Mobilizing Science: Movements, Participation, and the Remaking of Knowledge

Chapter 1: Democratizing Science Movements: Conditions for Success and Failure

❖ T his chapter describes what democratizing science movements attempt to do and why they may fail. Scholars have begun to report on these movements around the world and to theorize movement functioning. I build on their work to create a general typology of democratizing science movements. Although they may have very diverse goals, I argue that they have a common impetus— the process of scientization—that may stimulate them to arise and also cause them to fail (Voss 1996). Often, activists are calling for greater democracy of research and government, but success depends on whether activists can effectively participate in political and scientific institutions rather than be co-opted through superficial participation . Co-optation “becomes possible when a challenging group or social movement opposes the practices, initiatives or policies of more powerful social organizations or political institutions” and the result is “some mix of institutionalization, social control, cooptation, and policy changes” (Coy and Heeden 2005). What has been learned about social movement co-optation through political participation can be applied to scientific participation as well. Lay citizens may engage in research without formal decision-making power or in situations where they are greatly outnumbered by experts. In those cases, their perspectives may not be represented in outcomes, although their participation is celebrated. Democratizing Science Movements Conditions for Success and Failure 1 24 ▪ Chapter 1 Making the Case for Democratizing Science Movements Movements around the world challenge expert knowledge, critique the minutiae of new technologies, and reshape research. On the continents of Asia, Africa, and South and North America, these movements address a diverse set of issues. Many of these are focused on health or the environment—from AIDS (Steven Epstein 1996) to pollution regulation (Hsiao and Liu 2002)—but others expand beyond those realms to address a multitude of political and corporate practices . Activists in Latin America have used “participatory research” as a movement strategy (Flint 2003). In line with Paolo Freire’s conceptualization of “pedagogy for liberation” (1970), politically disenfranchised communities are empowered through learning and sharing their knowledge. A variety of movements in Europe have created “science shops” where research collaborations address movement concerns of many types (Leydesdorff and Ward 2005). These movements have been active for some time, possibly because of their relevance for diverse topics. Although there is little information to trace their emergence and rise, it is likely that they largely emerged with the second wave of environmentalism that was accompanied by engagement with research discovering environmental degradation. Rachel Carson, the initiator of that movement, was possibly one of the first to call for them and be a part of them. Barry Commoner, another instigator of modern environmentalism, also championed democratizing science by helping lay citizens gain access to information about health effects of nuclear fallout (Egan 2007; McCormick 2008). In order to distribute more understandable information, Commoner and his group, the Committee for Nuclear Information, began to work with a group of women who had begun to be concerned about the health effects of nuclear fallout (Moore 2008). Soon after, environmental justice advocates arose and pointed to the importance of equal participation in research and decision making about environmental exposures. Experts have been involved in environmental justice movements’ attempts to address inequalities of environmental illness (Bullard 1990; Corburn 2005). Environmental justice movements direct attention to asthma or other chronic conditions of people of color disproportionately exposed to polluting sources. In order to demonstrate the connection between these sources and illness outcomes, they often engage in collecting data and forming scientific hypotheses. For example , “bucket brigades” gather air samples next to oil refiners and Democratizing Science Movements ▪ 25 other polluters and then use those data to make arguments about exposure levels (Allen 2003). Environmental justice activists have also attacked the norms that are embodied in scientific language, tools, and practice. Scientific norms are institutionalized in the same ways as norms about gender and race. In fact, these norms sometimes intersect. Asthma movements in the United States exemplify how movements contest science to affect racism (Brown et al. 2003). Organizations have formed in the Roxbury area of Boston and in Harlem in New York City in response to extraordinarily high asthma rates of inner-city children. These citizens protest the hazardous exposures in their community that they believe to be causing asthma. They have developed relationships with researchers at Harvard and Columbia to study environmental exposures in the community. They argue that predominant scientific...