View
214
Download
0
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Responses to Environmental and Societal Challenges for our Unstable Earth (RESCUE) foresight initiative
Citation preview
1
RESCUE foresight initiativeResponses to Environmental and Societal Challenges for our Unstable Earth
Forw
ard
Lo
ok
RES
CU
E
www.esf.org/rescue
ESF-COST “Frontier of Science” initiative & ESF Forward Look
developed after a request from the French CNRS
ESF – European Science Foundation COST – European Cooperation in Science & Technology
September 2009 – June 2011
fl-rescue@esf.org
RES
CU
E
Last
up
dat
e:
13th
Ap
ril 2
01
1
1. interdisciplinary synergy between natural, social & human sciences to respond effectively to societal and policy-relevant needs related to the global environmental changes;
2. articulation of new scientific issues, especially those of trans-disciplinary nature or of major relevance to society;
3. development of new institutional approaches towards integrated, interdisciplinary science & to facilitate the ‘revolution’ in education and capacity building it requires.
RESCUE Objectives ensuring strategic scientific advice and
approaches for sustainable development & global sustainability governance
RES
CU
E o
bje
ctiv
es
2/24
2
1.new, emerging and neglected, global environmental change “research questions” with a marked human / social focus;
2.collaboration between the natural, social and human sciences in global change research;
3. research methodologies and data requirements for addressing the global change challenges;
4. transforming education and capacity building in response to global change; and
5.opening science for a knowledge democracy at the interfaces between research, policy, and society.
RES
CU
E N
ext
Step
s
RESCUE Thematic ActivitiesR
ESC
UE
Nex
t St
eps
draft RESCUE key recommendations (1/2)
• develop a common European vision of an open knowledge system through a dialogue process to establish a framework for dedicated and long-term funding of
sustainability research to promote and support a diversity of mechanisms for engagement in
knowledge production, learning and evaluation to link these to place-based needs and global sustainability concerns in a
set of demonstration projects.
• commission a pan-European mapping study of interdisciplinary research and education together with an inventory of strength in underlying single disciplines contributing to global change research to provide support and incentives for interdisciplinarity and
transdisciplinarity in research design.
• substantially increase national and European support for the study human of behaviour, social arrangements, and human-environmental interactions to establish/support dedicated venues and institutes for this task.
3
RES
CU
E N
ext
Step
s draft RESCUE key
recommendations (2/2)
• establish an international working group to address the challenges posed by the growth of the Internet as a means of access to knowledge, as a repository of knowledge, as a research tool and as an agora, for the production, diffusion and use of knowledge in responding to societal challenges related to GEC
• engage education policy makers and educators together with a broad range of societal actors in a facilitated dialogue on the changes for a radical transition to an open knowledge democracy with a focus on sustainability issues to develop a systematic and effective method for both designing and conducting projects that are more interdisciplinary, creative and innovative in GCR.
“New, emerging and neglected scientific questions in RESCUE remit” Task Force
Challenges of the Anthropocene: Contributions from Social Sciences and Humanities for the
Changing Human Condition (with ISSC, especially)
Global environmental change: one of the biggest challenges in human history
Dualism between natural and social systems Earth System vs. Human included – focused – centred “Anthropocene”: rethink the relationship between environment and
humankind at a fundamental level “Changing Human Condition”: major challenge for the scholarly
communities; for the literary & artistic communities; for policy makers Systemic, technocratic or manipulative approach to behaviour change,
with a redefine experts’ role and clear science-policy-society relations “New” planetary boundaries and historical perspectives Landscapes and food issues as examples
RES
CU
E W
ork
ing
Gro
up
s
6/24
4
RES
CU
E W
ork
ing
Gro
up
sWG “Collaboration between the natural,
social and human sciences in GCR” Develop a strategic vision to break down
individual & institutional barriers that hamper collaboration between scientific disciplines
1. Balance between “classical” discipline-based research and inter-disciplinary research?
2. Trigger effective and fruitful collaboration at the interface between different fields?
3. Identify and mobilise “disciplinary” scientists, funding agencies and stakeholders to participate and contribute to this joint effort right from the start?
4. Good practices to be promoted between European research organisations to support the next generation of GCR activities?
Examples of key topics:
7/24
Research Collaboration – considered in term of: Practice (what is it, are we doing, need to do?) Programming (How and what to fund) Balance (between classic mono-disciplines & scalars involved)
Preliminary WG recommendationsAgree on definitions of inter/trans/cross-disciplinarity;Define a ”Radically Inter and Trans-disciplinary
Environments”(RITE) model for promoting European GCR; Identify research areas where interdisciplinarity adds value and
areas where mono-disciplinary expertise alone is needed;Strengthen the critical role of research councils in defining
research areas where marked interdisciplinarity is required;Build on differences that emerge from different disciplinary
perspectives.
WG “Collaboration”
8/24
Up
dat
e o
n “
Co
llab
ora
tio
n”
(1
/2)
5
Tourism, ICT
Knowledge Transfer Partnerships
Urban development
Environment
Social cohesion
Coping with change
Cultural acceptance
Media
Heritage
Social Reference System
Human Reference System
Natural Reference System
Environmental Reference System
Need a convergence of Reference Systems – ”systems’ approach”
Keywords between the systems need review
A systems’ approach is not always an interdisciplinary approach!
