IntSci Moderators: Topic One introduction
1 - 3 March 2006
Dear IntSci E-conference participants,
In the conference framework E-mail we suggested a series of topics for discussion We have planned this first topic to provide a way for getting a common language amongst all the participants. We also suggested three questions that you could use as a guide for structuring your thoughts. We appreciate that many of you may have additional comments to make. We plan for discussion on this first topic to run from today through to the close of Friday 3 March.
In this e-mail we restate the first topic and questions. We also provide some introduction material to set a wider context. We have endeavoured to find some on-line links that can be used to access more information where participants might want it.
You can send a message to all the participants by sending an e-mail to IntSci@learningforsustainability.net. We look forward to your participation.
Topic 1: Understanding the context for Integrated Science and its emerging shape
(Wed 1 Mar - Fri 3 Mar)
Classical science and conventional problem-solving techniques were labeled "normal science" by Kuhn (1970). However experiences over the past two decades, alongside emergent thinking in fields such as complex systems theory, have provided insights that suggest normal science is insufficient (though still useful) in dealing with interlinked and socially-contested issues. In 1993 Funtowicz and Ravetz proposed the concept of "Post-Normal Science" to deal with problems outside the realm of normal science - a realm where objectivity is not possible, prediction and control are limited, and where society and politics must play a key role.
There are moreover, a number of strands of work that address the challenges of more closely linking science with management and policy to address complex real world problems. Some of these seem to have emerged from a review of science generally. Such as “Mode 2 science – the new production of knowledge” which is a concept which supports a network of thinking and conversation in this area. It was first coined by Helga Nowotny and colleagues in 1994, and a good introduction to their work can be found in an on-line SciDev editorial (2005) and related background material http://www.scidev.net/Editorials/index.cfm?fuseaction=readeditorials&itemid=144&language=1. “Sustainability science” describes a similarly new approach to using science that was developed by group of leading thinkers at a workshop in Friiberg (2000) http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/BCSIA/sust.nsf/pubs/pub3 .
Other researchers have developed concepts and approaches that have emerged within particular sectors. Niels Roling (1994) uses the concept of constructivism to argue for the need for science to move towards a more participatory paradigm (http://library.wur.nl/ejae/v2n4-5.html ). In this paper he suggests the need to more interactively engage with rural people, and develop stronger links between the natural and social sciences. A similar notion of “interactive” research is developed in a catchment management sense by Ian Calder (2002) in his on-line journal article “Forests and hydrological services: Reconciling public and science perceptions” (http://www.luwrr.com ). In biodiversity management this new approach for science can be seen to be nested within Kenton Miller’s (1996) characterization of “bioregional management” http://pubs.wri.org/pubs_content_text.cfm?ContentID=521 .
Yet another group of conversations radiate out from concepts referring to these new approaches in practice. “Social learning” is a concept that is increasingly being looked at as an approach to support constructive change in environmental management. For example see the European Social Learning for Integrated Management (SLIM) project http://slim.open.ac.uk/page.cfm. “Adaptive management” is another approach that sets out to support closer links between science and policy, through the use of experiential learning. Good on-line sources for information and networks in this area can be found through the Ecology and Society journal http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/ and the Resillience Alliance http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/ .
In the light of the above outline of the emerging field of Integrated Science we suggest the following questions as a starting point for this first topic ….
- Question 1. There are a number of related terms around (e.g. Sustainability science, Mode II science, Integrated science), are we using different words to describe the same concept, or are there important and useful distinctions?
- Question 2. Theory and practice around Integrated Science approaches is emerging from often radically different backgrounds (convergent evolution), how do the different trajectories effect the theory and application?
- Question 3. Is this a new and different form of science and do you need new knowledge and skills to practice it?
We look forward to your participation. To make a posting to the discussion just send an e-mail to IntSci@learningforsustainability.net.
If you have questions, concerns or suggestions about the operation of this list please feel free to contact us directly.
best regards
Will Allen, Chrys Horn & Margaret Kilvington
IntSci conference managers
E-mail: intsci-owner@learningforsustainability.net
http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/research/social/IntSci_info.asp