presentation to the Third Transdisciplinary Summer School on Climate Geo-EngineeringQueens College University of Oxford
21st August 2012
Andy StirlingSPRU & STEPS Centre
Knowing Knowledge and Innovation:
some key implications for climate geo-engineering
‘Governance’? Know Thyself!
Question content and processes of knowledge production
Learn from studies of innovation and social choice
Appreciate Diversity of Methods, Principles and Procedures
Understand Key General Lessons
Geoengineering Challenges
Knowledge in Policy
on chemicals:“ …sound science will be the basis of the Commission's legislative proposal…” - EC RTD Commissioner, Philippe Busquin
on genetic modification:
“… this government's approach is to make decisions … on the basis of sound science”
- former UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair
on energy:
“[n]ow is the right time for a cool-headed, evidence based assessment … I want to sweep away historic prejudice and put in its place evidence and science”
former UK Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks
Justification: move from political ‘problems’ to technical ‘puzzles’
on zoonotic pandemics:
“… sound science … science-based decisions” - UN WHO DG Margaret Chan
Ambiguity in Evidence
Energy technologies: mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
0.001 0.1 10 1000externality’: cUS/kWh (after Sundqvist et al, 2005)low RISK high
coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
wind
solar
biomass
Energy technologies: mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
Ambiguity in Evidence
0.001 0.1 10 1000
coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
21
wind
solar
biomass
n =
‘externality’: cUS/kWh (after Sundqvist et al, 2005)
minimum maximum25% 75%
low RISK high
Energy technologies: mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
Ambiguity in Evidence
coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
36
20
wind 18
solar 11
biomass 22
31
21
16
n =
Energy technologies: mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
Ambiguity in Evidence
Knowing Knowledge
` Conventional ‘risk practices’ suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
` Conventional expert practices suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
` marginalises, elides, ignores, (often) denies radical openness of ‘incertitude’:
` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action . Aristotle, Kant, Habermas know-how is less important than know-why
– eg: how to apply neuroscience?
Knowing Knowledge
` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action
` - incompleteness: knowledge enabling utility is limited on wider effects . Lao Tzu, Socrates, Keynes ‘unknowns’ as important as ‘knowns’
– eg: unexpected
mechanisms
in nanohealth
technologies
` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge:
Knowing Knowledge
` Conventional expert practices suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
- indeterminacy: effective knowledge does not preclude surprise . Gödel, Dosi, Collingridge ”known knowns” foster hubris
– eg: dangers of thinking we know
halogenated hydrocarbons,
CFCs and the ozone hole
endocrine disruptors
methyl tertbutyl ether
- incompleteness: knowledge enabling utility is limited on wider effects
` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge:
` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action
Knowing Knowledge
` Conventional expert practices suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
- incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action
- ‘inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance . Einstein, Ravetz, Beck… area / perimeter of known
– nonlinear
dynamics
of climate
and oceans
` - indeterminacy: effective knowledge does not preclude surprise
` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge:
` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action
Knowing Knowledge
` Conventional expert practices suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
- ‘inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance
- intractability: knowledge-commitments compound vulnerability . Ellul, Wynne, Tenner not existence but exposure to unknown
eg: nuclear
dependency
- incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action
` - indeterminacy : effective knowledge does not preclude surprise
` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge:
` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action
Knowing Knowledge
` Conventional expert practices suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
- intractability: knowledge-commitments compound vulnerability
- incommensurability: knowledges are plural and often conflicting . Kuhn, Arrow, Jasanoff… knowledge often not linear / additive
- eg: agronomy, ecology, soil science, molecular biology on GM
- ‘inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance
- incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action
` - indeterminacy : effective knowledge does not preclude surprise
` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge:
` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action
Knowing Knowledge
` Conventional expert practices suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
- incommensurability: knowledges are plural and often conflicting
representing incomplete knowledge as expert ‘risk’ is deeply problematic
- ‘inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance
- intractability: knowledge-commitments compound vulnerability
- incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action
` - indeterminacy: effective knowledge does not preclude surprise
` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge:
` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action
Knowing Knowledge
` Conventional expert practices suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’
- The Economist
SCIENCE
`“we'll restore science to its rightful place”… - President Obama
“Our hope … relies on scientific and technological progress” - Premier Wen Jiabao
PROGRESS
“you can’t stop progress” …
“One can not impede scientific progress.” - President Ahmadinejad
Science in Policy
SCIENCE
Lord Alec Broers, President, RAEng
…“history is a race to advance technology”
Technology:
“will determine the future of the human race’”
The challenge of government:
“to strive to stay in the race”…
The role of the public:
“to give technology the status it deserves”…
PROGRESS
TECHNOLOGY
Innovation in Policy
all innovation is progress…
Lisbon Strategy for: “pro-innovation action” - EU Council of
Ministers
“we need more pro-innovation policies” - PM Gordon
Brown
“… the Government’s strategy is … pro-innovation” - PM David Cameron
PROGRESS
TECHNOLOGY
Innovation Governance
all technology is progress…
all innovation is progress…
Lisbon Strategy for: “pro-innovation action” - EU Council of
Ministers
“we need more pro-innovation policies” - PM Gordon
Brown
“… the Government’s strategy is … pro-innovation” - PM David Cameron
GM critics are “anti-technology … members of the 'flat earth society’, opposed to modern economics, modern technology, modern science, modern life itself”
- UN DDG Malloch-Brown
“a pro- technology culture must be created…”
- Council for Science and Technology
PROGRESS
TECHNOLOGY
Innovation Governance
Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives… no politics … no choice !
