Consensus conferences, also known as citizens’ panels—a collection of lay citizens akin to a jury but charged with deliberating on policy issues with a high technical content—are a potentially important way to conduct technology assessments, inform policy makers about public views of new technologies, and improve public understanding of and participation in technological decision making. The first citizens’ panel in the United States occurred in April 1997 on the issue of “Telecommunications and the Future of Democracy.” This article evaluates the impact of this citizens’ panel. The standard criteria to evaluate the impact of analyses focus on the “actual impact” and on the “impact on general thinking.” To these standard criteria, this article introduces the evaluation of two impacts related to learning: impact on the training of knowledgeable personnel and the interaction with lay knowledge. The impact evaluation is based on a nearly comprehensive set of semistructured telephone interviews with the participants in the panel.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1177/016224399902400402
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,916
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Participatory Analysis, Democracy, and Technological Decision Making.Frank N. Laird - 1993 - Science, Technology and Human Values 18 (3):341-361.
Risk and Social Learning: Reification to Engagement.Brian Wynne - 1992 - In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (eds.), Social Theories of Risk. Praeger. pp. 275--297.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Survey Article: Citizen Panels and the Concept of Representation.Mark B. Brown - 2006 - Journal of Political Philosophy 14 (2):203-225.
The Paradox of Participation Experiments.Alexander Bogner - 2012 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 37 (5):506-527.
Technology Theory and Deliberative Democracy.Patrick W. Hamlett - 2003 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 28 (1):112-140.
Evaluation of a Deliberative Conference.Lynn J. Frewer, Roy Marsh & Gene Rowe - 2004 - Science, Technology and Human Values 29 (1):88-121.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Cloning and Deliberation: Korean Consensus Conference.Myung–sik Kim - 2002 - Developing World Bioethics 2 (2):159-172.
Cloning and Deliberation: Korean Consensus Conference.Myung–sik Kim - 2002 - Developing World Bioethics 2 (2):159–172.
Consensus and Power in Deliberative Democracy.Tim6 Heysse - 2006 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 49 (3):265 – 289.
Electronic Petition as an Effective Tool for Political Participation of Citizens.A. K. Konstantynivska - 2018 - Epistemological studies in Philosophy, Social and Political Sciences 1 (1-2):89-95.


Added to PP index

Total views
1 ( #1,538,224 of 2,497,981 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,301 of 2,497,981 )

How can I increase my downloads?


Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes