Kontinuität in der Techniksozialisation • fehlender Handlungs- und Alltagsbezug bei Projekten • negatives Image von Technik und der entsprechenden Berufsbilder • unzureichende und falsche Vorstellungen über technische Ausbildungen und Berufe Als Reaktion auf den Mangel an technisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fachkräften sowie auf wahrgenommene Defizite bei der Vermittlung von Technik sind in den letzten Jahren zahlreiche Initiativen und Projekte entstanden. Diese verfolgen das Ziel, das Technikverständnis junger Menschen zu fördern, diese für Technik und entsprechende Studienfächer und Berufswege zu interessieren und zu begeistern. Nun ist es an der Zeit, die verschiedenen Maßnahmen zu systematisieren, zu analysieren und zu evaluieren. Dieser Aufgabe widmen sich verschiedene Stuttgarter Forschungsprojekte, deren zentrale Erkenntnisse in dem Sammelband zusammengefasst werden. • Das Projekt „Monitoring von Motivationskonzepten für den Techniknachwuchs (MoMoTech)“ ist ein innovatives Projekt zur Evaluation bestehender Modellprojekte in Deutschland, die der besseren Vermittlung von technischem Interesse und erhöhter Attraktivität von Technik bei Jugendlichen dienen. Im Rahmen einer Best Practice Analyse wurden die empfehlenswerten Projekte mit den besten nachhaltigen Effekten und optimalen institutionalisierten Voraussetzungen durch Effektmessungen identifiziert. Dieses Projekt stellt Frau Hiller in ihrem Beitrag „Motivation durch Modellprojekte – Effekte beispielhafter Modellprojekte auf das Interesse an Technik bei Kindern und Jugendlichen“ vor. • In dem Forschungsprojekt Lernmotivation im Technikunterricht (kurz LeMoTech) ging es um die Einrichtung und Evaluation eines Techniklabors in einem allgemeinbildenden Gymnasium und dessen Einsatz im Unterricht zum Fach Naturwissenschaft und Technik. Ziel sollte sein, die Effekte, die ein solches Lern- und Lehrlabor auf das Technikinteresse und -verständnis bei den Schülern hat, zu messen und sowohl quantitativ als auch qualitativ zu untersuchen. Die zentralen Ergebnisse dieses Projektes präsentiert Frau Hiller in dem Beitrag „Lernmotivation und Lerneffekte im Vergleich von schulischen und außerschulischen Lernorten“. • Die Baden-Württemberg Stiftung unterstützt im Rahmen verschiedener Programme seit Jahren verschiedene Projekte und Initiativen zur Förderung naturwissenschaftlicher und technischer Interessen bei Kindern und Jugendlichen. Für das Programm „mikromakro“ hat die Baden-Württemberg Stiftung die Dialogik gGmbH mit der Evaluation betraut. Ziel des Programms „mikromakro“ ist es, mit der Einführung und Etablierung von Erfinderclubs das Interesse von Mädchen und Jungen für Technik und Naturwissenschaft zu verbessern. Frau Schulz und Frau Keierleber fassen die Ergebnisse der ersten mikromakro-Runde in ihrem Artikel „Förderung des technischen und naturwissenschaftlichen Interesses bei Schülern durch außerschulische Erfinderclubs. Ergebnisse einer empirischen Evaluation“ zusammen. • Der Beitrag von Herrn Pfenning „MINT-Forschung und Sozialwissenschaften“ stellt eine Art Synthese aus verschiedenen Forschungsprojekten dar. Er skizziert einen theoretischen Rahmen und konzentriert sich dabei vor allem auf den Stand der Forschung in Sachen Lerntheorien, Didaktik, sozialpsychologische Ansätze und soziologische Ansätze. Untermauert werden seine Annahmen mit empirischen Daten aus dem Nachwuchsbarometer Technikwissenschaft (kurz NaBaTech).Item Open Access Group Delphi Workshop on In Silico Methods : successful communication of scientific content on the example of testing chemical substances(2012) Benighaus, Christina; Renn, Ortwin; Benighaus, Ludger; Hinderer, Nele; Alle, KatrinThe REACH Regulation (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals) contains the commitment to minimize the amount of animal testing necessary to achieve its aims. To do this, industry is providing justifications to waive animal tests in preference for in vitro or in silico methods. In silico methods rely on computer simulation or modeling and use results from existing tests to model the ways in which a chemical may be hazardous in the body and/or in the environment. Therefore the toxicity of chemicals can be assessed without further tests on animals. In the REACH context, ORCHESTRA was an EU funded project with the aim of disseminating recent research on in silico methods for evaluating the toxicity of chemicals such as quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs). The project aimed to promote a wider understanding, awareness and appropriate use of in silico methods. It communicated and exploited the findings of nine previous EU-funded projects relating to several areas, including food, environment and health. More information is found on the website www.in-silico-methods.eu/ or www.orchestra-qsar.eu/. The coordinator of the project was Dr. Emilio Benfenati, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche MARIO NEGRI, Milano, Italy. The interdisciplinary research unit on risk governance and sustainable technology development (ZIRN) that was part of Stuttgart University‘s International Center on Culture and Technology conducted the examination of responses and reactions of various stakeholders to successful communication strategies in the context of ORCHESTRA. This led ZIRN to conduct the one-day-workshop “Successful Com-munication of scientific Content on the Example of testing Chemical Substances” using the Delphi Method. The workshop was held on December 13th, 2011 in the GENO-Haus, in Stuttgart Germany. 