The title of this post was the surprising subject of a recent e-mail I got from a scientific journal. It's not the review method I'm used to, but a quite interesting one nonetheless.
I recently made a contribution to a paper by Wouter Buytaert and others, entitled "Uncertainties in climate change projections and regional downscaling: implications for water resources management", which has now appeared in the on-line journal Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions (you can find it here). It will undergo a kind of public on-line review. These are some of the instructions given by the journal:
"In addition to the Author Comments, you and your co-authors can individually publish Short Comments under your names. Short Comments can also be published by all other members of the scientific community. To foster scientific discussion, please forward this information to your co-authors and any other interested colleagues. Please respond to the Referee Comments and relevant Short Comments published in the discussion forum of your paper as soon as possible in order to stimulate further discussion by interested scientists."
After responding to the comments by referees and colleagues and revising the paper, an editorial decision will be made whether or not to publish the paper in the ISI journal Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. I'm curious to see how this will work and, of course, you are all invited to comment!
Friday, March 12, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Knowledge for Climate PhD position “Making sense of climate impacts" at Wageningen University
After favourable review by scientific and societal referees, the Knowledge for Climate board has decided to fund the full proposal submitted by our "Governance of Climate Adaptation" consortium! The consortium has been awarded the Center of Excellence label. In the framework of this 4-year research and action programme, we are looking for candidates for the following PhD position at our group (www.pap.wur.nl)
“Making sense of climate impacts: Understanding and dealing with the variety of climate change frames in governance processes”
Promotor: Prof. Dr. Katrien Termeer
Co-promotor: Dr. Art Dewulf
Behind the apparent consensus that climate change is an important issue, a world of different perspectives or frames emerges (Benford & Snow, 2000; Chong & Druckman, 2007; Dewulf, et al., 2009; Schön & Rein, 1994). Effective, legitimate and resilient adaptation strategies require more than a broad agreement that climate change is important. First, in a new and not yet institutionalized policy domain, tuning with sectors like spatial planning, water, nature, agriculture, industry or infrastructure becomes crucial – these different worlds need to be connected somehow and the spatial scale for doing so is not self-evident. Second, in a multi-level governance context (Hooghe & Marks, 2003), tuning is also needed between local, regional, national and international levels on the administrative scale, which operate with different frames of reference. Third, the time scale for climate change goes much further than the usual planning horizon of governments, companies or societal organizations (Haug, et al., 2009). The long term scenarios for climate impacts, although plausible, do involve margins of uncertainty, which can be used as excuses not to act (Keeling, 2009).
All of this provides endless possibilities to frame the seriousness, urgency or scale of climate adaptation in widely diverging ways. The increasingly polarized discussion between ‘climate sceptics’ and ‘climate alarmists’, which has reached the mainstream media and political parties, testifies to this. Therefore, the variety of climate adaptation frames is likely to play an important role in climate adaptation governance processes, and we assume that the way these frame differences are handled will affect the progress and outcomes of these governance processes.
The aim of this research project is to answer this key question: How to realize effective, legitimate and resilient adaptation strategies in a situation of diverging frames about spatial, temporal and administrative scales for climate adaptation, within and between governments, businesses, scientists, societal actors and the media? The following research questions will be addressed:
“Making sense of climate impacts: Understanding and dealing with the variety of climate change frames in governance processes”
Promotor: Prof. Dr. Katrien Termeer
Co-promotor: Dr. Art Dewulf
Behind the apparent consensus that climate change is an important issue, a world of different perspectives or frames emerges (Benford & Snow, 2000; Chong & Druckman, 2007; Dewulf, et al., 2009; Schön & Rein, 1994). Effective, legitimate and resilient adaptation strategies require more than a broad agreement that climate change is important. First, in a new and not yet institutionalized policy domain, tuning with sectors like spatial planning, water, nature, agriculture, industry or infrastructure becomes crucial – these different worlds need to be connected somehow and the spatial scale for doing so is not self-evident. Second, in a multi-level governance context (Hooghe & Marks, 2003), tuning is also needed between local, regional, national and international levels on the administrative scale, which operate with different frames of reference. Third, the time scale for climate change goes much further than the usual planning horizon of governments, companies or societal organizations (Haug, et al., 2009). The long term scenarios for climate impacts, although plausible, do involve margins of uncertainty, which can be used as excuses not to act (Keeling, 2009).
