Final Report Summary - VOICES (VOICES)
Executive Summary:
Funded by the European Commission and led by Ecsite, the European network of science centres and museums, the VOICES project was a response to the Science in Society 2013.1.2.1-1 call on citizen participation in science and technology policy. Citizens from 27 EU countries were invited to give input - in the form of ideas and priorities - to a group of experts (the ‘Consolidation Group’) who contributed to defining the priorities for the next Work Programme of EU research calls on waste. VOICES therefore represented an innovative method of integrating public opinion into the ‘Climate action, environment, resource efficiency and raw materials’ dimension of the Horizon 2020 Work Programmes launched in 2014.
At the heart of the VOICES project is the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). This means engaging the public more in research and innovation (R&I), making R&I more socially responsive and encouraging shared responsibility for R&I agendas, practices and outcomes. The main aim of VOICES was to yield valuable insight on methods and procedure for engaging citizen participation to help set the research agenda for Europe’s Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) framework.
Compared to many other consultation initiatives, VOICES represents a breakthrough in its commitment to formally include the results of the citizens’ consultations in the main policy directions, shaping the priorities of future European research.
VOICES was also particularly innovative because of its scale (covering all of the EU member states at the time) and because of the methodological approach used on this wide scale: an approach which made use of a qualitative methodology (focus groups), which gathered and analysed citizens’ views, fostering real governance processes and social innovation. Another unique element is that the knowledge gained with this pilot project, in terms of methodology, infrastructure and results, can be used to organise similar participatory actions across Horizon 2020.
Citizens’ active participation in research and innovation is becoming a strong priority in Europe, as confirmed by the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020. Today more than ever, scientific and technological solutions need a societal uptake. Participation empowers citizens and strengthens science governance. The ground-breaking VOICES process was the first in-depth consultation of people living in every country of the EU on a scientific topic. The methodology used, 3-hour focus groups, resulted in a deep, unique understanding of citizens’ views. Citizens around Europe were delighted by the clear commitment of the European Commission to make use of their VOICES to influence research priorities. VOICES has proved to be a successful model of democratic science governance. It produced an innovative and replicable participatory process, orienting research, innovation and policy making more strongly towards societal needs. VOICES represents a milestone in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), fostering new multi-stakeholder participatory activities in the future.
Project Context and Objectives:
The overall aim of the VOICES project was to identify citizens’ ideas, preferences, values, needs and expectations with respect to research priorities for the theme ‘Urban Waste and Innovation’.
In recent years, the EU has been supporting the involvement of different societal actors in scientific research: researchers; but also citizens, policy makers, CSOs, etc.; in research and innovation processes, in order to better align the outcomes of scientific research to the expectations of European citizens. This approach is known as Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). Engaging multiple stakeholders in research and innovation (R&I) leads to more socially responsive processes and outcomes, as well as encourages shared responsibilities for R&I agendas.
RRI means understanding society's expectations as well as possible implications of scientific advancements. New technologies need to be as useful to society as possible. That’s why researchers and innovators should ensure their work is in line with people’s needs and ethical values. In the past, surveys have given us a hint about European citizens’ opinions and views. Nevertheless, by engaging participants in face-to-face conversations, the VOICES consultation has successfully tested an innovative, in-depth way of finding out how people really feel about research and innovation. It has also allowed them to bring about their own ideas.
In the future, similar participatory processes will be used to consult the public across the EU on topics from nanotechnology to climate change. For example, the European Commission’s website Your Voice in Europe opens up a wide variety of tools for stakeholders to play an active role in the European policymaking process, from consultations on EU policies to online chats with Europe’s leaders.
The VOICES consultation process used science centres and museums as powerful spaces for public engagement. Science centres and museums not only play an important role in informal science education, but are also engaged in initiatives which impact local and European policy making. They are spaces where people can engage in and debate complex and controversial issues in science. Science centres equip adults, teenagers and children with the tools to become informed, engaged and responsible citizens. These spaces bring the public together to share opinions with researchers, policymakers and other key players in research and innovation. As well as the latest exhibitions and science shows, many organise debates, workshops and special activities where you can get to grips with real research and make a difference.
Through VOICES, citizens from 27 EU countries had the concrete possibility to contribute with their ideas to the definition of strategic priorities for research in the EU in the field of waste management. The VOICES participatory exercise provided a deep and unique understanding of public opinion on the topic of urban waste, showing that in many areas citizens do have significant knowledge of the challenges facing waste disposal in Europe. It has also highlighted some issues which would allow for real social innovations, greater public engagement and new business opportunities.
We invited European citizens from a range of ages and backgrounds to focus groups in 27 countries of the European Union. Each group of ten people met in a science centre or museum. They were there for an in-depth discussion about urban waste as a resource. A moderator from the science centre or museum introduced the topic and guided the group through four simple exercises, in which they discussed face-to-face. The exercises allowed them to engage with the chosen topic, relate it to their everyday lives, identify their concerns and propose solutions as a group. The conversations brought out a huge range of opinions. It was impressive to see how engaged people felt with the topic, putting forward hundreds of ideas, from the creative and inspiring to the serious and urgent. Each focus group lasted three hours and was completely transcribed, word-for-word, and translated into English. The main areas of discussion were:
• How do you get rid of rubbish in your household?
• What stops you from disposing of waste in better ways?
• How could we achieve a “zero waste society”?
