University voices: professional communicators and science communication perspectives

Abstract

Abstract Universities are part of a network of relationships that engage them in research activities and institutional commitments, allowing them to build connections with business, industry, and civil society. These relationships are not new, and many have described university’s public communication functions such as Marketing, Public Affairs and Public Relations. As public engagement in science and science communication increasingly becomes part of the agendas and university missions, attention has been given to the ‘science communication function’ of universities– aimed at engaging civic society. Yet, our knowledge about the contexts in which science communication emerges in the university setting is limited, we examine this question through a qualitative study with 39 interviews involving communication professionals working in central communication offices in universities in four European countries. Major findings indicate that Science Communication is strongly connected to other functions and is rapidly evolving, particularly in the United Kingdom. Considering the centralised and decentralised system of science communication, there is an evident process of roles’ distribution and differences between countries: in Germany and the United Kingdom the process of decentralization of science communication is more developed. Finally, there are factors that may hinder or support the development of communication functions, particularly for science communication. Among the former, a lack of resources and a dysfunctional internal organisation stand out, while for the latter, the legitimisation of the crucial role of communicators, as well as training courses appropriate to this evolving profession, seem to be very important.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.