Creating a collaborative future between science and society
Today, every breath we take carries the imprint of science—its successes, its failures and its work in progress. Scientific discoveries have profoundly shaped our world, from electricity systems powering industries and healthcare breakthroughs that extended lifespans to the green revolution that provided food security to India at a critical juncture in its post-colonial recovery.
However, sometimes scientific advancements may lead to negative externalities - harmful consequences to society. Consider the air pollution problem in northern India during the winter season. Smoke due to the burning of crop stubble, biomass burning, thermal power plants, dust and vehicular pollution - the key causes of air pollution - are the byproducts of large-scale farming and industrialisation, turning scientific achievements into a major public health crisis.
Given the advancements in science, one wonders why we are unable to circumvent these harmful consequences?
Paraphrasing French philosopher Joseph de Maistre's words "Every nation, gets the ‘science’ it deserves" to remind us that in democracies, science and society are deeply intertwined. When people actively engage with science—participating in it, shaping its priorities, asking questions, and holding the government and scientific enterprise accountable—it creates a system that not only drives progress through science but one that proactively addresses the challenges we face together.
This connection becomes even more critical when tackling urgent issues associated with public health, environment, and education. To solve these problems, science and its applications need to be inclusive, fair, and rooted in the realities of diverse communities. Enabling meaningful and reciprocal public engagement ensures scientific research reflects ground realities, while also empowering people with the knowledge to act. It’s about creating a two-way street where science and society inform and uplift one another, turning discoveries into solutions that truly matter for all.
The Indian R&D ecosystem, predominantly driven by government initiatives and marginally supported by businesses, has increasingly become insular in its approach to solving challenges, placing little to no intentional emphasis on the public's role in shaping what science should and should not do. This is when scientific research is majorly funded and subsidized by taxpayers – directly through the government and indirectly through government incentive schemes to businesses. Yet, we don’t have effective mechanisms to enable public participation in the design, process, or adoption of scientific products and innovations.
There is a lack of effective public participation in public policy as well, including when policies are enacted to manage negative externalities of scientific advancements such as the air pollution problem. Many attempts have been made to solve the air quality crisis in India through technology without yielding the desired results. In addition, the policy solutions tend to put a larger burden of compliance on individuals than on businesses like the odd-even policy, closure of construction activities, and schools and offices switching to online mode without providing persons affected an opportunity to be heard and alternatives considered. Despite these policy interventions, there is barely any change in the air pollution problem.
We believe change happens when people demand better from both the government and the market. A truly representative government empowers public participation, enabling active engagement in science and science-based policymaking to drive meaningful change.
‘Participation’, that is, intentional and meaningful, moving beyond tokenistic consultations and extractive research. As described by Arnstein, author of the famous research article “A Ladder of Citizen Participation”, participatory science can range from absolute non-participation with one-way communication; to tokenism wherein people are either informed, consulted or placated with no real power over the situation; to finally public participation wherein people share power with the decision-makers. However, public participation cannot happen in a vacuum; it thrives in a society that actively builds and nurtures an enabling environment for public engagement and empowerment.
Building blocks of public participation
An informed and active citizenry is the bedrock of democratizing science.
The ability of people to access information, critically appraise it and demand their rights can drive key policy decisions on science and technology for the benefit of the community. In India, some of these characteristics of an active citizenry form key constitutional values of our democratic society such as justice, equality and liberty, as well as article 51 A (h) which calls every citizen “to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform”.
The government has an imperative role in enabling meaningful public participation. In 2014, the Indian government introduced a pre-legislative consultation policy describing the process for public consultation before formulating any new laws. As per the policy, the government departments should set clear goals for proposed legislation, along with its financial, environmental, livelihood and human rights impact for feedback from the civil society, which should be considered before finalising a law. However, in practice, the implementation of this policy is followed in a piecemeal manner, with the extent and impact of public contributions to the process remaining uncertain.
Patronage of the government is not the only way to enable citizen participation in science policy - public or citizen collectives can be equally influential. However, the demonisation of key collective movements in the recent past has been one of the key reasons for a lack of citizen-led efforts to demand basic rights such as access to clean air and water.
It therefore doesn’t come as a surprise that the people science movements of today remain largely invisible and have struggled to foster citizen-informed science. To make this happen, both our society and the science community at large need to be more accepting of dissent and critique and less cynical about the political nature of science.