• Which of the group’s ideas do you think are the most important?
VOICES consulted citizens using a renowned method - focus groups - in a unique way. In terms of structure, the VOICES focus groups incorporated four exercises, which engaged the participants on the relevant topics, drawing out collective opinions and ideas in a carefully facilitated face-to-face process. The VOICES focus groups were led by trained moderators from science centres and museums, following a semi-structured script designed by researchers of the Athena Institute (VU University Amsterdam). This specific methodology ensures the results are both meaningful and valid, and was successfully implemented in a range of cultures and contexts, across 27 EU member states. Focus groups are a very important element of VOICES. This methodology allowed for flexibility as well as uniformity, and was very much enjoyed by participants and moderators.
• Flexibility: the VOICES methodology was successfully implemented in a range of cultures and contexts, across 27 EU member states, and can also be adapted for use at national and local levels, and with a range of policy topics.
• Structure: the VOICES focus groups worked on four exercises, which engaged the participants on the relevant topics, drawing out collective opinions and ideas in a carefully facilitated face-to-face process.
• Expertise: 22 external experts from a variety of backgrounds were involved in validating the methodology, devised by a highly experienced academic team at the VU University Amsterdam’s Athena Institute.
The results were fed back to policymakers in order to influence the direction of EU research policy. This provided input for the Consolidation Group that defined the actual priorities for the new work programme on ‘Urban Waste’ (call SiS.2013.1.2.1-2). In addition, it provided a valuable example of a methodology, the tools, the know-how and recommendations that can be adapted and used in coming years for similar initiatives.
The methodology is available in detail on the VOICES website, designed for you to adapt and use in your own consultation processes: www.voicesforinnovation.eu
Project Results:
In recent years, the European Union has been focusing on its strategy to create sustainable, inclusive growth and prosperity and address the societal challenges of Europe and the world. In line with this strategy, in the context of Europe 2020, the Innovation Union has the ambition to develop a European Research Area, the European institutions are working to address societal needs and ethical questions in research and development. We refer to this work using the term Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). The European Commission defines RRI in its 2013 expert group report ‘Options for Strengthening Responsible Research and Innovation’:
“To achieve better alignment of research and innovation with societal needs a number of initiatives have been undertaken by EU Member States and the European Commission. These initiatives have shown that there is a need for a comprehensive approach to achieve such an improved alignment. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) refers to the comprehensive approach of proceeding in research and innovation in ways that allow all stakeholders that are involved in the processes of research and innovation at an early stage (A) to obtain relevant knowledge on the consequences of the outcomes of their actions and on the range of options open to them and (B) to effectively evaluate both outcomes and options in terms of societal needs and moral values and (C) to use these considerations (under A and B) as functional requirements for design and development of new research, products and services. The RRI approach has to be a key part of the research and innovation process and should be established as a collective, inclusive and system-wide approach.”
The VOICES initiative was taken in line with the RRI approach, in order to demonstrate how policymaking related to research and innovation can be directly influenced by the opinions of European citizens. As the expert group report states:
“There are many examples in which the outcomes of research have been contested in society, because societal impacts and ethical aspects have not adequately been taken into consideration in the development of innovation. In many cases, the related research funding was wasted. On the other hand, there are many cases in which the successful and early consideration of societal needs has brought up innovation which were particular successful also in economic terms.”
Consultations such as that of VOICES therefore contribute to ensuring societal needs are taken into account. The report underlines the importance of coordinating these actions in order to maximise impact.
VOICES key findings related to RRI
The following results came up from the VOICES consultation. This is the collective opinion of 992 citizens from across all 27 European Union countries.
The outcomes of the focus groups were analysed by researchers, who first summarised the priorities for each country, and then compared these results on a European level. The reports produced were used by the European Commission to draft some of the calls for research proposals under the new Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. This means that the VOICES outcomes have made a significant contribution to the research priorities of scientists in Europe working in the area of ‘Waste: A Resource to Recycle, Reuse and Recover Raw Materials’, which will benefit from EU financial contribution of approximately €116 million in 2014-2015. Researchers, policymakers, science communicators and civil society organizations are also looking at VOICES results to find inspiration for socially relevant propositions and innovations.
The work of the VOICES Consolidation Group was to take the outcomes of the VOICES focus group analysis from across the 27 countries where consultations took place, and integrate them into future priorities in European research and innovation policy. The work of the Consolidation Group drew out a number of key points from the analysis of the VOICES focus groups.
In 2012, the European Commission released a policy document which outlined its priorities on research and innovation in waste management, entitled ‘Waste as a Resource – EU research’. The document states that, “The top priority is finding ways to reduce waste where possible, reuse what can be salvaged, and recycle more and more with sophisticated as well as effective sorting and recovery technologies.” Other priorities include encouraging industries to make use of waste generated in other sectors, and managing waste efficiently at local, national and global levels. The document also refers to the high recycling targets which the EU has set itself, based on the European Commission’s 2008 Waste Framework Directive.
The Consolidation Group, in line with the feedback provided by the VOICES Advisory Board, found that many of the VOICES outcomes clearly legitimised these current priorities in European research and innovation policy. Other key outcomes, however, suggested new priorities which could be incorporated into the priorities of future European research and innovation.
VOICES outcomes in line with current EU research priorities
- Citizens want less packaging, and more efficient packaging materials. They want to see 100% biodegradable packaging, and plastics that can be fully recycled without loss of quality.
