Accessibility
Language
High-tech, deep-tech, innovation - many people come across these terms in everyday life without really knowing what they mean. And why should they? If you have nothing to do with science, you don't need to understand it - do you? In fact, this is precisely what is crucial: trust and acceptance can only arise if scientific developments are also understood outside of laboratories. Public Understanding of Science creates the space for this - so that nobody is left behind.
The TV is buzzing, the picture is grainy. It is an evening in 1989 at the Miller family home, somewhere in a British terraced housing estate. On the screen, a BBC reporter is explaining something about a new technology - a worldwide network of computers that will soon revolutionize communication: the Internet.
"So... is it like a TV station, only on a computer?" asks the mother, putting down her teacup.
The son hesitates. "I think it's more like a library without the books. Or... maybe more like... a kind of postal system?"
They frown. The terms fly around the room: data packets, protocols, network nodes. They nod on the sofa, but don't understand. "And what good will that do us?" - "Maybe we'll be able to write letters faster?"
The show is over, the screen goes black. The questions remain.
Then as now, it is clear that technological developments reach us - but do we understand what they are about? Why is it important to engage with science and technology - even if you have nothing to do with it?
How it all began
The question of why people should engage with science and technology, even if they are not active in the field themselves, is by no means new. As early as the 1980s, there was growing concern in the UK that a large proportion of the population was losing touch with the ever faster pace of scientific and technological development. Research became more complex, technological innovations followed at ever shorter intervals - but the public was left out in the cold. In response, the Royal Society published its influential report The Public Understanding of Science in 1985. It defined the communication of scientific content as a social task - not just to disseminate knowledge, but to create understanding. The UK was a pioneer: in a country known for its scientific excellence, a strong media landscape and technological leadership, science communication was thought about strategically for the first time.
A first major study in 1989 confirmed the need for action: While concrete knowledge about scientific methods and interrelationships was rather low, interest in them was surprisingly high. Many people stated that they would like to learn more about research - but did not feel addressed by the type of communication. The finding was clear: if people do not understand science, it is not necessarily because of them - but because of the way it is talked about. The idea that science should not only be designed for society, but also with it, began here.
See, understand, participate
There are various approaches that describe the relationship between society and science. In addition to the public understanding of science (PUS), there is also the concept of public awareness of science (PAS), which refers to public awareness of science. At first glance, these two terms seem very similar, but they describe two different phenomena - and provide different answers to the question of why it is important to engage with science and technology, even if you are not active in the field. A third, newer approach is Public Engagement with Science and Technology (PEST), which is not just about knowledge or visibility, but about the active participation of society in scientific processes - for example through dialog formats, citizen participation or co-creation. To summarize, we can say that
- PUS stands for the understanding of scientific content: It is about enabling people to understand basic principles, methods and developments. Not in detail - but in such a way that they can have a well-founded say.
- PAS means the visibility of science: research should be present in public, not hidden away in specialist journals. Visibility creates trust and makes research tangible.
- PEST goes one step further: it is about participation. Society should not just watch, but be allowed to have its say - for example in the form of citizen dialogs, co-creation or citizen science.
All three concepts show that Science is not a black box. It affects us all - and should therefore be understandable and accessible to everyone
Why do we need a public understanding of science?
Whether we realize it or not, science and technology have long been part of our everyday lives. And that is precisely why it concerns us all - even far away from laboratories and research institutions.
Science in everyday life
A quick glance at our smartphone is all it takes - and science is there. When we search for the fastest route on Google Maps, satellites, complex data models and algorithms are working together in the background. All without us even realizing it. It's high-tech wrapped up in everyday life.
Or at your next visit to the doctor: a routine blood test today not only provides values, but is also analyzed by automated laboratory systems, often supported by AI-based evaluation. Even blood glucose testing for diabetes patients is now done by sensor - with a direct app connection. Behind these everyday applications lies highly specialized research in medicine, biochemistry, sensor technology and software development. Much of this has long been part of the field of deep tech - technologies that are deeply rooted in scientific knowledge and fundamentally change our world.