All of this provides endless possibilities to frame the seriousness, urgency or scale of climate adaptation in widely diverging ways. The increasingly polarized discussion between ‘climate sceptics’ and ‘climate alarmists’, which has reached the mainstream media and political parties, testifies to this. Therefore, the variety of climate adaptation frames is likely to play an important role in climate adaptation governance processes, and we assume that the way these frame differences are handled will affect the progress and outcomes of these governance processes.
The aim of this research project is to answer this key question: How to realize effective, legitimate and resilient adaptation strategies in a situation of diverging frames about spatial, temporal and administrative scales for climate adaptation, within and between governments, businesses, scientists, societal actors and the media? The following research questions will be addressed:
- How do the actors in climate adaptation policy processes interactively deal with their frame differences?
- What is the potential of these ways of dealing with frame differences to prevent (or stir up) controversies?
- What is the influence of climate frames in the media on climate frames or controversies in policy processes?
- Which interventions for dealing with multiple frames can contribute to effective, legitimate and resilient climate adaptation and how?
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Upcoming conferences and calls for papers
A number of interesting conferences later this year have their calls for papers out now:
The "Deltas in times of climate change" conference (Rotterdam, 29 September - 1 October 2010 ) has extended the deadline for abstract submission until March, 15th. The call for abstracts can be found here. There's a thematic session on governance and economics of climate adaptation where my colleague Katrien Termeer is one of the convenors. This quote from the website gives an idea about the issues that will be addressed:
Governance of adaptation is a so called 'wicked' problem. It involves many challenges: the multi-actor challenge because many actors and institutions are involved with different stakes, resources and strategies, the multi-level challenge because which geographic level to address which adaptation tasks is unclear; the multi- scale challenge because climate adaptation requires a constant alternation of short-term action and long-term anticipation; the multi-sector challenge, because many societal sectors are involved and climate adaptation lacks a settled climate policy domain itself and; the multi-perception challenge, because of the uncertainties and the various perceptions about risks, adaptation problems and solutions.
As I announced earlier on this blog, the 17th Annual Conference on Multi-Organisational Partnerships, Alliances and Networks (MOPAN) will be organized by Steve Cropper at Keele University (UK), 28th - 30th June 2010. The conference theme is Collaboration: Dynamics, Movement, Change. Collaboration: Dynamics, Movement, Change.The Conference joins this year with the ESRC Research Seminar on Collaborative Futures (which will form a stream of the Conference on Tuesday 29th June) and the British Academy of Management Special Interest Group on Inter-Organisational Relations. Abstracts need to be submitted by Monday 12th April 2010.
The call for papers for the Berlin Conference of the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change (8-9 October 2010) is out as well. The deadline for paper abstracts is April 6, with full papers due September 20. This year’s conference will adress the “Social dimensions of environmental change and governance”.
The "Deltas in times of climate change" conference (Rotterdam, 29 September - 1 October 2010 ) has extended the deadline for abstract submission until March, 15th. The call for abstracts can be found here. There's a thematic session on governance and economics of climate adaptation where my colleague Katrien Termeer is one of the convenors. This quote from the website gives an idea about the issues that will be addressed:
Governance of adaptation is a so called 'wicked' problem. It involves many challenges: the multi-actor challenge because many actors and institutions are involved with different stakes, resources and strategies, the multi-level challenge because which geographic level to address which adaptation tasks is unclear; the multi- scale challenge because climate adaptation requires a constant alternation of short-term action and long-term anticipation; the multi-sector challenge, because many societal sectors are involved and climate adaptation lacks a settled climate policy domain itself and; the multi-perception challenge, because of the uncertainties and the various perceptions about risks, adaptation problems and solutions.
As I announced earlier on this blog, the 17th Annual Conference on Multi-Organisational Partnerships, Alliances and Networks (MOPAN) will be organized by Steve Cropper at Keele University (UK), 28th - 30th June 2010. The conference theme is Collaboration: Dynamics, Movement, Change. Collaboration: Dynamics, Movement, Change.The Conference joins this year with the ESRC Research Seminar on Collaborative Futures (which will form a stream of the Conference on Tuesday 29th June) and the British Academy of Management Special Interest Group on Inter-Organisational Relations. Abstracts need to be submitted by Monday 12th April 2010.
The call for papers for the Berlin Conference of the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change (8-9 October 2010) is out as well. The deadline for paper abstracts is April 6, with full papers due September 20. This year’s conference will adress the “Social dimensions of environmental change and governance”.