- They want urban waste to be easier to recycle and reuse, in more efficient ways.
- They want manufacturers to be regulated more heavily, taking responsibility for the lifespan and recycling of their products, and ending planned obsolescence.
- Citizens ask for more recycling points at convenient locations.
- They want incineration plants to be used as much as possible to produce heat and energy for the local communities.
Much of what was relevant of these findings related to awareness: confirmation that in many areas, citizens do have significant knowledge of the challenges facing waste disposal in Europe, and agree with current EU research priorities. These outcomes can be summarised as follows.
Citizens across the focus groups expressed a need for less packaging. On the whole, they believe products are over-packaged in an attempt to make them more appealing to consumers, using more material than the minimum necessary to ensure hygiene and protection of the product. European citizens also expressed a need for more efficient packaging materials. They want to see research carried out into more effective types of 100% biodegradable packaging, and plastics that can be fully recycled without loss of quality. This fits with the EU priorities of reducing waste on the manufacturing level, and finding ways to recycle more.
The focus group participants want urban waste to be easier to recycle and reuse, in more efficient ways. They look to European research to come up with innovative ways to recycle and reuse products, taking the recycling process into account both in the way the products are manufactured and in their disposal or reuse. This is in line with EU priorities to find ways to reuse and recycle more using sophisticated technologies.
In terms of policy measures, European citizens want manufacturers to be regulated more heavily, taking responsibility for the lifespan and recycling of their products. They are aware that many products are designed to have a limited lifespan. Manufacturers could in fact produce longer life products, but choose to make their products become redundant after a certain period of time in order to encourage the consumer to buy new products. Citizens want to see an end to this planned obsolescence. Again, this supports current EU priorities of encouraging industries to take action to reduce waste.
Another policy point which came up in the focus groups relates to recycling points, where citizens take their waste to be recycled. In general, citizens across the EU feel that more recycle points are needed, at locations which will be more convenient for the general public to reach. This supports the EU’s focus on recycling targets as stated in the 2008 Waste Framework Directive.
A final point which came out of the focus groups that legitimises current research priorities is on the subject of waste incineration. Focus group participants in general called for more waste to be incinerated to produce heat and energy. They would like to see European research focusing as much as possible on innovations which make the incineration process more efficient. The EU’s current priority on using sophisticated technology to improve waste management is already working towards this goal.
VOICES outcomes suggesting innovative ways to strengthen EU research
- European citizens feel convenience in the household is crucial. This is a part of waste management often neglected by research. They ask for devices to facilitate sorting and compacting in the home (“smart bins”), or technology which allows waste to be used as a resource in the household.
- Citizens want incentives to separate their waste. This can be done through deposit systems and reward schemes.
- Education and communication are crucial. Citizens are largely unaware of what happens to their waste, and would feel more engaged in the process if knowledge was more widespread.
- Technology can be a motivation to recycle in itself. Citizens feel that systems using chips, electronic tags and apps can help to empower people in the recycling process.
The VOICES outcomes underlined some issues which are not sufficiently accounted for by current EU priorities on the topic of ‘Urban Waste’, and which could be used to strengthen European research and innovation. These elements, which constitute the core of the VOICES contribution to RRI and strong suggestions for better social innovation in the field, can be summarised as follows.
One aspect of the waste management process which focus group participants emphasised heavily in consultations across the EU was the issue of recycling and household convenience. European citizens feel convenience in the household is crucial. The VOICES outcomes pointed to a clear need for devices to facilitate sorting and compacting in the home (along the lines of “smart bins”), or technology which allows waste to be used as a resource in the household.
In terms of waste management policy, one key outcome from VOICES is that European citizens want more incentives to separate their waste. Consultations across the EU found that citizens feel that a lot of effort is required to dispose of their waste properly. They see other individuals and organisations benefitting financially from waste, and they would like to see more deposit systems and reward schemes in place to ensure that the general public also has a direct incentive to separate and dispose of waste correctly.
In order to do so, citizens suggested ideas which could be developed through scientific research, by creating new technologies or adapting already existing ones. For example, they would like to have machines in their houses that automatically sort or dispose of waste, or smart bins and containers, that can inform about waste and correct or inappropriate separation. They would also like a barcode recognition system (or other systems) which can detect whether or not waste has been properly separated and disposed of, linked to some kind of ‘credit system’, bringing advantages to citizens in terms of taxes, incentives, etc.
VOICES focus group participants emphasised that they feel education and communication are crucial to improve management of urban waste as a resource. The consultations found that citizens are largely unaware of the waste management process, and would feel more engaged in the process if knowledge was more widespread. Citizens across Europe stated specifically that they would feel more motivated to dispose of waste correctly if they knew exactly what happened once they had sorted and thrown it away.
One final conclusion of the VOICES consultations which can strengthen future EU research directions is the citizens’ emphatic confirmation that technology can be a motivation to recycle in itself. Citizens frequently stated they feel that technology can help to empower people in the recycling process. Subsequently, they assigned high priority to ideas using chips, electronic tags and apps to facilitate the waste disposal process, and lead Europe towards a ‘zero waste society’.
The VOICES pilot activity was designed with a view to mainstreaming direct citizen consultation across societal challenges in Horizon 2020. All the project outcomes are available at www.voicesforinnovation.eu. There, you can consult any of the 27 country reports to find out the detailed results for your country, as well as the overall EU report to gain a European perspective on the results.
