_ The Zero Emissions Strategy Conference

The Podium, 27 August

Page Contents:

• Podium Presentation
  
• Your comments and discussion of this presentation

XXXXXXXX careful -- need ot take this from the topc again also link to some of the other stuff, indluing Podium peices. As we look to the future, beyond the first stages and accomplishments of ZERI over the last few years, it may be useful to ponder what specifically might follow on from here, both at the UNU and IAS and elsewhere, from a somehat different persepctive. From the outside looking in, as it were.

What is going to take place in and through "ZERI II" (or whatever it is eventually called) is of course one of the main preoccupations that have led to the present conference, virtual though it may be. Let me share with you a few of my ideas and prejudices on just this subject, in an attempt to open up the debate which I really think needs to be fully and openly engaged.

My immediate inspiration for this 'external view' of the ZERI II problematique came from a paper that arrived here this morning and that will tomorrow be posted in its entirely on this Podium. Its title: Mensch and Mesh: Perspectives on Industrial Ecology© . The author, Matthias Ruth, opens with these words: "A new systems view of industrial processes is emerging that attempts to relate the activities of diverse businesses with each other and their environment in order to optimize the use of materials and energy and reduce environmental impacts of the economy. This emerging industrial ecology has far reaching implications that range from product design and technology choice to consumer behavior, market dynamics, and institutional design. Most attention to date has been given to product and production process related issues. Albeit by definition an integral part of industrial ecology, few analyses exist of the relationships between technologies, industries and socioeconomic institutions."

Now, it might on the surface seem fair enough if we were to jump to a conclusion: for example, since the UNU is by name a university, then perhaps the most appropriate thing for it to do next, if indeed it is going to extend its ZERI activities into the future (recalling that it is by name a 'research initiative'), will be to organise yet more "research", and/or perhaps somethign along the lines of "education". Maybe so, but let's reflect on this a bit first before jumping in with both feet.

Studies, reports, debriefings, conferences, and "more research" have been the main tools of trade of university educated policy advisors over the last three or so decades. All are of course highly respectable and have their uses -- but also they have their limits and abuses. Given these limits and the fact that the issues that bring us here are, by and large, complex, systemic, and further that they involve reconciling the positions of groups and interests which are usually far from identical and often highly conflicted, I would like to suggest respectfully that as we seek to build on what has thus far been accomplished within the broad movements outlined here we should be prepared to consider giving place to other less "academic" approaches to knowledge-building, communications, conflict resolution and, finally, to the mobilization of opinion and resources that is now required.

Instead of always accepting automatically that the right next move is to generate yet more paper (and that in a society that increasingly won't read, never mind act on what they read!), may I propose that we should now be giving more importance to such things as......

• Standing around and observing carefully what is really going on (as opposed to what is perhaps being reported by a self-interested source)
• Insisting always on the use of simple language and as much common sense as we can muster (both of which all too often being rare commodities in government and specialized academic circles)
• Not excluding humor, wit, jokes, irony from policy discussions (& even the possibility of bad taste, if that's what it takes to increase the level of critical thinking, perspective and creativity)
• Using photographs, photo essays, film, architectural renderings, video scenarios, cartoons, posters, drawings and other forms of lively graphic expression and characterization -- to impart greater depth and impact to the issues and realities being faced
• Using these techniques to illustrate alternative futures and policy options, in ways which render them striking and understandable (as opposed to the usual and appalling: high, medium and low, or "business as usual" bromides)
• Polls, surveys, feedback monitoring schemes which improve awareness of the diversity of needs and views
• Creative use of small samples (cheaper, faster and sometimes even more accurate)
• Imaginative linking of quantitative analysis with more vivid information concerning the real impacts on individuals, families, firms & communities
• Socioeconomic analysis, studies and portrayals of actual daily life experience
• "Day in the life of ... " profiles, scenarios, stories, rapportages & other "literary" treatments
• Books and articles on these challenging issues aimed at informing and involving the general public (as opposed to only the usual specialist or academic readers)
• Editorials, columns and op-ed pieces (carefully written) to hammer the key points home
• Games, educational and others, using a wide variety of media
• Contests, competitions to elicit broader, more vigorous and more imaginative participation in all stages
• More brilliant use of "commercials", spots, etc., to achieve educational and social objectives
• Events, books, images, programs aimed at informing and socializing children
• Finding ways to involve children actively both in the collective learning experience and in the solution process
• Use of the school system as a resource, to carry out surveys, mini-studies, demonstrations, parent education and activism on these issues, etc.
• Using town halls, libraries, museums and other public places including the streets themselves as centers of exposition and public debate
• New techniques of knowledge building (including opening up of the policy process to public participants in new and more far-reaching ways)
• Active networking at all levels of society, and using an increasing variety of media
• Electronic bulletin boards, networking, conferencing, new group work/groupware techniques
• Use of simulations, artificial intelligence, etc. to encourage depiction, emergence, and collective consideration of broader solution sets
• Innovative techniques of conflict resolution (including iterative adversary programs using video, audio and other feedback techniques)
• Town meetings & other open public fora of debate, consensus building & group decision
• Process-oriented projects involving the semi-structured use of collective tools such as brainstorming sessions, roundtables, confrontations of opposing points of view-all oriented to attain specific objectives
• Demonstrations of new ways of doing things (properly prepared, carefully monitored & flexibly fine-tuned for results)
• New partnerships bringing together representatives of business and industry in new relationships with government, the volunteer sector, organized labor, consumer groups, and the scientific, research and educational communities in actual hands-on demonstrations.
• Cross-project and cross-country support by policy gurus, networks & public interest consortia
• New partnerships with radio, television and the media, which increase public awareness of both issues and trade-offs, as well as direct public involvement in the solution process
• Active investigation & learning from honest, publicly available post mortems of project experience, both successful & other

Of course you may argue that all of these are in fact elements or concomitants of the kinds of research that now need to be engaged. If so, it is not I who will argue with you. But if it is 'research' it is also research with some major new wrinkles, and these are the kinds of values and approaches which I for one hope we shall be seeing more of in the future, including in any eventual ZERI follow-up.

Which leaves us with the future of ZERI-2, and for that I think we still have to keep our thinking caps on in the closing days of this collective brasinstorming effort that is our virutal conference. It is clear to me that there are a number of pure research tasks that are still much needed to prepare the ground, HOwever, I for one would like to see the UNU/IAS also take a somewhat more activist stance on these important issues from a perspective of policy and practice, drawing on some of the techniques and attitudes which are set out in the above little list

More research yes!, but also other things that a great university has to do to remain great, i.e., never forget that it is also responsible for what is going on in its own backyard. Thus, Yale has to be concerned about New Haven, Oxford University about what is going on in the town of Oxford, and the UNU for what is going on in its own backyard... well the world of course.

Your comments?

Back to top

__ Commentary & Discussion of This Paper (Once you have registered)

__ Go to Other Podium Presentations

Back to top