Up
dat
e o
n “
Co
llab
ora
tio
n”
(2
/2)
Value systemfor GCR
Analytical power
Pride
WG “Requirements for research methodologies and data”
GCR crucially depends on observing & monitoring many complex, natural, social & human processes,
and on conceptualising /modelling them at different space & time scales
1. Identify major strengths and weaknesses, knowledge gaps, alternatives or extensions, and needs for innovation in methodologies, observations, databases and integration for interdisciplinary GCR and global assessments, across many scales;
2. Assess the state of integration of the human component and in particular the “soft” aspects such as perceptions and beliefs, situated knowledge;
3. Develop a list of priority actions to improve the current situation
RES
CU
E W
ork
ing
Gro
up
s
10/24
6
• Overcome the lack of social engagement / participatory processes in GEC research and understanding
• Establish global (multi-level) governance, through foresight studies, robust decision making approaches, and adequate institutional design for sustainability governance
• Assessing environmental and social vulnerability, through long-term research for different GEC scenarios, and development of responsive strategies to disaster risk
GCR challenges’ characteristics that make them not easily amenable to policy solutions and how can innovation in data and methods support identification and implementation sustainable policy solutions?
Up
dat
e o
n “
Req
uir
emen
ts”
(2
/3)
WG “Requirements”
• Support long-term studies – change funding structure (database infrastructure, action research programmes)
• Promote research institutions with integrated approaches
• Consider data, information, knowledge-base as common pool resource, for wide-ranging comparative case-study analyses
• Improve access to, interoperability and comparability of large data sets
• Develop tools/methods for monitoring change and embed them in societal context (e.g., evolutionary perspectives on change)
How to manage system transitions to integrated, sustainability governance? What data and methods are required to understand such transition processes and support their management?
Up
dat
e o
n “
Req
uir
emen
ts”
(3
/3)
WG “Requirements”
7
WG “Towards a ‘revolution’ in educationand capacity building”
In education as in science related to GEC, the dualism of nature and culture is a great challenge for
the next generation of researchers and citizens
1. Responses to environmental and social challenges require new and visionary approaches to interdisciplinary science, more than a new type of “global change” curriculum with disciplinary courses from the natural, social and human sciences.
2. Design, test, evaluate and diffuse a learning-by-doing process to develop a vision for a revolution in education system and in capacity building, to overcome current academic division of work, especially in Europe.
3. Requires transformational changes, incentives and new approaches at the individual and institutional levels to enhance capacities to understand complex and interacting processes such as those study in GCR.
RES
CU
E W
ork
ing
Gro
up
s13/24
Change of perspective needed!
It is not just about changing the system, but also about changing the way of looking at the system of education and capacity building by those with the power to make the changes happen, through a Visioning the Education / Capacity Revolution (VCR) process
to mobilise
to reflect
to in
spir
e to asse
ss
Up
dat
e o
n “
Rev
olu
tio
n”
(2
/3)
8
Key Factors
Education for social transformation
Multi-dimensionalizing GEC issues
An open future
Education for political change
Blind spots?
”We are often stuck in the ideology of a single truth. We isolate ourselves from those parts of reality that don’t fit our ideology.” ... ”The picture of the whole you see should include yourself as part of the system you are trying to fix.”
Up
dat
e o
n “
Rev
olu
tio
n”
(3
/3)
WG “Revolution”
WG “Interface between science and policy, communication and outreach”
or “Opening science for a knowledge democracy” Develop good practices, scientific consensus and
targets to be fed into research policy development for the benefit of policy makers and other stakeholders
Future of knowledge systems: open; diverse; problem-oriented; implementation-oriented; transformative; responsible; accountable
Work domains:
RES
CU
E W
ork
ing
Gro
up
s
• Organising and performing science• Incentives for stakeholders, and metrics• Learning and feedbacks• Demand for, production and use of knowledge• Processes of engagement and accountability• New challenges, new problems and tensions• Redistribution of responsibility, power and
authority
16/24
9
“Vision RD4SD” Concept
• Analysis of how research systems (i.e. organisations, programmes and policies) are responsive to sustainability requirements.
• Proposals for monitoring and enhancing this response.
• Iterative, structured dialogue between R&D / policy makers, with support of sustainability scientists.