Finally, the Climate 2010 Conference will take place from 1-7 November 2010 and is organised by the Hamburg University of Applied Sciences at a very special location: in cyberspace - through discussion fora, virtual blackboards, expert live chats and video podcasts. The website presents this conference as "The World´s CO2-friendly Scientific On-line Climate Conference". This conference takes place for the third time, focusing this year on "Climate Change and the Sustainable Management of Water Resources". Abstracts need to be submitted online by 31 March.
There are probably more interesting conferences coming up. Leave a comment about conferences that you want to bring to people's attention!Friday, December 25, 2009
A participant-structured approach for assessing and addressing the framing of uncertainties
Another article by Nicola Isendahl has just been published on-line in the Journal of Environmental Management. I have been co-supervising her PhD project together with Claudia Pahl-Wostl at the University of Osnabrück. If all goes well, Nicola would be able to graduate in the spring of 2010!
The starting point for Nicola's project is that in order to improve the way uncertainties in water management are dealt with, we need to understand how water managers frame uncertainties. In this paper we present an approach where water managers developed criteria of relevance to understand and address uncertainties. The empirical research took place in the Doñana region of the Guadalquivir estuary in southern Spain making use of the method of card sorting. Through the card sorting exercise a broad range of criteria to make sense of and describe uncertainties was produced by different subgroups, which were then merged into a shared list of criteria. That way framing differences were made explicit and communication on uncertainty and on framing differences was enhanced. In that, the present approach constitutes a first step to enabling reframing and overcoming framing differences, which are important features on the way to robust decision-making. Moreover, the elaborated criteria build a basis for the development of more structured approaches to deal with uncertainties in water management practice.
The article can be found here or downloaded here.
The starting point for Nicola's project is that in order to improve the way uncertainties in water management are dealt with, we need to understand how water managers frame uncertainties. In this paper we present an approach where water managers developed criteria of relevance to understand and address uncertainties. The empirical research took place in the Doñana region of the Guadalquivir estuary in southern Spain making use of the method of card sorting. Through the card sorting exercise a broad range of criteria to make sense of and describe uncertainties was produced by different subgroups, which were then merged into a shared list of criteria. That way framing differences were made explicit and communication on uncertainty and on framing differences was enhanced. In that, the present approach constitutes a first step to enabling reframing and overcoming framing differences, which are important features on the way to robust decision-making. Moreover, the elaborated criteria build a basis for the development of more structured approaches to deal with uncertainties in water management practice.
The article can be found here or downloaded here.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Knowledge for Governance of Climate Adaptation
Knowledge for Climate is a research programme for the development of knowledge and services that make it possible to climate proof the Netherlands. Governmental organisations (central government, provinces, municipalities and water boards) and businesses, actively participate in research programming through the input of additional resources (matching). The overall goal is to assess investments to be made in spatial planning and infrastructure over the coming twenty years in terms of their resistance to climate change, and for making changes where necessary.Our Public Administration and Policy Group at Wageningen University has brought together a consortium with Utrecht University, VU Amsterdam, Radboud University Nijmegen and Erasmus University Rotterdam, that has submitted the winning pre-proposal for research into the governance of climate adaptation. We are now very busy developing the full proposal, together with regional hotspot partners and our international academic partners: University of East Anglia, Stockholm Resilience Center and Oldenburg University.
The summary of the project pre-proposal reads as follows:
"Climate proofing the Netherlands is not only a technical issue but also a demanding matter of governance. The specific complexities of adaptation governance call for new advanced governance knowledge. This programme will develop and test forms of governance that can contribute to realizing adaptation options, and to increasing the adaptive capacity of society.
The program will be concentrated around four concepts and corresponding work packages:
- organizing connectivity
- (re)allocating responsibilities and risks
- coping with controversies
- normative principles for adaptation
To fulfil the dual ambition of developing practically relevant and scientifically sound knowledge, two supporting methodological work packages will be set up: collaborative action research and comparative analysis across regional and national boundaries. This interdisciplinary programme will result in new insights in climate governance; tested governance strategies, instruments and structures; innovative methods; and international comparison of adaptation efforts between Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and UK."
If all goes well, we could start setting up action research projects on climate adaptation strategies with a group of 8 PhDs, a postdoc and a number of senior researchers from the involved universities, as of March 2010. But first, the full proposal has to worked out, projects have to be defined and substantial co-funding needs to be committed by hotspot partners.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)