PROGRESS
TECHNOLOGY
Conventional Innovation Governance
Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives … no politics … no choice !
Scope for debate restricted to: yes or no? … how much? how fast? … who leads?
PROGRESS
TECHNOLOGY
Conventional Innovation Governance
TECHNOLOGY
Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives … no politics … no choice !
Scope for debate restricted to: yes or no? … how much? how fast?’ … who leads?
Seriously neglects questions over: which way? …what alternatives? says who? …why?
PROGRESS
Conventional Innovation Governance
direction
space of pathwayconfigurations
Inevitability of Pathways?
The example of the bicycle…
… early designs took many exotic forms
direction
space of pathwayconfigurations
Conventional idea: eccentric configurations converge to ‘optimality’…
Inevitability of Pathways?
…but ‘optimality’ depends on context, moment and perspective
direction
Contingency of Pathways
multiple diverging directions
time
each starting point yields many feasible, viable innovation pathways
So… … the ‘big picture’ is more the other way around!
‘best path’ not just about determining necessity or ‘optimising’ markets …
deliberately or blindly societies close down the pathways they pursue
For instance... “sustainable energy”
Not all that is conceivable, feasible, viable – will be fully realisable
Realities of Innovation
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
social shaping (Bijker, 85) co-construction (Misa, 03) studies: expectations (Brown, 03) imaginations (Jasanoff, 05)
Realities of Innovation
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
history: contingency (Mokyr, 92) momentum (Hughes 83)path-dependence (David, 85) path creation
(Karnoe, 01)
Realities of Innovation
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
philosophy: autonomy (Winner, 77) closure (Feenberg, 91)/politics entrapment (Walker, 01) alignment (Geels, 02)
Realities of Innovation
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
economics: homeostasis (Sahal, 85) lock-in (Arthur, 89) regimes (Nelson & Winter, 77) trajectories (Dosi,
82)
Realities of Innovation
unproblematic
problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
- Socrates, Lao Tzu, Knight, Keynes, Shackle, Collingridge, Smithson, Ravetz, Wynne ...
RISK
UNCERTAINTY
engineered components closed deterministic systems high frequency incidents familiar contexts
open dynamic systems low frequency events human factors changing contexts
INCERTITUDE
Beyond Risk contrasting aspects of ‘incertitude’
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
knowledge about possibilities
- Socrates, Lao Tzu, Knight, Keynes, Shackle, Collingridge, Smithson, Ravetz, Wynne ...
RISK
UNCERTAINTY
AMBIGUITY
IGNORANCE
engineered components closed deterministic systems high frequency incidents familiar contexts
open dynamic systems low frequency events human factors changing contexts
defining pros & cons contrasting impacts
diverse perspectives alternative options
novel agents or vectors surprising conditions new alternatives
wilful blinkers
INCERTITUDE
Beyond Risk contrasting aspects of ‘incertitude’
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
knowledge about possibilities
RISK
UNCERTAINTY
AMBIGUITY aggregative analysis patronage, pressure political closure
insurance limitsreductive modelsstochastic reasoning
` science-based policy
institutional remits
political cultureliability protection
harm definitions indicators / metrics IGNORANCE
risk focus is shaped by power – Beck’s “organised irresponsibility”
Pressures for Closure institutional drivers of risk assessment
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
knowledge about possibilities
RISK
UNCERTAINTY
AMBIGUITY
IGNORANCE
aggregated probabilities optimisation algorithms synthetic decision trees Delphi / Foresight predictive modelling
Methods for ‘Opening Up’
precautionary methods ‘open up’ appreciation of incertitude
precaution and participation are about rigour
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
AMBIGUITY
IGNORANCE
RISK
UNCERTAINTY
aggregated probabilities optimisation algorithms synthetic decision trees Delphi / Foresight predictive modelling
burden of evidence onus of persuasion uncertainty factors decision heuristics interval analysis sensitivity testing
knowledge about possibilities
Methods for ‘Opening Up’
precautionary methods ‘open up’ appreciation of incertitude
precaution and participation are about rigour
scenarios / backcasting interactive modelling
mapping / Q-methods participatory deliberation
democratic procedures
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
AMBIGUITY
IGNORANCE
RISK
UNCERTAINTY
burden of evidence onus of persuasion uncertainty factors decision heuristics interval analysis sensitivity testing
knowledge about possibilities
aggregated probabilities optimisation algorithms synthetic decision trees Delphi / Foresight predictive modelling
Methods for ‘Opening Up’
precautionary methods ‘open up’ appreciation of incertitude
precaution and participation are about rigour
unproblematic
unproblematic problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
AMBIGUITY
IGNORANCE
RISK
knowledge about possibilities
Methods for ‘Opening Up’
responsive civic research curiosity monitoring,
evidentiary presumptions flexibility, reversibility
diversity, resilience, agility, adaptability
scenarios / backcasting interactive modelling
mapping / Q-methods participatory deliberation
democratic procedures
problematic UNCERTAINTY
aggregated probabilities optimisation algorithms synthetic decision trees Delphi / Foresight predictive modelling
precautionary methods ‘open up’ appreciation of incertitude
precaution and participation are about rigour
burden of evidence onus of persuasion uncertainty factors decision heuristics interval analysis sensitivity testing
unproblematic
problematic
