Public engagement is an important feature of research into societal issues and challenges. Complex issues such as responses to climate change, environmental degradation, and fuel and food poverty require a closer link between academic research and publics if action relating to these challenges is to be harnessed collectively. The past two decades have seen an increase in efforts to form closer links between publics and academics. However, much of the activities associated with forming such links remain embedded within motivations defined by academics. Not only are these motivations defined by academics, but their success is often aligned with outcomes formed by the perspectives and targets of academics. Thus, “expert–lay” divisions are placed at the centre of the processes which initiate, facilitate, and report on public engagement. This paper engages with recent developments in public engagement to reveal the “expert–lay” divisions that allow academia to colonise the spaces and processes of public engagement. Using contemporary definitions of colonisation, this commentary demonstrates how academia forms a dominant praxis around spaces and outcomes of engagement. Overall, a reflexive approach to allow added opportunities for engagement to be facilitated by non‐academic actors is recommended, while the influences of different academic disciplines in defining the possibilities for such opportunities is acknowledged.

中文翻译：

---

殖民公众参与：揭示学术界主导实践形成的“专家型”部门

公众参与是研究社会问题和挑战的重要特征。如果要集中利用与这些挑战有关的行动，则应对气候变化，环境退化以及燃料和粮食贫困等复杂问题就需要学术研究与公众之间建立更紧密的联系。在过去的二十年中，为建立公众与学者之间更紧密联系的努力有所增加。但是，与形成这种联系有关的许多活动仍嵌入在学者定义的动机之内。这些动机不仅由学者定义，而且它们的成功通常与学者的观点和目标形成的结果一致。因此，“专家级”部门位于启动，促进和报告公众参与的过程的中心。本文结合公众参与的最新发展，揭示了“专家层”的划分，使学术界能够殖民公众参与的空间和过程。这篇评论使用当代对殖民的定义，展示了学术界如何形成围绕空间和参与成果的主导实践。总体而言，建议采用一种反思性的方法，以允许非学术行为者为参与提供更多的参与机会，同时应认识到不同学术学科在定义此类机会的可能性方面的影响。这篇评论表明，学术界如何围绕参与的空间和结局形成主导实践。总体而言，建议采用一种反思性的方法，以允许非学术行为者为参与提供更多的参与机会，同时应认识到不同学术学科在定义此类机会的可能性方面的影响。这篇评论表明，学术界如何围绕参与的空间和结局形成主导实践。总体而言，建议采用一种反思性的方法，以允许非学术行为者为参与提供更多的参与机会，同时应认识到不同学术学科在定义此类机会的可能性方面的影响。