For corporates, responsible activities are largely the result of compliances they are mandated to follow under various rules and regulations, and self-regulatory frameworks that help them build trust with consumers. For instance, multiple responsible frameworks that focus on public participation have been formed in the fields of emerging scientific areas such as AI.
While corporate self-regulation and public participation frameworks for emerging fields is encouraging, a robust and more proactive state leadership and citizenry are essential to ensure these efforts align with the broader public good and transcend the limitations of corporate goodwill and market interests. The Bhopal gas leak of 1984 is a haunting reminder of the dangers if this aspect remains unchecked.
In our view, constitutional values along with efficient, diverse and equitable participatory mechanisms mandated and led by the state, complemented by ethical self-governance, serve as essential pillars for fostering meaningful public participation and democratizing science.
A call to reform
The rapid growth and complexity of modern technology, with its profound impact on people and the planet, calls for fostering science-engaged — not just science-literate — citizenry. Citizenry that is capable of critical thinking and informed decision-making.
Achieving this requires a cultural and systemic shift—one that nurtures engagement with science and democracy from childhood to adulthood, allowing the public to hold governments, scientific institutions and businesses accountable, grounded in a clear understanding of the issues at hand.
Cultural shift through education: As a foundational step, a culture of scientific inquiry and democratic engagement needs to be fostered from an early age. Schools and higher education institutions should serve as incubators of curiosity and critical thinking, where children and young people are not only exposed to scientific facts or civic theory but are also empowered with the knowledge and tools to engage in constructive debates on science and society.
While some progressive steps in this direction have been outlined in the recent National Education Policy 2020, the success of this policy should be assessed not only in its ability to produce an employable workforce but also whether it is producing empowered, socially conscious, and critically informed citizens.
Citizen science: Citizen science is another handy tool that could be deployed for democratising science. So far, its application has been limited to the fields of ecology and biodiversity conservation but it holds equally remarkable potential for other crucial fields such as climate change, public health, food security, waste management, artificial intelligence, among others. Citizen science taps into the diverse technical and lived experiences of people, their innate curiosity and desire to solve social challenges.
The citizen science approach not only helps scale up scientific research, enabling scientists to go beyond their usual capacities but can bring in new perspectives to inform research and create allies in the process. Since it brings benefits for all, there is a strong case for ensuring a more extensive application of this approach in the science policy domain. For instance, India's air pollution crisis offers a prime opportunity to involve citizens in data collection and sharing through low-cost air quality monitors, similar to China's successful campaigns.
Avenues for public engagement: Inadequate platforms for the public to engage with science in a way that is meaningful and naturally aligns with their everyday experiences is also a major issue. This takes science policy away from them, making it even more inaccessible to the public at large.
This is where new and old media along with diverse cultural and public platforms can play a significant role. Together, they can make science more accessible and relatable to both young and adult populations.
Dialogue between scientists, policymakers, and the public can be organised through science communication events like festivals, public debates, and exhibitions as well as through more formal and strategic platforms including, but not limited to town halls and policy consultation meetings. These open dialogues can help build mutual trust, demystify complex issues while encouraging collaborative problem-solving, ultimately integrating science into the fabric of society.
Open science: Open science is a movement aimed at making scientific research, data, and outputs freely accessible to everyone, with minimal restrictions to promote transparency and inclusivity in science. For this reason, open science is seen as a major pillar for democratising science, promoting equity and collaboration. It empowers diverse stakeholders—including marginalized communities—to actively engage with, contribute to, and benefit from scientific knowledge, fostering inclusivity and shared progress.
Interdisciplinary collaboration: Finally, we need to break down the silos that exist between diverse disciplines and sectors working towards inclusive social and economic development in our country. It’s important to recognise science as a cross-cutting domain that intersects with nearly all aspects of contemporary decision-making and action, and not the sole territory of specialists in lab coats.
For this reason, fields such as development economics, education, social justice and human rights - many of which already employ participatory principles and approaches - should be brought into the fold to enable the democratisation of science.
By engaging more intentionally and meaningfully with science, not just as an academic discipline but as a critical social and political framework, these fields along with the scientific ecosystem can contribute to understanding the complexities of the world and identifying actionable solutions to social challenges with genuine public participation at its centre.