Group items tagged

My sense of Yamana is that it works mostly as a clearinghouse of exchange of innovative approaches. The second unSummit coming up in a few weeks has no schedule of papers, but facilitates discussions that evolve over the 2 days. I think one would have to experience this to understand how it works. I had planned to do so this time, but decided I was too far behind on following up on previous connections. Here are Yamana's guidelines: "We feel the current culture of science creates an invisible cost in loss of productivity, slower rates of discovery, and 'wasting assets,' including human capital. We are committed to having enough conversations with the people that can make a difference, including (and perhaps especially) within our own scientific communities. We will transform what is possible both for people who are currently working in the field of science and for those that are interested in studying to become scientists. We will impact the experience of learning science, the experience of teaching science and the experience of doing science. We include conversations across the whole gamut of what affects desired outcomes, from salaries, to healthcare, to personal leave, to the work environment, to the conversations being had about science, to how science is funded, commercialized, and shared. By acting as a clearinghouse for issues and concerns, as well as a catalyst for potential solutions, we are connecting the passionate voices in science with one another to create a shared vision for the future."

I've been thinking about this alot lately. How do you make cultural change? How do you shift conventional wisdom? How do you create new practices and ways of doing, especially if the dominant "narrative" and system of "incentives" don't support change? Do you shift one relationship at a time? Or is larger change possible? What are the spaces for going against the grain?

Poverty and biodiversity loss are two of the world's dire challenges. Claims of conservation's contribution to poverty alleviation, however, remain controversial. Here, we assess the flows of ecosystem services provided to people by priority habitats for terrestrial conservation, considering the global distributions of biodiversity, physical factors, and socioeconomic context. We estimate the value of these habitats to the poor, both through direct benefits and through payments for ecosystem services to those stewarding natural habitats. The global potential for biodiversity conservation to support poor communities is high: The top 25% of conservation priority areas could provide 56%-57% of benefits. The aggregate benefits are valued at three times the estimated opportunity costs and exceed $1 per person per day for 331 million of the world's poorest people. Although trade-offs remain, these results show win-win synergies between conservation and poverty alleviation, indicate that effective financial mecha- nisms can enhance these synergies, and suggest biodiversity conservation as a fundamental component of sustainable economic development.

Not related directly to any of the cases we are currently working on. But none the less I thought this was an interesting look at biodiversity from an economic angle.

Published by the Council of Canadian Academies, this paper reviews a bit of the history of the relationship between policy and science, as well as policy and scientists. The author, Executive VP of the Council, starts from a broad view, describing an "is (fact)/ought (value)" dichotomy between science and policy, moves closer to characterize the range of relationships between scientists and policymakers and their attitudes toward each other, describes their spheres of influence (world of progress v. world of power), and finally makes the case for government as a place for collaboration and progress employing both. Saner offers some "take-home messages" and some questions for further exploration, including how to meet the needs of each while facilitating communication; managing the divergent cultures to reach successful ends; creating incentives for both players to join the effort; and adapting to the multitude of ways the differences between these two groups manifest themselves around policy issues.

The goals for the 5th Living Knowledge conference are: "What innovation is needed to guide research towards public concerns? How can civil society fully participate in the co-creation of knowledge? The 5th Living Knowledge Conference will focus on getting more insight into processes, and develop specific policy recommendations that resonate with public concerns and articulated research needs." On the site we see "PERARES (Public Engagement with Research And Research Engagement with Society) project aims to strengthen the interaction between researchers and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and citizens in Europe." We also see a description of science shops: "small entities that carry out scientific research in a wide range of disciplines - usually free of charge and - on behalf of citizens and local civil society." All these things would be worth looking further into to understand what guidelines people use or recommend for engaging others in scientific & technological change. In brief, they seem very sympatico to the idea of Case 4 of the course (http://ppol749.wikispaces.umb.edu/PBLEngagementCase).

