Difference between revisions of "Key recommendations and invitations for involvement"

From EcoliseWiki
(pasted in text from other page)
 
m (General Recommendations)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==General Recommendations==
 
==General Recommendations==
(no place yet)
 
 
*Policy
 
*Policy
 
**"A CBI is difficult to define unambiguously, an important message for policymakers. What the analysis on regional characterisation(s) confirms is that CBIs are everywhere and operate for many reasons. CBIs emerge in varied environments ranging from urban to rural, also with large differences in population density. Within the case study selection stage it became apparent that local, contextual factors influence whether and how initiatives emerge and develop, yet another important message for policymakers." <ref name="multiple TESS D4.1"/>
 
**"A CBI is difficult to define unambiguously, an important message for policymakers. What the analysis on regional characterisation(s) confirms is that CBIs are everywhere and operate for many reasons. CBIs emerge in varied environments ranging from urban to rural, also with large differences in population density. Within the case study selection stage it became apparent that local, contextual factors influence whether and how initiatives emerge and develop, yet another important message for policymakers." <ref name="multiple TESS D4.1"/>
Line 32: Line 31:
  
 
**"To enable second-order transformation and climate research, extensive and concerted efforts will be needed that challenge current systems and structures of the way in which knowledge is produced and used. This is a major challenge given the dominance offirst-order approaches and powerful disciplines which are backed up by well-established assumptions, structures, institutions andfinance mechanisms. Given the need for system transformation to enable greater engagement with second-order science, joint action at four levels will be required. First, support is needed for innovative researchers to actively practice and further develop second-order science as a viable and mainstreamed complement to the practices offirst-order research. This would include initiatives such as building knowledge networks of champions of innovation; directly funding action-oriented research; strategically funding research on research (e.g. how to more effectively combine normative dimensions and rigour) and providing safe spaces at the boundary of science and society to test and apply innovations. Second, at a political and structural level bold and strategic action of politicians and funders is needed to pioneer and provide the supportive conditions necessary for second-order transformation research toflourish. Third, intermediary actors, such as advisory bodies (e.g. the newly formed International Council for Science and WBGU), will be required to strategically mediate between coal-face and political levels to further enhance enabling conditions. Finally, work is needed at public levels to increase demand for the co-production of action-oriented research (e.g. through engaging student projects in local communities or participatory forms of research) to help create a new social contract that provides greater support for action-oriented research [171,172]." <ref name="Multiple Ioan et al 2017"/>
 
**"To enable second-order transformation and climate research, extensive and concerted efforts will be needed that challenge current systems and structures of the way in which knowledge is produced and used. This is a major challenge given the dominance offirst-order approaches and powerful disciplines which are backed up by well-established assumptions, structures, institutions andfinance mechanisms. Given the need for system transformation to enable greater engagement with second-order science, joint action at four levels will be required. First, support is needed for innovative researchers to actively practice and further develop second-order science as a viable and mainstreamed complement to the practices offirst-order research. This would include initiatives such as building knowledge networks of champions of innovation; directly funding action-oriented research; strategically funding research on research (e.g. how to more effectively combine normative dimensions and rigour) and providing safe spaces at the boundary of science and society to test and apply innovations. Second, at a political and structural level bold and strategic action of politicians and funders is needed to pioneer and provide the supportive conditions necessary for second-order transformation research toflourish. Third, intermediary actors, such as advisory bodies (e.g. the newly formed International Council for Science and WBGU), will be required to strategically mediate between coal-face and political levels to further enhance enabling conditions. Finally, work is needed at public levels to increase demand for the co-production of action-oriented research (e.g. through engaging student projects in local communities or participatory forms of research) to help create a new social contract that provides greater support for action-oriented research [171,172]." <ref name="Multiple Ioan et al 2017"/>
 
  
 
*Policy recommendations from TESS <ref name ="multiple TESS Final Report"/>  
 
*Policy recommendations from TESS <ref name ="multiple TESS Final Report"/>  
 
**"Based on the results of the TESS project we extracted policy-relevant information, recommendations and guidelines for policy-makers. The main policy recommendations which emerged from the research are: the need to ensure longterm predictable policies; to improve information, transparency, accountability in policy-making; the need to simplify procedures and bureaucracy; to harmonize laws and regulations; to ensure coherence in the implementation of policies; the proposal to establish or to improve a permanent dialogue between CBIs and public authorities; to remove barriers many CBIs face in their access to public funding; to improve CBIs’ access to assets and space; to increase training information and knowledge for and around CBIs; to ‘invert the mindset’, ie. to acknowledge the role of CBIs as a source of political empowerment, rather than as something that needs public support or top down encouragement. Some of these policy recommendations regard general policy issues which turned out to be, however, particularly problematic for CBIs, and were discussed in terms of the specific problems they pose for community organisations in the six city-regions explored throughout the project, referring to several examples of ‘best’ and ‘worst’ practices." <ref name ="multiple TESS Final Report"/>  
 
