What are science communicators' expectations for actual policies related to science communication?

We will move from small group-level discussion and carry main ideas to the plenary level. Through this, the session aims to build consensus about expections along with priorities for action. Click on session title to read workshop group descriptions.

Group A – Infrastructure

• Do you really need a building or infrastructure (including communication channels, etc) for science communication activities?

• Should it be the authority that runs the building or is a private company or PPP more efficient to be involved?

• What can you use the infrastructure for if ever the science center will not be successful? (innovation aspect to adapt to changes)

Group B – Political ownership

• What kind of political support would be the minimum/optimum/maximum requirement to ensure a good quality science communication job?

• Should it be a bottom-up (deriving from stakeholders) or a top-down (coming from high political level as a quasi granting, designating a title) process?

• Is a title necessary for the recognition of activities? Do you need to declare that you are a city of science?

Group C – Citizens

• Can you brand a city without citizens’ support?

• How could science communicators and policymakers support each other to reach out to citizens?

• What could citizens do for a city of science?

• If we integrate the impact question: how would the fact of becoming a city of science influence the city and citizens’ lives?

Group D – Resources

• What is your most efficient model of financing science communication activities?

• What should funding target - activities/infrastructure system development or skill development?

• What public service could science communicators fulfil for which they could be remunerated as a trustworthy partner of the local public administration?

Group E – Knowledge hub

• Is having a science communication institution, a university or a research-intensive company in the city/region a necessary or a sufficient condition of becoming a science city/region?

• If there is no such institute, what can take this role over? What else can replace the driver function?

• What can science communicators&policy makers do for this institute to be the driver?

• Once the city becomes a city of science, what would be the impact of this title on the institution?