So this seems to be the other theme emerging, how you work with individuals / the public / citizens in shaping scientific research and the dialogue around it.

"Cultural Theory is used as a theoretical lens for understanding the different interpretations of the risk associated with BSE/nvCJD, the subsequent risk amplification by the media, and the effect of trust and reliance in science and government in their construction."

Committee of examine whether publicly funded agricultural research has influenced the structure of U.S. agriculture and if so, how. They also looked at the role of public-sector agricultural research on changes in the size and numbers of farms. Chapter 5 is of particular interest as it investigates the role of extension policy. There is a free executive summary and the book can be read online from this site.

The American Climate and Environmental Value Survey (ACEVS) is the third application of sophisticated psychographic research on American environmental and climate values. The goal of ACEVS is to increase the leverage, scale, reach, and most importantly, efficacy, of climate and environmental initiatives by empowering the movement with proven research and methodology for authentically engaging Americans in climate and environmental solutions, bringing these Americans to solutions on their own terms, in context of their choosing, and for their personal benefit.

This survey includes a section on what influences people (primarily the media). It also begins with the comment that "cap and trade" is now "toxic." It would be interesting to connect the dots here (as Oreskes & co-author do in Merchants of Doubt), so that we see who was behind the push against cap and trade. Ironically, cap and trade originated as a free market alternative to government regulation of how much pollution could be emitted.

Fred Singer!

The four diagrams capture the 4 world views about human impact on the environment. (I provide some critical commentary on this view of worldviews in "Exploring themes about social agency through interpretation of diagrams of nature and society," in How Nature Speaks: The Dynamics of the Human Ecological Condition , ed. Y. Haila and C. Dyke. Durham, NC, Duke University Press)

''Clumsy Solutions for a Complex World'' is a powerful and original statement on why well-intended attempts to alleviate pressing social ills too often derail, and how effective, efficient and broadly acceptable solutions to social problems can be found. It takes its cue from the idea that our endlessly changing and complex social worlds consist of ceaseless interactions between four ways of organizing, justifying and perceiving social relations. Each time one of these perspectives is excluded from collective decision-making, governance failure inevitably results. Successful solutions are therefore creative combinations of four opposing ways of organizing and thinking.

Rhoda, when I click on the link it goes to a login for Swarthmore. I'm thinking this article by the same authors may cover similar ground -- http://psychologyforasafeclimate.org/resources/Clumsy%20solutions%20for%20a%20complex%20world%20The%20case%20of%20climate%20change.pdf

Sorry about the link problem, Felicia. I'll see if I can fix it. Thanks for finding one that works!

Why are so many conservatives still skeptical that global warming is a real problem and threat? It may have to do with the willingness to read opposing view points. Talks about echo chamber effect of modern partisan politics. References alternative to cap-and-trade (carbon tax offset by a payroll tax cut).

Jeff -- by looking at the "other" side I've found that there is probably a discourse / ideological framing that would be more life affirming and oriented towards sustainable growth that would still address carbon reductions but orient it at a more local level. Interested in checking out the resource you mention.

It might also have to do with the fact that media tends to exaggerate and provide inaccurate information with the purpose of selling more (like advertising, twisting the facts a little bit just to sell more). In the 70's it wasn't about global warming, it was about global cooling. I wonder what happen to that.

"For scientists, the struggle between their work and the way society views that work is nothing new, says Francesca Grifo, director of the scientific integrity program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. After all, she says, Galileo was forced by the Catholic establishment to renounce his evidence for a sun-centered solar system, and Darwin's ideas have been a political football for more than a century." This article places the current Tennessee proposed bill on "academic freedom" in the context of other challenges the scientific community faces when trying to reconcile their knowledge and research within the context of social believes and attitudes.

"This article... was written by GRAIN and the Pesticides Eco-Alternatives Centre (PEAC) in China to raise Chinese farmers' awareness about the broad historical context of industrial agriculture, and how it paved the way for the introduction of modern varieties of crops and agricultural technologies."

