Science communication for a sustainable academia: a comparative analysis of public and private universities Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain

Rocío Torres Mancera; Estrella Martínez-Rodrigo

doi:10.31637/epsir-2024-1392

Autores/as

Rocío Torres Mancera Universidad de Málaga https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7205-5639
Estrella Martínez-Rodrigo Universidad de Málaga https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8063-0525

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2024-1392

Palabras clave:

ciencia para todos, educación, impacto, sostenibilidad, estrategia, análisis intercultural, transferencia de conocimiento, gestión de grupos de interés

Resumen

Introduction: This research outlines a comprehensive study aimed at exploring the role of science communication in high education institutions, its impact and future sustainability in European universities across Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain. Methodology: By conducting a comparative review, we aim to provide valuable insights that can inform policy decisions and practices in the field of education sciences sharing knowledge in a more efficient manner. Through an examination of existing corporate data of public and private centers (N = 166) by conducting an exhaustive quantitative and correlational analysis of its official digital communications. Results: it is spotted that Spanish universities include more direct messages towards science communications, while Netherlands make much less general load but focuses more on sustainability topics. Findings suggests that in the stakeholder management, quantitative attempts in digital media are stronger from public institutions but may not be as decisive as the quality efforts, given that although Spain leads a higher gross value of online corporate communications, Dutch and Portuguese public universities are relatively much better valued in the global worldwide academic classification. Conclusions: This first study reveals an innovative unique new approach in cross-analyzing sustainable scientist knowledge, European universities, and international rating impacts based on the ARWU ranking.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Rocío Torres Mancera, Universidad de Málaga

Psicóloga y Doctora Industrial Internacional en Comunicación con estancia de investigación invitada en la Universidad de Oxford. Executive MBA por IE Business School, Másteres en Comunicación Empresarial y Publicidad, Dirección de RRHH, Desarrollo Económico Local y Dirección Estratégica e Innovación en Comunicación (Premio Extraordinario). Investigadora y colaboradora docente con estancias también en Holanda, Portugal y México. Actualmente, su labor investigadora cuenta con el apoyo de la Beca Margarita Salas de la Universidad de Granada. Cuenta con más de 20 años de experiencia profesional y colabora en Proyectos Europeos Erasmus + para la cultura internacional del desarrollo sostenible.

Estrella Martínez-Rodrigo, Universidad de Málaga

Doctora en Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Profesora Titular del Departamento de Información y Comunicación de la Universidad de Granada, en la Facultad de Comunicación y Documentación. Es responsable del Grupo de Investigación «Cibercultura, procesos comunicativos y medios audiovisuales» de la Junta de Andalucía (SEJ-508). Sus líneas de investigación y publicaciones se centran en la comunicación audiovisual, las redes sociales y la comunicación de la ciencia, especialmente en lo que se refiere a sus efectos sociales, culturales y educativos. Ha participado en diversos proyectos de investigación nacionales e internacionales y ha dirigido varias tesis doctorales sobre estos temas.

Citas

Alzubi, Y. (2018). Knowledge transfer for sustainability. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 15(4), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1108/wjstsd-04-2018-0023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/WJSTSD-04-2018-0023

Anderson, A. A., Scheufele, D. A., Brossard, D., & Corley, E. A. (2011). The Role of Media and Deference to Scientific Authority in Cultivating Trust in Sources of Information about Emerging Technologies. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24(2), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edr032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edr032

Babones, S. (2015). Interpretive Quantitative Methods for the Social Sciences. Sociology, 50(3), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038515583637 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038515583637

Bennett, N., Dudo, A., & Besley, J. C. (2022). The form and function of U.S.-based science communication fellowship programs: interviews with program directors. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 13(3), 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2022.2155495 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2022.2155495

Besley, J. C., Newman, T. P., Dudo, A., & Tiffany, L. A. (2020). Exploring scholars’ public engagement goals in Canada and the United States. Public Understanding of Science, 29(8), 855–867. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520950671 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520950671

Bucchi, M.; Trench, B. (2021), Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology, 3rd ed.; Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003039242 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003039242

Capers, R. S., Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., Wyss, R., Burgio, K. R., & Rubega, M. A. (2022). What Did They Learn? Objective Assessment Tools Show Mixed Effects of Training on Science Communication Behaviors. Frontiers in Communication, (6). https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.805630 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.805630

Chinn, C. A. & Duncan, R. G (2018). What is the value of general knowledge of scientific reasoning? In, Fischer, F., Chinn, C. A., Engelmann, K., & Osborne, J. (eds.), Scientific reasoning and argumentation: The roles of domain-specific and domain-general knowledge (pp. 77–101). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203731826-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203731826-5

Cooper, C. B., Hawn, C. L., Larson, L. R., Parrish, J. K., Bowser, G., Cavalier, D., Dunn, R. R., Haklay, M. (Muki), Gupta, K. K., Jelks, N. O., Johnson, V. A., Katti, M., Leggett, Z., Wilson, O. R., & Wilson, S. (2021). Inclusion in citizen science: The conundrum of rebranding. Science, 372(6549), 1386–1388. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abi6487 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abi6487

Davies, S. R. (2020). An Empirical and Conceptual Note on Science Communication’s Role in Society. Science Communication, 43(1), 116–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020971642 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020971642