Up
dat
e o
n “
Inte
rfac
e”
(2
/4)
WG “Interface”
10
Chair: Prof. Leen Hordijk (Inst. Environ. & Sustainability, EC-JRC, IT)Vice-Chair: Prof. Gísli Pálsson (Social & Env. Anthrop., U. Iceland, IS)
Thematic Leaders:Prof. Joseph Alcamo (UNEP Chief Scientist, KN)Prof. Michael Goodsite (Aarhus U., DK)Prof. Sierd Cloetingh (Free University, Amsterdam, NL)Prof. Poul Holm (Trinity College Dublin, IE)Prof. Claudia Pahl-Wostl (University of Osnabrück, DE)Prof. Theo Toonen (Delft University of Technology, Delft, NL)Prof. Karen O’Brien (University of Oslo, NO)Prof. Jonathan Reams (N.U. Science & Technology, Trondheim, NO)Dr. Jill Jäger (Vienna, AT)Prof. Frans Berkhout (Free University, Amsterdam, NL)
RESCUE Leadership
RES
CU
E Sc
ien
tifi
c St
eeri
ng
Co
mm
itte
e19/27
• Dr. Patrick Monfray (FR), initiator agency (CNRS) representative • Prof. Sonja Lojen (SI), LESC member• Prof. Luisa Lima (PT), SCSS member• Prof. Ulrike Landfester (CH), SCH member• Prof. Ole-John Nielsen (DK); Prof. M. Kaminska (PL), PESC members• Dr. Ipek Erzi (TK), ESSEM Chair; J. Ingram (UK), ESSEM member• Dr. Mehmet Güran (TK), ISCH member• Prof. Giuseppe Scarascia-Mugnozza (IT), FPS member• Dr. John Williams (FR), FA member• Dr. Marc Heppener (ESF), Dir. of Science & Strategy Development• Dr. Matthias Haury (COST), Head of Science Operations
RESCUE Quality Reference Group (QRG) set up to ensure the optimal quality and impact of the RESCUE activities and outputs
RES
CU
E Q
ual
ity
Ref
eren
ce G
rou
p
20/27
11
RESCUE membership (SSC, WGs, QRG)disciplinary distribution (as of June 2010)
RES
CU
E m
emb
ersh
ip -
dis
cip
linar
y d
istr
ibu
tio
n
4%
32%
33%
18%
3%10%
Geosciences Environmental sciences
Social sciences Humanities
Technological sciences Foresight
Humanities and Social Sciences
51%
21/24
In cooperation with: ICSU, ISSC, CIPSH, GCR programmes & ESSP, European Alliance - GCR, science funding & performing agencies, EC
Stakeholders ConferenceMay 2011
Integration WorkshopDec. 2010
RESCUE general timeline
RES
CU
E ge
ner
al t
imel
ine WGs &
Governance setup
Alignment WorkshopJune 2010
Launching Conference
ThematicActivities
Sept. 2009 Sept. 2009 –Nov. 2010
Report Preparation
Sept. 2010 –May 2011
Dissemination& Monitoring
summer 2011
SSC setup & meeting
SSC + QRG meeting
SSC // QRG meetings
External ReviewsStakeholders’
validation
12
8-9 Dec. 2010: Integration Workshop
mid March 2011 : RESCUE Report – first draft
late April 2011: RESCUE Report – second draft
16-17 May 2011: Stakeholders Conference
late May 2011: Report + Science Policy Briefing (SPB) – final draft
June 2011: Report & SPB external reviews
September 2011: Report & SPB – launching event (Brussels)
2011-2012: continuous monitoring the implementation of RESCUE recommendations and their impacts
questions, comments, inputs are most welcome.Contact: fl-rescue@esf.org
RES
CU
E N
ext
Step
s
RESCUE Next StepsR
ESC
UE
con
tact
s
Forward Looks enable Europe’s scientific community, in interaction with policy makers, to develop mid- to long-term views and analyses of future research developments with the aim of defining research agendas on national and European level.
European Science Foundation (ESF)Dr. Bernard AvrilLife, Earth & Environmental Sciences (LESC)Email: fl-rescue@esf.org; Website: www.esf.org/rescue
European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST)Dr. Carine PetitEarth System Science & Environmental Management (ESSEM)Email: cpetit@cost.esf.org
ESF-COST “Frontier of Science” initiativeRESCUE Contacts
24/24
13
General Forward Look Goals
• Forward Looks provide medium to long-term authoritative visions on science perspectives in broad areas of research bringing together ESF Member Organisations, other research institutions and the scientific community, in creative interaction.
• Forward Look reports and other outputs such as Science Policy Briefings assist policy makers and researchers in setting priorities and in defining and implementing optimal research agendas.
ESF
Fore
sigh
t A
ctiv
itie
s
Typical Forward Look Design
• State-of-the-Art review – Current state of research in the area and highlights of the major advances
in the last years
• Scientific challenges – Impact of those advances on the research agenda – Indication of major knowledge gaps and potential ‘hot topics’– Identification of European strength and weakness
• Vision – Presentation of a vision with major goals that could provide directions for
research in the medium and long term time frame – Implementation plan (in terms of infrastructure, institutional innovation,
human resources, governance)
• Impact Monitoring and Implementation Follow-up – Key stakeholders likely to play a key role in the implementation– Targeted recommendations– Follow-up mechanism to ensure delivery and avoid risks
ESF
Fore
sigh
t A
ctiv
itie
s
14
Typical Forward Looks Format
• Activities include preparatory study/expert groups, high level overview papers, workshops and meetings
• Main event: high-visibility conference
• Outputs: Policy Briefings, major reports,action plans
• Scientific Steering Committee: 8-12 p.
• Lead time: 12-18 months
• Average budget: 120-240 k€
ESF
Fore
sigh
t A
ctiv
itie
s
Recommended