14 experts plus four staff members have participated. The workshop aimed at investigating how complex scientific content, in this case, the use of computer models (in silico methods) in chemical research can be communicated in the “right way” through different communication channels to individual stakeholders as well as to a broad public. This report documents the procedure as well as the results of the workshop. First, the Method of the Group Delphi and the corres-ponding process and agenda of the workshop are described. The following chapter demonstrates particular results. The final chapter summarizes the outcomes of the workshop.Item Open Access Energy technology roadmap and stakeholders perspective : Establishment of social criteria for energy systems(2007) Brukmajster, Diana; Hampel, Jürgen; Renn, OrtwinThis report will inform about the development and selection of social indicators for the measurement of social effects of energy systems. As in the NEEDS project the aim of Workpackage 2 is to define social indicators for the assessment of social effects of energy systems, we applied a multi-step-approach. In a first step, we looked for existing indicators available in publications from the last twenty years. The keywords "social indicator", "sustainability", "environmental indicator" and "energy indicator" have been used to organise this research process. As a result of this research process 1320 indicators could be found. In a second step, these indicators have been proved according to the following meta-criteria: 1. The clarity of the indicators. 2. Whether the indicators are simple and logical. 3. Whether the indicators can be applied throughout Europe. 4. Whether they combine social and energy system-related aspects. Only 148 of the 1320 criteria passed this step of the research process. These indicators have been proved according to three main questions, which should make sure that the indicators are suitable with the requirements of the NEEDS project: 1. Whether they can be applied to future technologies. 2. Whether their focus is on the level of countries and not only on the regional level. 3. And whether the indicators allow differentiating between energy technologies. Only 26 of the 148 indicators passed this filter process and are able to measure the social dimension of present and future energy systems. These indicators have been attributed to concepts derived from the theoretical concept of social compatibility (Häfele/Münch/Renn 1985). With reference to the theoretical concept of social compatibility we allocated the indicators to four main criteria, these criteria are: 1. Continuity of Energy Service over Time 2. Political Stability and Legitimacy 3. Social Components of Risk 4. Quality of Life. For every criterion suitable indicators have been defined and added. Those mentioned criteria and indicators build the basis of our social indicator-set. The indicators will be measured with reference to the four main life cycle phases of energy systems: energy extraction and processing, transport, power plant (conversion to electricity) and waste management (considering the entire back-end). An updated version of indicators will be the outcome of a Stakeholder-Delphi. The stakeholders are invited to the Delphi to give a crucial input for the final version of the social indicators. The results of the Delphi and the final set of the social indicators will be added to the present report and complete it.Item Open Access Meeting of minds - European citizens' deliberation on brain sciences : final report of the external evaluation(2006) Goldschmidt, Rüdiger; Renn, OrtwinThe 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.Item Open Access European citizens' consultations project : final evaluation report(2008) Goldschmidt, Rüdiger; Renn, Ortwin; Köppel, SonjaThe 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.Item Open Access Radiation risks and uncertainties : a scoping review to support communication and informed decision-making(2020) Hoti, Ferdiana; Perko, Tanja; Thijssen, Peter; Renn, OrtwinAlthough radiation protection is challenged by many uncertainties, there is no systematic study investigating the definitions and types of these uncertainties. To address this gap, in this paper we offer a scoping review to comprehensively analyse, for the first time, peer-reviewed scientific articles (n = 33) related to uncertainties in the following radiation exposure situations: nuclear emergencies, decommissioning of nuclear/radiological installations and long-term radiological exposure situations (e.g. naturally occurring radioactive materials). The results suggest that firstly, there is no agreement regarding definitions of uncertainty, which is mainly defined based on its sources, types or categories rather than by its meaning. Secondly, different actors are faced with different types of uncertainties. Uncertainties of the scientific community are mostly data and methodology-driven (e.g. dose-response relationships), those of the decision-makers are related to the likely consequences of decision options and public reactions, while laypeople’s uncertainties are mainly related to the