Potential Impact:
Embarking on such a large-scale consultation with such a direct impact, shows a strong commitment from the European Commission to the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation. As mentioned above, the impact of such an undertaking stretches beyond what was conceived of at the beginning of the project.
Looking back at the project, it should be noted that it is important with such a consultation process to be clear in advance about the expected outcomes. In the case of VOICES, the consultations were clearly aimed at identifying and collecting citizens’ ideas which would influence part of the priorities of a specific EU work programme for research and innovation. One misconception about VOICES could be that it was inviting citizens to identify problems in the waste management process and directly come up with new innovations in order to solve these problems. This may well be a by-product of the work of the VOICES consultations, and it is true that the methodology involves participants identifying and prioritising solutions, but the ultimate objective was for citizens to identify ideas (not only those linked to existing problems) to feed into analysis and influence research priorities. The success of the project can clearly be judged on these terms.
That said, participants in the VOICES consultations did come up with a number of significant creative innovations. Thanks to the structure of the focus group, these innovative ideas were also assigned priority by each group, validating the importance of each idea in the eyes of European citizens.
The analysis of the VOICES consultation outcomes also brought up a number of questions which could form the basis of future research into European attitudes towards urban waste as a resource and the concept of a ‘zero waste society’. Several such questions are raised when looking at the focus group data across groups of linked countries. For example, a trend can be perceived that European countries around the Mediterranean tend to favour the use of incentives, deposit systems and reward schemes as a way to motivate people to dispose of waste correctly, more than other member states. Furthermore, in EU member states which belonged to the former Soviet Union, various participants expressed nostalgia for the values of society under that regime. Such trends reflect local cultural, social and economic factors and should be further studied in order to be able to foster more region-specific policymaking in European research.
The VOICES data also invites further analysis in relation to age groups. Although VOICES focus groups were clearly structured by age groups, no major trends related to this were drawn out in the current analysis. Nevertheless, further analysis of the attitudes of each of these groups could lead to interesting conclusions regarding urban waste, particularly with a view to the opinions of future generations.
A number of broader findings of the VOICES consultations also invite further research. For example, participants in VOICES focus groups emphatically supported the regulatory role of legislative bodies like the European Commission, calling for more regulation in waste management. This does not appear to be in line with the trend currently perceived in Europe calling for less regulation from EU institutions. Another example was a perceived mistrust from citizens in countries considered leaders in waste management (highest-ranking countries in the 27 EU member states of Municipal Solid Waste Recycling) regarding their own countries’ policies, facilities and systems for waste disposal. This attitude was perceived in consultations in many of the countries which are ranked at the top of Eurostat’s 2010 listing of the percentage of Municipal Solid Waste recycled. Participants often expressed similar levels of mistrust of waste disposal management in their country as those in countries which rank lower on the same listing (and therefore do not have such well-developed recycling systems and facilities). Further research could draw interesting conclusions on this matter.
An interesting analysis could also be performed to look at the terms which participants came up with to describe their innovative ideas. Participants across Europe coined a number of phrases such as ‘smart bins’, ‘zero-waste marketing’ and ‘zero-waste behaviour’ which could be interesting concepts to explore in more depth and apply to future research and innovations.
VOICES outcomes are intended to be used by many types of stakeholders, for a range of purposes.
• Policy: “VOICES shows the determination of the European Commission to give European citizens the opportunity to have their say on societal challenges in the new Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, Horizon 2020.” Gilles Laroche, DG Research and Innovation, European Commission
• Advocacy: “Municipalities are always looking for methods and systems through which to manage waste more sustainably, with the interests of citizens in mind. For them, consultations such as VOICES offer an excellent opportunity to promote local issues at EU level, but also to better understand citizen expectations of their municipality in terms of information on their local waste management system and its implementation.” Vanya Veras, Secretary General, MWE (Municipal Waste Europe)
• Education and Outreach: “VOICES provides science centres an opportunity to learn the visitors’ needs. Through this kind of consultations we can much better understand the needs of our visitors and much better develop ways to address them.” Robert Firmhofer, Director, Copernicus Science Centre, Warsaw, Poland
• Research: “It is clear that convenience in households is, from a citizen’s point of view, one of the most important issues, and hence absolutely justified to talk about. To a certain extent the increase of convenience by new waste technologies may therefore also be a good way to make people support modern waste management.” Matthias Rapf, Institute of Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Waste Management Group Resources Management and Industrial Wastes (RIK), Stuttgart University, Germany.
• Public Engagement: “I wouldn't have expected the European Commission to take my opinions into account like this. I’m proud that my voice helped shape the way European researchers work on urban waste.” Paco Francisco, VOICES focus group participant, Granada, Spain
The fact that the VOICES consultation resulted in an impact and a set of potential future opportunities for more research and analysis is further confirmation of its value as not just a consultative tool but also a framework within which RRI can be fostered and advanced. We look forward with great anticipation to the outcomes of future initiatives which follow the precedent set by VOICES.