We don't need to fully understand these technologies - but we should know that they exist, how they work and which decisions they influence. Because if we understand the basic principle, we can act in a more informed way, question things more critically - and deal with new developments more responsibly. This is exactly what the Public Understanding of Science is all about.
Disinformation & trust
Science makes the world explainable - but what happens when no one can explain what is true? Times of crisis in particular show how quickly uncertainty can arise when complex relationships are no longer understood - or are deliberately distorted. Disinformation falls on fertile ground when there is a lack of trust in science. When studies are suddenly dismissed as opinion, experts are seen as "elites" and science is not visible and tangible enough. This is precisely where Public Awareness of Science comes in: Science should not only take place in the ivory tower, but in the public sphere. This is also visible in high-tech topics such as artificial intelligence or vaccine development - where decisions suddenly become part of everyday life.
Whether it's vaccinations, nuclear fusion, climate policy or deep tech such as quantum computing - trust is created when it becomes visible what is being researched, who is researching and why. This is the only way to reduce uncertainty - and the space that conspiracy narratives like to fill becomes smaller. Visibility not only protects science - it also protects society.
Democracy & participation
Scientific findings concern us all - they influence political decisions, economic developments and social debates. Anyone who believes that research has nothing to do with their own life underestimates its political relevance. Whether it's the energy transition, nuclear fusion or digital policy - research and society meet everywhere. It often involves highly complex developments, such as deep-tech solutions for energy infrastructure or high-tech systems for automating political processes.
And this is precisely why it is so important that citizens understand what is at stake - and can help shape it. Public engagement, i.e. the active involvement of society in science and technology, offers opportunities for this: Citizen dialogs, participatory research projects or discussion formats at eye level.
This not only creates understanding, but also responsibility. Because those who have a say can also have a say in decision-making. And that is precisely what makes the difference - in a democracy based on informed participation. Science needs a say, especially when it comes to the big questions of the future.
Science for all - and how?
It was a rainy Tuesday evening when the Miller family came to the community's old gym. Neighbors, club activists and a few students sat on long wooden benches. At the front of the stage: a research institute, an energy start-up and the question of whether nuclear fusion could really be part of the local energy supply one day - or whether it remains a dream of the future. What sounded like science fiction was explained in simple terms, with tangible examples, sketches and models to touch. For the Millers, it was the first time they had experienced deep tech not as an abstract concept, but as a real possibility.
Understanding, having a say, helping to shape - that sounds good. But how is all this actually implemented? How do you reach people who have little contact with research in their everyday lives and still get them interested in scientific topics?
This is exactly where programs and initiatives that promote the transfer of knowledge into society come in. They translate, network and bring people together - from universities, business and everyday life. One of these approaches comes directly from us: Transfer Leben.
TRANSFERleben - when science enters the living world
The "TRANSFERleben" program of Bayern Innovativ GmbH is an example of how science can be brought into people's everyday lives in a very concrete way. It brings together researchers, companies, local authorities and other social stakeholders to work together on practical issues - such as sustainable materials, digital solutions or social innovations in rural areas.
The focus is not only on the application of research results, but above all on their comprehensible transfer: research should not only be utilized, but also truly understood. In workshops, events and dialog formats, a common understanding is created - for ideas, problems and solutions. It is precisely at this interface that public understanding, awareness and engagement meet in practice.
And today?
A few years later, back at the Millers' home. The living room furniture is the same, but the television has given way to a gray home computer. The son, now a father, shows his own daughter how to access a website. "Back then," he says with a smile, "we didn't even know what the internet was. Now you need it for school." The daughter types nimbly. She takes the internet for granted. What was high-tech back then and for many barely comprehensible - the Internet - is now part of everyday life. And what sounds similarly distant today, such as the quantum computer, could soon become just as commonplace. Technology is changing - understanding must grow with it.
But this development is not a foregone conclusion. Especially in times when disinformation, crises and technological upheavals are shaping our everyday lives, it is more important than ever that society not only hears about science - but also understands it.
Only if people understand science can they support it - and help shape it.
And only then can research develop its full potential: as a basis for enlightened decisions, for social progress - and for a future that everyone can help build. Because the next big development is sure to come. And this time, nobody should be sitting on the sofa wondering what it's all about.