**"Based on the results of the TESS project we extracted policy-relevant information, recommendations and guidelines for policy-makers. The main policy recommendations which emerged from the research are: the need to ensure longterm predictable policies; to improve information, transparency, accountability in policy-making; the need to simplify procedures and bureaucracy; to harmonize laws and regulations; to ensure coherence in the implementation of policies; the proposal to establish or to improve a permanent dialogue between CBIs and public authorities; to remove barriers many CBIs face in their access to public funding; to improve CBIs’ access to assets and space; to increase training information and knowledge for and around CBIs; to ‘invert the mindset’, ie. to acknowledge the role of CBIs as a source of political empowerment, rather than as something that needs public support or top down encouragement. Some of these policy recommendations regard general policy issues which turned out to be, however, particularly problematic for CBIs, and were discussed in terms of the specific problems they pose for community organisations in the six city-regions explored throughout the project, referring to several examples of ‘best’ and ‘worst’ practices." <ref name ="multiple TESS Final Report"/>  
  
 
 
 
To see:
 
 
See <ref>Durrant, R., 2015. How can local initiatives help accelerate progress to sustainability in a socially inclusive manner? A case study of the Brighton and Hove Food Partnership.</ref>
 
See <ref>Durrant, R., 2015. How can local initiatives help accelerate progress to sustainability in a socially inclusive manner? A case study of the Brighton and Hove Food Partnership.</ref>
 
SEE
 

Revision as of 19:27, 5 July 2018

General Recommendations

  • Policy
    • "A CBI is difficult to define unambiguously, an important message for policymakers. What the analysis on regional characterisation(s) confirms is that CBIs are everywhere and operate for many reasons. CBIs emerge in varied environments ranging from urban to rural, also with large differences in population density. Within the case study selection stage it became apparent that local, contextual factors influence whether and how initiatives emerge and develop, yet another important message for policymakers." [1]
    • "ARTS suggest a huge potential to contribute to sustainability transitions but at the same time dominant practices, policies and institutions are far away from realizing this potential." [2]
    • "Long-term and predictable policies that facilitate their work are therefore helpful," [2]
    • "Even more important though, is enhancing the understanding of the newly emerging forms of socio-economic organization, their diverse logics and multiple strategies towards achieving a low-carbon Europe among policy-makers and public institutions." [2]
    • "Public funding therefore needs sensitivity to the context." [2]
    • "Some cases indicate that network hubs that integrate or moderate between local initiatives and are led by experienced and well-networked managers may be helpful and thus should be supported."[2]
    • "This also implies an increased need for openness towards non-quantifiable results and impacts, as well as multiple, non-monolithic ways of perceiving the contributions and success of local initiatives." [2]
    • "Finding ways to better understand the broader societal values produced (health benefits, social engagement, greening of neighbourhoods, lifestyle changes, awareness raising and so on) vis-à-vis the detrimental effects of dominant practices might help to create a better understanding of the value of transition initiatives as well as support more coherent policies to their support." [2]
    • "Formulate transformative policy mixes" [2]
    • "Policy environments characterized by transparency, accountability, coherence (between different political and institutional bodies, laws and regulations), and simplified procedures and bureaucracy, are found to strongly benefit the emergence and performance of local initiatives."[2]
    • "Establishing a permanent dialogue between policy-makers or public institutions and local initiatives that are interested in engaging in such a dialogue could be beneficial in terms of designing and testing scenarios for a low-carbon Europe." [2]
    • From TESS:

the need to ensure longterm predictable policies; to improve information, transparency, accountability in policy-making; the need to simplify procedures and bureaucracy; to harmonize laws and regulations; to ensure coherence in the implementation of policies; the proposal to establish or to improve a permanent dialogue between CBIs and public authorities; to remove barriers many CBIs face in their access to public funding; to improve CBIs’ access to assets and space; to increase training information and knowledge for and around CBIs; to ‘invert the mindset’, ie. to acknowledge the role of CBIs as a source of political empowerment, rather than as something that needs public support or top down encouragement. Some of these policy recommendations regard general policy issues which turned out to be, however, particularly problematic for CBIs, and were discussed in terms of the specific problems they pose for community organisations in the six city-regions explored throughout the project, referring to several examples of ‘best’ and ‘worst’ practices." [3]