List of Websites:
www.voicesforinnovation.eu
Ecsite - the European network of science centres and museums
89/7, Avenue Louise
B-1050, Brussels
Belgium
info@ecsite.eu
Project Coordinator: Marzia Mazzonetto, Senior Project Manager, mmazzonetto@ecsite.eu
Funded by the European Commission and led by Ecsite, the European network of science centres and museums, the VOICES project was a response to the Science in Society 2013.1.2.1-1 call on citizen participation in science and technology policy. Citizens from 27 EU countries were invited to give input - in the form of ideas and priorities - to a group of experts (the ‘Consolidation Group’) who contributed to defining the priorities for the next Work Programme of EU research calls on waste. VOICES therefore represented an innovative method of integrating public opinion into the ‘Climate action, environment, resource efficiency and raw materials’ dimension of the Horizon 2020 Work Programmes launched in 2014.
At the heart of the VOICES project is the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). This means engaging the public more in research and innovation (R&I), making R&I more socially responsive and encouraging shared responsibility for R&I agendas, practices and outcomes. The main aim of VOICES was to yield valuable insight on methods and procedure for engaging citizen participation to help set the research agenda for Europe’s Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) framework.
Compared to many other consultation initiatives, VOICES represents a breakthrough in its commitment to formally include the results of the citizens’ consultations in the main policy directions, shaping the priorities of future European research.
VOICES was also particularly innovative because of its scale (covering all of the EU member states at the time) and because of the methodological approach used on this wide scale: an approach which made use of a qualitative methodology (focus groups), which gathered and analysed citizens’ views, fostering real governance processes and social innovation. Another unique element is that the knowledge gained with this pilot project, in terms of methodology, infrastructure and results, can be used to organise similar participatory actions across Horizon 2020.
Citizens’ active participation in research and innovation is becoming a strong priority in Europe, as confirmed by the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020. Today more than ever, scientific and technological solutions need a societal uptake. Participation empowers citizens and strengthens science governance. The ground-breaking VOICES process was the first in-depth consultation of people living in every country of the EU on a scientific topic. The methodology used, 3-hour focus groups, resulted in a deep, unique understanding of citizens’ views. Citizens around Europe were delighted by the clear commitment of the European Commission to make use of their VOICES to influence research priorities. VOICES has proved to be a successful model of democratic science governance. It produced an innovative and replicable participatory process, orienting research, innovation and policy making more strongly towards societal needs. VOICES represents a milestone in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), fostering new multi-stakeholder participatory activities in the future.
Project Context and Objectives:
The overall aim of the VOICES project was to identify citizens’ ideas, preferences, values, needs and expectations with respect to research priorities for the theme ‘Urban Waste and Innovation’.
In recent years, the EU has been supporting the involvement of different societal actors in scientific research: researchers; but also citizens, policy makers, CSOs, etc.; in research and innovation processes, in order to better align the outcomes of scientific research to the expectations of European citizens. This approach is known as Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). Engaging multiple stakeholders in research and innovation (R&I) leads to more socially responsive processes and outcomes, as well as encourages shared responsibilities for R&I agendas.
RRI means understanding society's expectations as well as possible implications of scientific advancements. New technologies need to be as useful to society as possible. That’s why researchers and innovators should ensure their work is in line with people’s needs and ethical values. In the past, surveys have given us a hint about European citizens’ opinions and views. Nevertheless, by engaging participants in face-to-face conversations, the VOICES consultation has successfully tested an innovative, in-depth way of finding out how people really feel about research and innovation. It has also allowed them to bring about their own ideas.
In the future, similar participatory processes will be used to consult the public across the EU on topics from nanotechnology to climate change. For example, the European Commission’s website Your Voice in Europe opens up a wide variety of tools for stakeholders to play an active role in the European policymaking process, from consultations on EU policies to online chats with Europe’s leaders.
The VOICES consultation process used science centres and museums as powerful spaces for public engagement. Science centres and museums not only play an important role in informal science education, but are also engaged in initiatives which impact local and European policy making. They are spaces where people can engage in and debate complex and controversial issues in science. Science centres equip adults, teenagers and children with the tools to become informed, engaged and responsible citizens. These spaces bring the public together to share opinions with researchers, policymakers and other key players in research and innovation. As well as the latest exhibitions and science shows, many organise debates, workshops and special activities where you can get to grips with real research and make a difference.
Through VOICES, citizens from 27 EU countries had the concrete possibility to contribute with their ideas to the definition of strategic priorities for research in the EU in the field of waste management. The VOICES participatory exercise provided a deep and unique understanding of public opinion on the topic of urban waste, showing that in many areas citizens do have significant knowledge of the challenges facing waste disposal in Europe. It has also highlighted some issues which would allow for real social innovations, greater public engagement and new business opportunities.
We invited European citizens from a range of ages and backgrounds to focus groups in 27 countries of the European Union. Each group of ten people met in a science centre or museum. They were there for an in-depth discussion about urban waste as a resource. A moderator from the science centre or museum introduced the topic and guided the group through four simple exercises, in which they discussed face-to-face. The exercises allowed them to engage with the chosen topic, relate it to their everyday lives, identify their concerns and propose solutions as a group. The conversations brought out a huge range of opinions. It was impressive to see how engaged people felt with the topic, putting forward hundreds of ideas, from the creative and inspiring to the serious and urgent. Each focus group lasted three hours and was completely transcribed, word-for-word, and translated into English. The main areas of discussion were:
• How do you get rid of rubbish in your household?
• What stops you from disposing of waste in better ways?
• How could we achieve a “zero waste society”?
• Which of the group’s ideas do you think are the most important?
