Participatory Science Communication Through Consensus Conferences: Legitimacy Evaluations of a German Consensus Conference on Genome Editing

Considering growing deliberative turns within and beyond science communication coupled with calls for their systematic evaluations, this paper presents a legitimacy framework to analyze a recent consensus conference on the topic of genome editing. Drawing upon participant surveys (PSs) and interviews, it confirms difficulties of this deliberative method in achieving inclusive input from across society as well as conflicts between deliberative ideals, empirical communication practice, and ensuring impact on policy making. The case calls for more experimentation with hybrid online/offline approaches while staying aware of unequally distributed deliberation abilities and the need for unifying outputs.

Automated summary

This paper presents a legitimacy framework to analyze a recent consensus conference on genome editing and highlights the difficulties of achieving inclusive input and conflicts between deliberative ideals, empirical communication practice, and policy making. It calls for more experimentation with hybrid online/offline approaches and emphasizes the need for unifying outputs.