In 2003, the Danish University Law was introduced, which essentially kick-started the Danish science-society debate. The University Law states that uni-versities are obliged to collaborate with the surrounding society, contribute to the development of international collaborations, contribute to the enhance-ment of growth, welfare, and developenhance-ment in society, and exchange know-ledge and competencies with society (Ministry of Higher Education and Sci-ence, 2003). In other words, Danish universities were now obliged by law to share their knowledge with business and society. By giving priority to the dis-semination of science, the goal of this law was not only to increase the Danish population’s knowledge of science, but also to engage Danish universities in the global race to become strong knowledge economies (Horst, 2012).
Since the first scientific journal was released in Denmark in 1673, Danish re-searchers have systematically disseminated their research to the public (Bur-chardt, 2007). By that, the primary consequence of the Danish University Law of 2003 was that this dissemination became a governmental demand rather than a voluntarily scientific activity. Accordingly, Danish universities have had to systematise their dissemination of information and upgrade their documen-tation. As outlined by Horst (2012), the Danish University Law of 2003 changed the societal role of Danish universities, moving from a generalised perception of universities as societal institutions to universities as individual organisations competing for public research funds, value-added grants, and
the attention and respect of the public. Thus, universities are increasingly be-coming distinguished brands, and consequently dissemination of scientific knowledge has become a tool to ensure market value. This leads to a profes-sionalisation of communication.
In the aftermath of the University Law, a number of governmental activities formed the Danish practices on knowledge dissemination between universities and the business sector:
- In 2003, the Danish Minister of Science formed a think tank concern-ing the understandconcern-ing of scientific knowledge. In 2004, the think tank published a report with recommendations for the future communica-tion of science (The Ministry of Science, 2004). Their recommenda-tions regarded the public at large and brought attention to the need for universities to prioritise communicating science (rather than only conducting it). Among others, they mentioned creating incentives for researchers to engage in communicational activities, developing a strategy for the communication of science, using two percent of all scientific funds for communication, and incorporating the communi-cation of science into the educommuni-cation of researchers.
- In 2003, the Danish Government launched an Action Plan called New Roads between Science and Business (Regeringen, 2003). This charted a course for the commercialisation of scientific knowledge in order to improve the innovation and economic growth in Denmark.
They stated that Denmark was not good enough at disseminating sci-entific knowledge to the business sector, and vice versa: The experi-ence and knowledge of the business society had to be better reflected in science and education. In other words, science had to ‘give some-thing’ back to society. This increased the political and public attention of the use and value of scientific knowledge.
- In 2012, the Danish Government launched an Innovation Strategy dealing with the innovativeness of Danish enterprises. They con-cluded that the Danish investments in knowledge and education were not sufficiently converted into growth and jobs in Danish enterprises.
Mutual exchange of knowledge between educational institutions and enterprises was prioritised in order to increase the Danish innovation capacity. The Innovation Strategy proved a continued political focus on improving the commercial potential of scientific knowledge.
- In 2013, a report by DEA analysed the efforts of knowledge dissemi-nation by the Danish universities since 2003 (DEA, 2013). While the analysis showed that a significant and positive development on know-ledge dissemination from Danish universities had happened, it also pointed out that, at large, the Danish universities had not succeeded in creating a direct and documentable economic profit. It stated that
much of the legislation made to improve the dissemination of knowledge instead inhibited it. A very important result of this work was that scientific knowledge was considered a product that requires a significant amount of translation in order to be ‘sold’ to the outside world. The reason being that there is a large gap between scientific validation and the validation necessary for private investors to make a qualified assessment of the commercial potential. The report stated that the political agenda had not accounted for the extent of this fact.
For the same reason, the report concluded that knowledge dissemina-tion usually requires an ongoing collaboradissemina-tion between researchers and business representatives in order to be successful.
- In 2015, the Governmental Plan for Growth (The Danish Govern-ment, 2015) highlighted a need to fortify the interplay between higher educational institutions and enterprises. It further mentioned that rel-evant knowledge from universities must be of benefit to the growth and development of enterprises, and furthermore that collaboration between educational and research institutions and SMEs, especially in smaller cities, must be strengthened.
As stressed by Hague (1991), in the knowledge society, knowledge will be a widely-traded commodity. The successful university will in part succeed by competing effectively in that trade, as professionals, not amateurs. As the above-mentioned initiatives illustrate, Danish dissemination of scientific know-ledge has increasingly entered the political agenda for the past 15 years. It bears witness to a demand for dissemination of scientific knowledge to become still more professional and goal-oriented.
1.3.1 EXEMPLIFYING DANISH KNOWLEDGE DISSEMINATION Seeing as the thesis is primarily written in a Danish context, I will give some examples to illustrate the current Danish scene within knowledge dissemina-tion. First, the most popular nationwide initiatives that have managed to cre-ate positive awareness about scientific knowledge:
- Forskningens Døgn (The Danish Science Festival)
Organised by The Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science, the purpose of the festival is to establish a meeting place for research-ers and the general public and thereby support public engagement in research. Every year, the festival hosts about 600 events in more than 100 cities and is visited by more than 75,000 guests (Sekretariatet for Forskningens Døgn & Styrelsen for Forskning og Uddannelse, n.d.).
- Ph.d. Cup (PhD Cup)
Started in 2013 and organised by Dagbladet Information, DR and Lundbeckfonden, PhD Cup is an annual dissemination contest,
broadcast on national television, where PhD students compete to communicate their research to society at large (Ph.d. Cup, n.d.).
- Videnskab.dk (science.dk)
The popular website delivers scientific news to society at large on a daily basis. The aim is to enhance the knowledge of the public and arouse an interest in science (Videnskab.dk, n.d.).
- Tænkepause (Reflections)
Since 2012, Aarhus University has published the very popular book series with the slogan ’60 pages, 60 minutes’. The idea is to give the public a condensed access to scientific knowledge, written without ‘ac-ademic nonsense’ (Aarhus Universitetsforlag, n.d.).
- Bloom, the Golden Days Festival
An open-air festival celebrating nature and science. Here, researchers, philosophers and artists talk about nature and the universe to a public audience. At the Golden Days Festival, scientific knowledge is hon-oured and ‘science is allowed to talk the language of science’ (Golden Days Sekretariat, n.d.).
Besides these large initiatives, a range of smaller ones are worth mentioning.
In 2009, a collaboration between the Danish Broadcasting Cooperation and the higher knowledge organisations resulted in the broadcasting of lectures on national TV called Danskernes Akademi (Academy of the Danes). It ended after four years and more than 1000 broadcasts. Scientific fight nights, so-called science-slams, (Science slam, Aalborg University, n.d.) and public lec-tures in social settings, i.e. Kort Sagt (Kort Sagt, n.d.) or Vin og Videnskab (Statens Naturhistoriske Museum, n.d.) make room for scientific knowledge to be a social and entertaining public activity and are very popular. Examples of displaying artistic science communication installations (see for example Horst
& Michael, 2011) in public places such as malls and libraries can also be found.
Collectively, these initiatives bear witness to a focus on disseminating scientific knowledge to society at large and, furthermore, that a public interest in scien-tific knowledge exists.
According to The Ministry of Science (2004, p. 9), four types of scientific com-munication exist:
1. Researchers communicating with other researchers 2. Researchers communicating with students
3. Researchers and higher education institutions communicating with the business sector
4. Researchers communicating with different groups in society at large
The above-mentioned examples illustrate that the main focus of the profes-sionalised Danish dissemination of scientific knowledge is addressed at society at large. Dissemination activities specifically targeted at the business sector are largely absent.