VOICES consulted citizens using a renowned method - focus groups - in a unique way. In terms of structure, the VOICES focus groups incorporated four exercises, which engaged the participants on the relevant topics, drawing out collective opinions and ideas in a carefully facilitated face-to-face process. The VOICES focus groups were led by trained moderators from science centres and museums, following a semi-structured script designed by researchers of the Athena Institute (VU University Amsterdam). This specific methodology ensures the results are both meaningful and valid, and was successfully implemented in a range of cultures and contexts, across 27 EU member states. Focus groups are a very important element of VOICES. This methodology allowed for flexibility as well as uniformity, and was very much enjoyed by participants and moderators.
• Flexibility: the VOICES methodology was successfully implemented in a range of cultures and contexts, across 27 EU member states, and can also be adapted for use at national and local levels, and with a range of policy topics.
• Structure: the VOICES focus groups worked on four exercises, which engaged the participants on the relevant topics, drawing out collective opinions and ideas in a carefully facilitated face-to-face process.
• Expertise: 22 external experts from a variety of backgrounds were involved in validating the methodology, devised by a highly experienced academic team at the VU University Amsterdam’s Athena Institute.
The results were fed back to policymakers in order to influence the direction of EU research policy. This provided input for the Consolidation Group that defined the actual priorities for the new work programme on ‘Urban Waste’ (call SiS.2013.1.2.1-2). In addition, it provided a valuable example of a methodology, the tools, the know-how and recommendations that can be adapted and used in coming years for similar initiatives.
The methodology is available in detail on the VOICES website, designed for you to adapt and use in your own consultation processes: www.voicesforinnovation.eu
Project Results:
In recent years, the European Union has been focusing on its strategy to create sustainable, inclusive growth and prosperity and address the societal challenges of Europe and the world. In line with this strategy, in the context of Europe 2020, the Innovation Union has the ambition to develop a European Research Area, the European institutions are working to address societal needs and ethical questions in research and development. We refer to this work using the term Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). The European Commission defines RRI in its 2013 expert group report ‘Options for Strengthening Responsible Research and Innovation’:
“To achieve better alignment of research and innovation with societal needs a number of initiatives have been undertaken by EU Member States and the European Commission. These initiatives have shown that there is a need for a comprehensive approach to achieve such an improved alignment. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) refers to the comprehensive approach of proceeding in research and innovation in ways that allow all stakeholders that are involved in the processes of research and innovation at an early stage (A) to obtain relevant knowledge on the consequences of the outcomes of their actions and on the range of options open to them and (B) to effectively evaluate both outcomes and options in terms of societal needs and moral values and (C) to use these considerations (under A and B) as functional requirements for design and development of new research, products and services. The RRI approach has to be a key part of the research and innovation process and should be established as a collective, inclusive and system-wide approach.”
The VOICES initiative was taken in line with the RRI approach, in order to demonstrate how policymaking related to research and innovation can be directly influenced by the opinions of European citizens. As the expert group report states:
“There are many examples in which the outcomes of research have been contested in society, because societal impacts and ethical aspects have not adequately been taken into consideration in the development of innovation. In many cases, the related research funding was wasted. On the other hand, there are many cases in which the successful and early consideration of societal needs has brought up innovation which were particular successful also in economic terms.”
Consultations such as that of VOICES therefore contribute to ensuring societal needs are taken into account. The report underlines the importance of coordinating these actions in order to maximise impact.
VOICES key findings related to RRI
The following results came up from the VOICES consultation. This is the collective opinion of 992 citizens from across all 27 European Union countries.
The outcomes of the focus groups were analysed by researchers, who first summarised the priorities for each country, and then compared these results on a European level. The reports produced were used by the European Commission to draft some of the calls for research proposals under the new Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. This means that the VOICES outcomes have made a significant contribution to the research priorities of scientists in Europe working in the area of ‘Waste: A Resource to Recycle, Reuse and Recover Raw Materials’, which will benefit from EU financial contribution of approximately €116 million in 2014-2015. Researchers, policymakers, science communicators and civil society organizations are also looking at VOICES results to find inspiration for socially relevant propositions and innovations.
The work of the VOICES Consolidation Group was to take the outcomes of the VOICES focus group analysis from across the 27 countries where consultations took place, and integrate them into future priorities in European research and innovation policy. The work of the Consolidation Group drew out a number of key points from the analysis of the VOICES focus groups.
In 2012, the European Commission released a policy document which outlined its priorities on research and innovation in waste management, entitled ‘Waste as a Resource – EU research’. The document states that, “The top priority is finding ways to reduce waste where possible, reuse what can be salvaged, and recycle more and more with sophisticated as well as effective sorting and recovery technologies.” Other priorities include encouraging industries to make use of waste generated in other sectors, and managing waste efficiently at local, national and global levels. The document also refers to the high recycling targets which the EU has set itself, based on the European Commission’s 2008 Waste Framework Directive.
The Consolidation Group, in line with the feedback provided by the VOICES Advisory Board, found that many of the VOICES outcomes clearly legitimised these current priorities in European research and innovation policy. Other key outcomes, however, suggested new priorities which could be incorporated into the priorities of future European research and innovation.
VOICES outcomes in line with current EU research priorities
- Citizens want less packaging, and more efficient packaging materials. They want to see 100% biodegradable packaging, and plastics that can be fully recycled without loss of quality.
