Introduction. The role of science communication in defining modern knowledge societies
In 1984 the French philosopher Jean-François Lyotard argued that «knowledge had
become, over the past few decades, the primary force of production in the upcoming
postmodern society1». A science-based society, where science translates into the
Aristotelian tradition notion of scientia (perfect knowing), takes over the industrial
one, originated two centuries before. Today, scientific knowledge is widely
considered as the core of economic growth, driver for innovation and a possible
answer to humanity’s greatest challenges such as shortage of resources and climate
change. Because of such expectations, science communication comes to play a
crucial role on, at least, three fronts: welfare, democracy and cultural identity2.
Knowledge must be communicated to citizens, policy makers, entrepreneurs, so they
can take advantage from it, enhance and strengthen our understanding of the world,
develop new products and improve life quality. Beside welfare, democracy also
benefits from science communication, as the decision-making is a practice more and
more participative in our societies, engaging a variety of different publics. To let the
general public in science-related debates as a key interlocutor, along with the
understanding of scientific concepts, people must become familiar with how science
works, be aware of its methodologies, practices, limitations and failings. Finally,
science communication can directly mold the cultural fabric we live in by shaping our
thinking about social issues, providing meaning and sense to the world, valuing
knowledge as a public good and defining a shared social identity. This is especially
true in Europe, where a deep-rooted political union as first envisaged by the
Maastricht treaty in 1992 has still to come.
But what do we exactly refer to when we talk about science communication? Over
time, it has turned into something much more complex than a mere transmission,
illustration or simplification of technical information by those who know to those who do not . Nowadays, science communication does not simply try to provide answers. It
rather creates new environments where people with different expertises can face
each other, debate, raise new questions and co-produce new solutions. This
happens in a variety of contexts: science museums, festivals, events, workshops,
conferences, public lectures and debates, journalistic publications, social media. In
order to transfer knowledge, information must be «processed, integrated, understood
3» and, for this, science communication provides interpretative categories,
instruments and schemes for thought and for interpreting reality which are tailored to
suit specific audiences: scientists, academics, general public, students, policy
makers, communicators, entrepreneurs...