unproblematic problematic
knowledge about likelihoods
precautionary appraisal
participatory deliberation
definitive prescription
RISK
UNCERTAINTY
AMBIGUITY
IGNORANCE
knowledge about possibilities
Op
tion
s
Op
tion
s
humility reflexivity
adaptive learning
sustainability
safety
‘opening up’: options, issues, approaches, possibilities, perspectives
‘Opening Up’ Incertitude precaution and participation are about rigour
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance MTBE PCBs, DES; human systems; experimental lock-in
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
CFCs, EDCs, GMOs: use broader, open methods reviewed,
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation MTBE, CFCs: special vulnerability under
known threats
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
pro-active research prioritise open monitoring & surveillance & targeted experiment TBT, BSE; asbestos, C6H6, PCBs: monitoring over
models:
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
deliberate argument levels of proof, burden of evidence, onus of persuasion antimicrobials: acknowledge values, conflicts, politics,
power
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
pro-active research prioritise open monitoring & surveillance & targeted experiment
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
alternative options pros, cons, justifications for range of options & substitutes BAT, BPM: note systematic blinkers on
superior approaches
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
pro-active research prioritise open monitoring & surveillance & targeted experiment
deliberate argument levels of proof, burden of evidence, onus of persuasion
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
transdisciplinarity collect all relevant knowledge, beyond ‘usual suspects’ MTBE; BSE: society, humanities, arts, … sceptics
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
pro-active research prioritise open monitoring & surveillance & targeted experiment
deliberate argument levels of proof, burden of evidence, onus of persuasion
alternative options pros, cons, justifications for range of options & substitutes
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
engage public independence through pluralism and robustness on values not as political correctness, but rigour of framings
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance ; ‘
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
pro-active research prioritise open monitoring & surveillance & targeted experiment
deliberate argument levels of proof, burden of evidence, onus of persuasion
alternative options pros, cons, justifications for range of options & substitutes
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
,
transdisciplinarity collect all relevant knowledge, beyond ‘usual suspects’
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance ; ‘
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
pro-active research prioritise open monitoring & surveillance & targeted experiment
deliberate argument levels of proof, burden of evidence, onus of persuasion
alternative options pros, cons, justifications for range of options & substitutes
engage public independence through pluralism and robustness on values
Precaution, Participation, Adaptive Learning (cf: EEA, 2001)
explicit incertitude explicitly engage with uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance
,
‘open up’ politics ‘plural conditional’ (not unitary definitive) inputs to policy debate
from CGE technologies to CGE democracies
transdisciplinarity collect all relevant knowledge, beyond ‘usual suspects’
Narrow ‘decision rules’ to broad, open ‘technology democracy’
Catalysing New Political Spacescombining scientific rigour and democratic legitimacy
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory / deliberative
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory / deliberative
citizen’s juries
Catalysing New Political Spacescombining scientific rigour and democratic legitimacy
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory / deliberative
citizen’s juries
stakeholder negotiation
cost-benefit analysis
risk assessment structured
interviews
citizen’s juries
open hearings
Catalysing New Political Spacescombining scientific rigour and democratic legitimacy
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory / deliberative
citizen’s juries
decision analysis
stakeholder negotiation
sensitivity analysis
cost-benefit analysis
risk assessment
interactive modelling
structured interviews
narrative-based participant observation
multi-site ethnographic-
methods
citizen’s juries
consensus conference
open hearings
dissenting opinions
Catalysing New Political Spacescombining scientific rigour and democratic legitimacy
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory / deliberative
citizen’s juries
decision analysis
participatory rural appraisal
stakeholder negotiation
q-method
sensitivity analysis
deliberative mappingdo-it-yourself
panels
open space
cost-benefit analysis
risk assessment
interactive modelling
structured interviews
narrative-based participant observation
multi-site ethnographic-
methods
citizen’s juries
consensus conference
open hearings
dissenting opinions
multi-criteria mapping
scenario workshops
Catalysing New Political Spacescombining scientific rigour and democratic legitimacy
acknowledging inherently politics in geoengineering governance
‘Governance’ – Know Thyself!
Geoengineering Challenges
Question not only Knowledge – but knowledge production
Seriously Explore Choice – branching path-dependencies
Be aware of Power – in subject as well as object of scrutiny
Fallacies of Control – affect both sides of geoengineering debate
Rigour of Precaution – not emotive fear; reason under uncertainty
Open up and Broaden out – inputs and outputs to options appraisal
Urgency and Robustness – democracy and science reconciled