- They want urban waste to be easier to recycle and reuse, in more efficient ways.
- They want manufacturers to be regulated more heavily, taking responsibility for the lifespan and recycling of their products, and ending planned obsolescence.
- Citizens ask for more recycling points at convenient locations.
- They want incineration plants to be used as much as possible to produce heat and energy for the local communities.
Much of what was relevant of these findings related to awareness: confirmation that in many areas, citizens do have significant knowledge of the challenges facing waste disposal in Europe, and agree with current EU research priorities. These outcomes can be summarised as follows.
Citizens across the focus groups expressed a need for less packaging. On the whole, they believe products are over-packaged in an attempt to make them more appealing to consumers, using more material than the minimum necessary to ensure hygiene and protection of the product. European citizens also expressed a need for more efficient packaging materials. They want to see research carried out into more effective types of 100% biodegradable packaging, and plastics that can be fully recycled without loss of quality. This fits with the EU priorities of reducing waste on the manufacturing level, and finding ways to recycle more.
The focus group participants want urban waste to be easier to recycle and reuse, in more efficient ways. They look to European research to come up with innovative ways to recycle and reuse products, taking the recycling process into account both in the way the products are manufactured and in their disposal or reuse. This is in line with EU priorities to find ways to reuse and recycle more using sophisticated technologies.
In terms of policy measures, European citizens want manufacturers to be regulated more heavily, taking responsibility for the lifespan and recycling of their products. They are aware that many products are designed to have a limited lifespan. Manufacturers could in fact produce longer life products, but choose to make their products become redundant after a certain period of time in order to encourage the consumer to buy new products. Citizens want to see an end to this planned obsolescence. Again, this supports current EU priorities of encouraging industries to take action to reduce waste.
Another policy point which came up in the focus groups relates to recycling points, where citizens take their waste to be recycled. In general, citizens across the EU feel that more recycle points are needed, at locations which will be more convenient for the general public to reach. This supports the EU’s focus on recycling targets as stated in the 2008 Waste Framework Directive.
A final point which came out of the focus groups that legitimises current research priorities is on the subject of waste incineration. Focus group participants in general called for more waste to be incinerated to produce heat and energy. They would like to see European research focusing as much as possible on innovations which make the incineration process more efficient. The EU’s current priority on using sophisticated technology to improve waste management is already working towards this goal.
VOICES outcomes suggesting innovative ways to strengthen EU research
- European citizens feel convenience in the household is crucial. This is a part of waste management often neglected by research. They ask for devices to facilitate sorting and compacting in the home (“smart bins”), or technology which allows waste to be used as a resource in the household.
- Citizens want incentives to separate their waste. This can be done through deposit systems and reward schemes.
- Education and communication are crucial. Citizens are largely unaware of what happens to their waste, and would feel more engaged in the process if knowledge was more widespread.
- Technology can be a motivation to recycle in itself. Citizens feel that systems using chips, electronic tags and apps can help to empower people in the recycling process.
The VOICES outcomes underlined some issues which are not sufficiently accounted for by current EU priorities on the topic of ‘Urban Waste’, and which could be used to strengthen European research and innovation. These elements, which constitute the core of the VOICES contribution to RRI and strong suggestions for better social innovation in the field, can be summarised as follows.
One aspect of the waste management process which focus group participants emphasised heavily in consultations across the EU was the issue of recycling and household convenience. European citizens feel convenience in the household is crucial. The VOICES outcomes pointed to a clear need for devices to facilitate sorting and compacting in the home (along the lines of “smart bins”), or technology which allows waste to be used as a resource in the household.
In terms of waste management policy, one key outcome from VOICES is that European citizens want more incentives to separate their waste. Consultations across the EU found that citizens feel that a lot of effort is required to dispose of their waste properly. They see other individuals and organisations benefitting financially from waste, and they would like to see more deposit systems and reward schemes in place to ensure that the general public also has a direct incentive to separate and dispose of waste correctly.
In order to do so, citizens suggested ideas which could be developed through scientific research, by creating new technologies or adapting already existing ones. For example, they would like to have machines in their houses that automatically sort or dispose of waste, or smart bins and containers, that can inform about waste and correct or inappropriate separation. They would also like a barcode recognition system (or other systems) which can detect whether or not waste has been properly separated and disposed of, linked to some kind of ‘credit system’, bringing advantages to citizens in terms of taxes, incentives, etc.
VOICES focus group participants emphasised that they feel education and communication are crucial to improve management of urban waste as a resource. The consultations found that citizens are largely unaware of the waste management process, and would feel more engaged in the process if knowledge was more widespread. Citizens across Europe stated specifically that they would feel more motivated to dispose of waste correctly if they knew exactly what happened once they had sorted and thrown it away.
One final conclusion of the VOICES consultations which can strengthen future EU research directions is the citizens’ emphatic confirmation that technology can be a motivation to recycle in itself. Citizens frequently stated they feel that technology can help to empower people in the recycling process. Subsequently, they assigned high priority to ideas using chips, electronic tags and apps to facilitate the waste disposal process, and lead Europe towards a ‘zero waste society’.
The VOICES pilot activity was designed with a view to mainstreaming direct citizen consultation across societal challenges in Horizon 2020. All the project outcomes are available at www.voicesforinnovation.eu. There, you can consult any of the 27 country reports to find out the detailed results for your country, as well as the overall EU report to gain a European perspective on the results.