After Felicia's post about farmer suicides in India related to the use of GMO cotton seeds, I thought some might be interested in a more upbeat article about efforts to raise farmer's awareness about industrialized agriculture, etc.

Summarizes the evolution of the plant biotechnology industry in Europe and discuss relevant competitive issues. Also comments on the rise of public opposition to the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture in Europe, and conclude by highlighting key aspects of the emerging European policy on GMOs, and its political economy.

Across the United States, cities, towns, and counties are enacting policies and programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Many local governments are motivated by concerns about the impacts of climate change in their communities as well as an understanding that energy and climate solutions can benefit local economies and residents. Their actions reflect a strong history of local leadership in climate protection in the United States. While local governments face a number of limitations in addressing climate change, they can be a key part of the solution. Like states and regions, local governments can demonstrate leadership by implementing strategies to confront climate change and laying the groundwork for broader action at the national and international levels.

This brief is part of a series called Climate Change 101: Understanding and Responding to Global Climate Change, published by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

The documentation from this 2005 Congressional hearing may help insert some of the science Peter was prompting us to incorporate into our case investigations -- GIS, communications science, demographics, and others are brought to bear; the Q&A toward the end give some sense as to what the decisionmakers (Members of the House) took away from the expert scientists' presentations.

Scientific research plays a very important role in the development of the areas discussed; for example, information data collection and development and improvement of hazard and risk assessment models. These programs are critical since we live in a country with so many natural risks year round.

Indeed very comprehensive. I find interesting when they ask the effect of the local environment in shaping our perceptions of risk. It was interesting to see how people felt in Southesat Lousiana before and after hurrican Ivan.

Doing good things better is Brian's latest book. He is prolific and in this book he describes the discipline of daily writing that he used to write this book (and previous work) -- and that he leads his students to use. The principles of daily writing are given in brief at http://www.faculty.umb.edu/pjt/DailyWriting.html. Looking at Brian's website of writing, you will find material on activism, especially around developments in science and technology, but not only this.

So a couple of these annotated resources are seeming to point to the need for compelling and clear stories and communication. That would be interesting to follow up. And not just the dissemination of ideas, but the support for dialogue and deliberation.

Just found this too and wonder if there might be further work to look into. http://www.socialedge.org/discussions/marketing-communication/storytelling-and-social-change

The Public Science Project situated at the CUNY Graduate Center works in a participatory action research agenda.  They work in collaboration with groups on the ground. The website states:  "PAR Collective, we began our work as a coalition of activists, researchers, youth, elders, lawyers, prisoners, and educators, launching projects on educational injustice, lives under surveillance,and the collateral damage of mass incarceration. Most of our projects have been situated in schools and/or community-based organizations struggling for quality education, economic opportunities, and human rights. Knowledge-sharing research camps set the stage for most of our research, designed to bring together differently positioned people around a common table to design and implement the research: youth and educators; young people who have been pushed out of schools and mothers organizing for quality education in communities under siege; prisoners, organizers, and academics. Most projects have vibrant advisory boards of youth, community elders, educators and/or activists to shape the work and hold us accountable to the needs and desires of local communities." They conduct research, trainings, and consulting services as well as resources for PAR.

A theory that seeks to explain how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread through cultures. Everett Rogers, a professor of rural sociology, popularized the theory in his 1962 book Diffusion of Innovations. He said diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system.

Links to an NPR podcast telling the story of how homosexuality was removed from the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual). The story is told by Alix Spiegel, the granddaughter of one of the psychiatrists involved in the movement, Dr. John Patrick Spiegel. While his point of view is given, mostly by recounting stories passed down in the family, the podcast strives to be more objective than those stories, drawing on multiple sources, not only on family lore. In this historical example, a grassroots movement succeeds in changing accepted scientific "fact".

Kendra - I finally had time to listen to the podscast. Thanks for sharing this here so I could listen to this very personal story.