trustworthiness of experts or the emotional potential of specific risk exposures. Furthermore, the majority of articles focus on the uncertainties of the scientific community, while those of the information receivers (i.e. decision-makers and laypeople) receive much less consideration. Finally, there was no difference in types of uncertainties across the different risk-related study areas analysed (radiation versus other risks). Based on these findings, we provide some preliminary recommendations regarding research on uncertainty related to radiation protection, as well as communication practices.Item Open Access European citizens' panels : final report of the external evaluation(2007) Sellke, Piet; Renn, Ortwin; Cornelisse, CorinneObjectives of evaluation The European Citizens’ Panel (ECP) initiative was evaluated by a team of external specialists who were asked to assess whether ECP meets its self chosen goals and keeps up with the established standards of process evaluation outlined in the respective literature. The external evaluation focused on the quality of the process: What was successful, what needed improvement and how satisfied were the participants with the procedures of their involvement? The evaluation focused especially on the European component of the process. How was the evaluation performed? The external evaluation used different inter-related methods (see section 2 of the report) which enabled the researchers to validate results obtained with one method with results from another method (triangulation). The methods used for this evaluation included interviews with participants, European and regional organizers, facilitators and key-stakeholders, a standardized survey directed to all participants during and after the deliberations, systematic observations of the evaluation team made during the pan-European panel, the self-evaluation of the regional panels as well as an analysis of ECP’s website. Conclusions The evaluation of the European Citizens’ Panel confirmed that the main objectives of the project had been accomplished. Furthermore, the project demonstrated the feasibility of organising citizen participation at the European level and provided sufficient evidence that such a process can produce reliable, substantial and instructive results. Furthermore, the participants were overwhelmingly satisfied with their role and function in the process. They also stated that their interest in EU-policies did increase. External stakeholders have praised the process and its outcomes as well, although it is much too early to expect any policy changes or implementations of the recommendations. Early responses by policy makers suggest that they are willing to use the regional results in the respective areas while the European policy makers were more interested in the process itself and its feasibility for European policy formation in general. Given these positive impressions and impacts, there were also problems and deficits. Notwithstanding that the process was deliberately planned as a bottom-up approach, the process lacked clear leadership and an unambiguous distribution of authority. In addition, more efficient management procedures would have been advisable (i.e. in terms of smaller task forces). There were also minor problems with respect to fairness, transparency, and competence. These problems were never severe enough to compromise the process itself or the validity of its results. One should be careful, however, in the interpretation of the prioritized recommendations as their prioritization was developed by a voting procedure, which should and can not be taken as a representative view on the subject. Overall, the European Citizens’ Panel proved that it is possible to initiate a dialogue on a complex issue on the European level. The methodological and organizational experiences made within this process will certainly foster and encourage the further development of a European culture of participation.Item Open Access Exploring smart grids with simulations in a mobile science exhibition(2015) Li, Huijie; Chabay, Ilan; Renn, Ortwin; Weber, Andreas; Mbungu, GraceImproving the publics' understanding of the energy system is a challenging task. Making citizens aware of how the complex energy system functions and how consumers of energy services can respond to a changing energy environment seems more difficult. In the context of the German energy transition, more active energy consumers are needed, not only in producing electricity on their own but also interacting with suppliers to make the energy system operate in a more efficient way through the development of a "smart grid". This article describes an approach taken with a public education perspective to engage citizens in thinking about the issues we are facing in moving toward a future with greater reliance on renewable energy. We introduced a mobile exhibition, including an interactive simulation game, which offered a perspective on the whole energy system. The goal was to stimulate questions and arouse citizens' interest in learning about the smart grid and help them to prepare for the transition to a smarter way of using energy.Item Open Access Zur Wirkung und Effektivität von Dialog- und Beteiligungsformaten(2012) Goldschmidt, Rüdiger; Scheel, Oliver; Renn, OrtwinDer 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.