Potential Impact:
Embarking on such a large-scale consultation with such a direct impact, shows a strong commitment from the European Commission to the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation. As mentioned above, the impact of such an undertaking stretches beyond what was conceived of at the beginning of the project.
Looking back at the project, it should be noted that it is important with such a consultation process to be clear in advance about the expected outcomes. In the case of VOICES, the consultations were clearly aimed at identifying and collecting citizens’ ideas which would influence part of the priorities of a specific EU work programme for research and innovation. One misconception about VOICES could be that it was inviting citizens to identify problems in the waste management process and directly come up with new innovations in order to solve these problems. This may well be a by-product of the work of the VOICES consultations, and it is true that the methodology involves participants identifying and prioritising solutions, but the ultimate objective was for citizens to identify ideas (not only those linked to existing problems) to feed into analysis and influence research priorities. The success of the project can clearly be judged on these terms.
That said, participants in the VOICES consultations did come up with a number of significant creative innovations. Thanks to the structure of the focus group, these innovative ideas were also assigned priority by each group, validating the importance of each idea in the eyes of European citizens.
The analysis of the VOICES consultation outcomes also brought up a number of questions which could form the basis of future research into European attitudes towards urban waste as a resource and the concept of a ‘zero waste society’. Several such questions are raised when looking at the focus group data across groups of linked countries. For example, a trend can be perceived that European countries around the Mediterranean tend to favour the use of incentives, deposit systems and reward schemes as a way to motivate people to dispose of waste correctly, more than other member states. Furthermore, in EU member states which belonged to the former Soviet Union, various participants expressed nostalgia for the values of society under that regime. Such trends reflect local cultural, social and economic factors and should be further studied in order to be able to foster more region-specific policymaking in European research.
The VOICES data also invites further analysis in relation to age groups. Although VOICES focus groups were clearly structured by age groups, no major trends related to this were drawn out in the current analysis. Nevertheless, further analysis of the attitudes of each of these groups could lead to interesting conclusions regarding urban waste, particularly with a view to the opinions of future generations.
A number of broader findings of the VOICES consultations also invite further research. For example, participants in VOICES focus groups emphatically supported the regulatory role of legislative bodies like the European Commission, calling for more regulation in waste management. This does not appear to be in line with the trend currently perceived in Europe calling for less regulation from EU institutions. Another example was a perceived mistrust from citizens in countries considered leaders in waste management (highest-ranking countries in the 27 EU member states of Municipal Solid Waste Recycling) regarding their own countries’ policies, facilities and systems for waste disposal. This attitude was perceived in consultations in many of the countries which are ranked at the top of Eurostat’s 2010 listing of the percentage of Municipal Solid Waste recycled. Participants often expressed similar levels of mistrust of waste disposal management in their country as those in countries which rank lower on the same listing (and therefore do not have such well-developed recycling systems and facilities). Further research could draw interesting conclusions on this matter.
An interesting analysis could also be performed to look at the terms which participants came up with to describe their innovative ideas. Participants across Europe coined a number of phrases such as ‘smart bins’, ‘zero-waste marketing’ and ‘zero-waste behaviour’ which could be interesting concepts to explore in more depth and apply to future research and innovations.
VOICES outcomes are intended to be used by many types of stakeholders, for a range of purposes.
• Policy: “VOICES shows the determination of the European Commission to give European citizens the opportunity to have their say on societal challenges in the new Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, Horizon 2020.” Gilles Laroche, DG Research and Innovation, European Commission
• Advocacy: “Municipalities are always looking for methods and systems through which to manage waste more sustainably, with the interests of citizens in mind. For them, consultations such as VOICES offer an excellent opportunity to promote local issues at EU level, but also to better understand citizen expectations of their municipality in terms of information on their local waste management system and its implementation.” Vanya Veras, Secretary General, MWE (Municipal Waste Europe)
• Education and Outreach: “VOICES provides science centres an opportunity to learn the visitors’ needs. Through this kind of consultations we can much better understand the needs of our visitors and much better develop ways to address them.” Robert Firmhofer, Director, Copernicus Science Centre, Warsaw, Poland
• Research: “It is clear that convenience in households is, from a citizen’s point of view, one of the most important issues, and hence absolutely justified to talk about. To a certain extent the increase of convenience by new waste technologies may therefore also be a good way to make people support modern waste management.” Matthias Rapf, Institute of Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Waste Management Group Resources Management and Industrial Wastes (RIK), Stuttgart University, Germany.
• Public Engagement: “I wouldn't have expected the European Commission to take my opinions into account like this. I’m proud that my voice helped shape the way European researchers work on urban waste.” Paco Francisco, VOICES focus group participant, Granada, Spain
The fact that the VOICES consultation resulted in an impact and a set of potential future opportunities for more research and analysis is further confirmation of its value as not just a consultative tool but also a framework within which RRI can be fostered and advanced. We look forward with great anticipation to the outcomes of future initiatives which follow the precedent set by VOICES.
List of Websites:
www.voicesforinnovation.eu
Ecsite - the European network of science centres and museums
89/7, Avenue Louise
B-1050, Brussels
Belgium
info@ecsite.eu
Project Coordinator: Marzia Mazzonetto, Senior Project Manager, mmazzonetto@ecsite.eu
