Abstract
As one of only a few books focusing on science communication in developing countries, Constructing Culture of Science: Communication of Science in India and China provides a unique window to view a quite different picture from what we have seen in the West. Jointly published by the National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR) in India and the China Research Institute for Science Popularization (CRISP), the two nationally leading research institutions in the field, this book is an insider’s account of the hard struggle to popularize science and technology (S&T) in complex sociopolitical environments. In China and India, science popularization is written into their Constitutions and has been linked to decolonization, nation building, and modernization (chapters 1, 5, and 6). This has made popularizing science in the two countries mired in a dilemma between feeding their huge uneducated populations with S&T knowledge and reflecting the so-called deficit model.
But science communicators in these do not shun the challenges. The authors of Constructing Culture of Science, most of whom are scholars at NISCAIR and CRISP, describe and analyze their efforts to actively absorb Western expertise and experience to institutionalize science popularization (chapters 3 and 4) and investigate public scientific literacy (chapters 2, 5, and 6) while critically examining local relevance of the imported models and methods. They have built statistically representative samples despite China and India’s cultural and demographic diversity, developed and implemented locally meaningful measures for public scientific literacy (chapters 5 and 6), and proposed innovative theories like the model of cultural difference, which is used to measure peoples’ scientific literacy by considering the relevance of scientific topics to their structure of thought (chapters 1, 7, and 15). Due to language and institutional barriers, many such efforts are invisible to Western readers. This book fills the gap.
Despite the significant contribution, Constructing Culture of Science does have its limitations. Perhaps because of its authors’ official affiliations, it fails to fully demonstrate the diversified science communication process in the two countries, for example, the roles of S&T media controversies in shaping public attitudes. Although aware of Western models’ irrelevance, the authors have not fully probed local factors underlying people’s attitude to S&T. Despite its chapters describing local science days (chapters 9 and 10), the book has not practically and theoretically examined how to engage scientists in communicating science. I look forward to seeing these tasks addressed in future publications from these countries.