The paper posits that collaboration between scientists (across disciplines) and community members is crucial for impactful scientific advancements. Co-constructing meaning for key scientific concepts, especially regarding genetic engineering, is presented as a prerequisite for effective collaboration. The Target Malaria project, aiming to develop gene-based technologies to control malaria, serves as a case study. From its inception in 2012, Target Malaria committed to public dialogue in Burkina Faso, prioritizing informed decision-making rather than unconditional acceptance of the technology. This two-way dialogue aligns with Kelty's definition of collaboration as 'co-working and co-thinking'. International guidance on gene-drive research further informed the project's community engagement approach. The challenge lies in expanding discussions beyond expert circles to encompass communities lacking formal scientific training. This requires transdisciplinary dialogue within the research team to achieve a shared understanding of scientific processes before engaging with the broader community. The authors acknowledge that communities possess valuable knowledge that can contribute to a shared understanding of science and shape research direction. The Target Malaria team's engagement process involved iterative learning, adapting to unexpected turns and incorporating the principles of Art-Science theory and practice.

The paper references various works supporting the importance of community engagement in scientific research, particularly in the context of genetic engineering. It cites publications emphasizing the need for inclusive approaches, acknowledging the existing knowledge within communities, and highlighting the challenges of communicating complex scientific concepts to non-expert audiences. International guidelines for gene-drive research, advocating for community involvement, are also mentioned. Existing literature on the knowledge-deficit model and its limitations in science communication is also referenced.

The study details the Target Malaria project's collaborative methodology, which involved three stages. The first stage focused on internal collaboration between natural and social scientists within the Target Malaria team to establish a common understanding of the fundamental scientific concepts related to genetic engineering. This involved multiple group meetings and discussions, aiming to translate complex scientific jargon into accessible language. The second stage involved engaging with the local communities in Bana and Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso. This was achieved through individual and group meetings, emphasizing a two-way dialogue and co-development rather than a passive reception of information. A working group, including diverse stakeholders from the community, was formed to develop terminology that accurately reflects scientific concepts in the local Dioula language. The third stage addressed decreasing community participation by introducing theatre performances. Local theatre artists collaborated with the research team to create a performance that conveyed key genetic concepts using local language and storytelling techniques. The performance was iteratively refined based on community feedback gathered through post-performance forums. The methodology emphasizes the cooperative communication model, where reality is conceived as a pool of shared meaning into which each individual contributes.

The co-construction of meaning proved to be a synergistic process. Collaboration between natural and social scientists within the team successfully translated complex scientific concepts into accessible language, facilitating communication with the broader community. The community significantly contributed to the development of a common glossary of scientific terms. The terms chosen reflected local understanding and experience, illustrating the successful integration of scientific and community knowledge. For example, the term for genetically modified sterile male mosquitos evolved from initially inaccurate or culturally inappropriate suggestions to a final phrase ('a mosquito that is unable to produce offspring') that was both accurate and easily grasped by the community. Theatre performances proved to be an effective communication tool, engaging the community and generating valuable feedback that informed the research process. Community feedback led to adjustments in the research design and methodology, demonstrating the impact of community involvement on scientific research. Lab visits, facilitated by the theatre project, expanded community understanding of research procedures and biosafety measures. The engagement also highlighted the local community's extensive knowledge of mosquito behavior and seasonal dynamics, improving insect collection techniques.

The findings demonstrate the successful application of a multi-disciplinary, community-engaged approach to communicate complex scientific information. The collaborative process fostered a shared understanding of genetic engineering among diverse stakeholders, including scientists and community members. The study validates the importance of co-constructing meaning and adapting communication strategies to suit different audiences. The successful integration of theatrical performance demonstrates the potential of combining scientific rigor with artistic expression to improve communication and engagement. The iterative nature of the engagement process highlights the importance of flexibility and responsiveness to community needs and concerns. This approach challenges the knowledge-deficit model and promotes a more equitable and participatory approach to scientific research. The findings also resonate with Art-Science theory and practice, emphasizing the transformative potential of collaborative knowledge creation.

This study highlights the value of co-creating knowledge and involving diverse stakeholders in genetic engineering research. The multi-stage, community-engaged approach significantly impacted both the communication of complex scientific concepts and the research process itself. The iterative nature of the engagement, coupled with the integration of theatre performances, proved highly effective. Future research could explore the broader applicability of this model to other gene drive projects and similar initiatives involving sensitive technologies and community engagement. Further investigation into the long-term impacts of this collaborative approach on community understanding and trust is warranted.

The study's focus on a specific geographic location and community might limit the generalizability of the findings. The chosen methodology relies heavily on the active participation and collaboration of the community, which might not always be achievable in all contexts. The involvement of theatre professionals as mediators introduced a specific communication style that may not be universally applicable. The limited time frame of the study might not fully capture the long-term effects of the community engagement initiatives.