  • Practice
    • "In fact, evidence from the TESS project shows that replication strategies are often preferred over up-scaling as they are less risky, demanding, and make it easier to take local specificities into concern." [2]
    • "In this regard, results from the ARTS project show that the strategy "instrumentalising" can create a tension that the practice and products of initiatives may be objectified as 'project outcomes' and lose their legitimacy in the community." [2]
    • "Practitioners may also take a much more active role in research as they are often in better positions to learn about practice than an external researcher [120]. They can play important roles in framing questions, developing methodologies or even conducting research [101], such as through Science Shop arrangements, (http://www.livingknowledge.org/livingknowledge/scienceshops), Public Laboratory Networks (http://publiclaboratory.org/) or in participatory action research and evaluation [127,128]." [4]
  • Research
    • "Science needs to shift from only understanding the problems to prescribing and identifying solutions together with societal actors." [2]
    • "Even more important though, is enhancing the understanding of the newly emerging forms of socio-economic organization, their diverse logics and multiple strategies towards achieving a low-carbon Europe among policy-makers and public institutions." [2]
    • "This also implies an increased need for openness towards non-quantifiable results and impacts, as well as multiple, non-monolithic ways of perceiving the contributions and success of local initiatives." [2]
    • "Furthermore it requires a high regard for the processes rather than the outcomes." [2]
    • "it is fundamental to create and maintain new collaborations and synergies between researchers and all the others actors of society; from governmental authorities to transition initiatives and local businesses." [2]
  • "Finding ways to better understand the broader societal values produced (health benefits, social engagement, greening of neighbourhoods, lifestyle changes, awareness raising and so on) vis-à-vis the detrimental effects of dominant practices might help to create a better understanding of the value of transition initiatives as well as support more coherent policies to their support." [2]
    • "To enable second-order transformation and climate research, extensive and concerted efforts will be needed that challenge current systems and structures of the way in which knowledge is produced and used. This is a major challenge given the dominance offirst-order approaches and powerful disciplines which are backed up by well-established assumptions, structures, institutions andfinance mechanisms. Given the need for system transformation to enable greater engagement with second-order science, joint action at four levels will be required. First, support is needed for innovative researchers to actively practice and further develop second-order science as a viable and mainstreamed complement to the practices offirst-order research. This would include initiatives such as building knowledge networks of champions of innovation; directly funding action-oriented research; strategically funding research on research (e.g. how to more effectively combine normative dimensions and rigour) and providing safe spaces at the boundary of science and society to test and apply innovations. Second, at a political and structural level bold and strategic action of politicians and funders is needed to pioneer and provide the supportive conditions necessary for second-order transformation research toflourish. Third, intermediary actors, such as advisory bodies (e.g. the newly formed International Council for Science and WBGU), will be required to strategically mediate between coal-face and political levels to further enhance enabling conditions. Finally, work is needed at public levels to increase demand for the co-production of action-oriented research (e.g. through engaging student projects in local communities or participatory forms of research) to help create a new social contract that provides greater support for action-oriented research [171,172]." [4]
  • Policy recommendations from TESS [3]
    • "Based on the results of the TESS project we extracted policy-relevant information, recommendations and guidelines for policy-makers. The main policy recommendations which emerged from the research are: the need to ensure longterm predictable policies; to improve information, transparency, accountability in policy-making; the need to simplify procedures and bureaucracy; to harmonize laws and regulations; to ensure coherence in the implementation of policies; the proposal to establish or to improve a permanent dialogue between CBIs and public authorities; to remove barriers many CBIs face in their access to public funding; to improve CBIs’ access to assets and space; to increase training information and knowledge for and around CBIs; to ‘invert the mindset’, ie. to acknowledge the role of CBIs as a source of political empowerment, rather than as something that needs public support or top down encouragement. Some of these policy recommendations regard general policy issues which turned out to be, however, particularly problematic for CBIs, and were discussed in terms of the specific problems they pose for community organisations in the six city-regions explored throughout the project, referring to several examples of ‘best’ and ‘worst’ practices." [3]

See [5]

  1. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named multiple TESS D4.1
  2. 2.00 2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named multiple TESS, ARTS & PATHWAYS
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named multiple TESS Final Report
  4. 4.0 4.1 Fazey, I., Schäpke, N., Caniglia, G., Patterson, J., Hultman, J., van Mierlo, B., Säwe, F., Wiek, A., Wittmayer, J., Aldunce, P., Al Waer, H., Battacharya, N., Bradbury, H., Carmen, E., Colvin, J., Cvitanovic, C., D’Souza, M., Gopel, M., Goldstein, B., Hämäläinen, T., Harper, G., Henfrey, T., Hodgson, A., Howden, M.S., Kerr, A., Klaes, M., Lyon, C., Midgley, G., Moser, S., Mukherjee, N., Müller, K., O’Brien, K., O’Connell, D.A., Olsson, P., Page, G., Reed, M.S., Searle, B., Silvestri, G., Spaiser, V., Strasser, T., Tschakert, P., Uribe-Calvo, N., Waddell, S., Rao-Williams, J., Wise, R., Wolstenholme, R., Woods, M., Wyborn, C., 2018. Ten essentials for action-oriented and second order energy transitions, transformations and climate change research. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 40, 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.11.026
  5. Durrant, R., 2015. How can local initiatives help accelerate progress to sustainability in a socially inclusive manner? A case study of the Brighton and Hove Food Partnership.