Dawson, E. (2014). Reframing social exclusion from science communication: moving away from ‘barriers’ towards a more complex perspective. Journal of Science Communication, 13(02), C02. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.13020302 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22323/2.13020302

De Sola Pool, I., & Berelson, B. (1952). Content Analysis in Communication Research. American Sociological Review, 17(4), 515. https://doi.org/10.2307/2088029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2088029

Dudo, A., Brossard, D., Shanahan, J., Scheufele, D. A., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (2010). Science on Television in the 21st Century. Communication Research, 38(6), 754–777. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210384988 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210384988

Entradas, M., & Bauer, M. M. (2016). Mobilisation for public engagement: Benchmarking the practices of research institutes. Public Understanding of Science, 26(7), 771–788. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516633834 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516633834

European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, (2022). Education and training monitor 2022. https://op.europa.eu/webpub/eac/education-and-training-monitor-2022/en/country-reports/country-reports.html

Eurostat (2023). Country facts. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/countryfacts/#

Fähnrich, B., Wilkinson, C., Weitkamp, E., Heintz, L., Ridgway, A., & Milani, E. (2021). Rethinking Science Communication Education and Training: Towards a Competence Model for Science Communication. Frontiers in Communication, (6). https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.795198 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.795198

Fecher, B., Kuper, F., Sokolovska, N., Fenton, A., Hornbostel, S., & Wagner, G. G. (2021). Understanding the Societal Impact of the Social Sciences and Humanities: Remarks on Roles, Challenges, and Expectations. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, (6). https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.696804 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.696804

Gobierno de España. Ministerio de Universidades (2023). Registro de Universidades, Centros y Títulos (RUCT). https://www.educacion.gob.es/ruct/consultauniversidades?actual=universidades

Grunig J. E. (2023). Public Relations, Social Inclusion, and Social Exclusion. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 25(2), 90–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/15226379231167120 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15226379231167120

Gustafson, A., & Rice, R. E. (2020). A review of the effects of uncertainty in public science communication. Public Understanding of Science, 29(6), 614–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520942122 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520942122

Haklay, M.M.; Dörler, D.; Heigl, F.; Manzoni, M.; Hecker, S.; Vohland, K. What is citizen science? The challenges of definition. In Vohland, K., et al. (eds.), The Science of Citizen Science (pp. 13-33). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_2

Hmielowski, J. D., Feldman, L., Myers, T. A., Leiserowitz, A., & Maibach, E. (2013). An attack on science? Media use, trust in scientists, and perceptions of global warming. Public Understanding of Science, 23(7), 866–883. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513480091 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513480091

Instituto Geográfico nacional (2023). España en el mundo. https://www.ign.es/espmap/mapas_mundo_bach/pdf/Mundo_Mapa_01_texto.pdf

Judd, K., & McKinnon, M. (2021). A Systematic Map of Inclusion, Equity and Diversity in Science Communication Research: Do We Practice what We Preach? Frontiers in Communication, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.744365 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.744365

Lewenstein, B. V., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2022). How should we organize science communication trainings to achieve competencies? International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 12(4), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2022.2136985 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2022.2136985

Lozano, J. M., Bofarull, I., Waddock, S., & Prat-i-Pubill, Q. (2018). Avoiding the Iron Cage of Business School Rankings. Higher Education Policy, 33(1), 135–157. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-0107-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-0107-7

Mahdi, O. R., Nassar, I. A., & Almsafir, M. K. (2019). Knowledge management processes and sustainable competitive advantage: An empirical examination in private universities. Journal of Business Research, (94), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.013

Martins, V. W. B., Rampasso, I. S., Anholon, R., Quelhas, O. L. G., & Leal Filho, W. (2019). Knowledge management in the context of sustainability: Literature review and opportunities for future research. Journal of Cleaner Production, (229), 489–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.354 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.354

Miotto, G., Del-Castillo-Feito, C., & Blanco-González, A. (2020). Reputation and legitimacy: Key factors for Higher Education Institutions’ sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Business Research, (112), 342–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.076

Neuberger, C., Nuernbergk, C., & Langenohl, S. (2018). Journalism as Multichannel Communication. Journalism Studies, 20(9), 1260–1280. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670x.2018.1507685 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1507685

Riffe, D., Lacy, S., Fico, F., Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. G. (2006). Analyzing Media Messages. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410613424 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410613424

Seethaler, S., Evans, J. H., Gere, C., & Rajagopalan, R. M. (2019). Science, Values, and Science Communication: Competencies for Pushing Beyond the Deficit Model. Science Communication, 41(3), 378–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019847484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019847484

Statistics Netherlands (CBS). (2023). https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb

Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17), 137-146.

Teixeira, S. J., Veiga, P. M., & Fernandes, C. A. (2019). The knowledge transfer and cooperation between universities and enterprises. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 17(4), 449–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2018.1561166 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2018.1561166

Thorp, H. H. (2020). Stick to science. Science, 367(6474), 125–125. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba7714 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba7714

Wedlin, L. (2011). Going global: Rankings as rhetorical devices to construct an international field of management education. Management Learning, 42(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507610389683 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507610389683