Mario Giampietro - ICTA, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona & ICREA

The EU project MAGIC

Moving to Adaptive Governance in Complexity: Informing the NEXUS

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme - grant agreement No. 689669

MAGIC project context

• MAGIC - Moving towards Adaptive Governance in Complexity: Informing Nexus Security

• EU Horizon 2020 project

• Call: Water Innovation: Boosting its value for Europe (H2020-WATER-2014/2015)

• Topic: Integrated approaches to food security, low-carbon energy, sustainable water management and climate change mitigation

• Funding: 7.5 M€ (81FTE)

• Duration: 4 years (2016-06-01 to 2020-05-31 2020-09-30)

• Partners: 9

• Countries: 6

The Consortium

www.facebook.com/MagicNexusEu/

#MAGIC_NEXUS @MAGIC_NEXUS

magic-nexus.eu

MAGIC - doing things differently

Arguing that the answers we get to policy questions are the product of the way we carry out analysis

Using ideas of Societal Metabolism to make a “Quality Check” using the Multi-Scale Integrated Analysis of Societal and Ecosystem Metabolism approach (MuSIASEM)

Quantitative Story Telling

We suggest the use of transdisciplinary research within the post-normal science approach POLICY DOMAINS

energy, water, CAP (food), biodiversity, circular economy

INNOVATIONSbiofuels, electric cars, shale gas, desalination, green bonds

Explanation narratives

HOW will it be achieved

Quantitative Story-Telling

Justification narratives

WHY should we do something

Normative narrativesWHAT should be achieved

identifyingconcerns

prioritizingconcerns

framing ofthe problem

identifying relevant knowledge claims

generatingscientific evidence

HEGEMONIZATION UNFAIRNESS

POLITICALSPHERE

UNCERTAINTY CARELESSNESS(poor analysis)

SCIENTIFICSPHERE

HYPOCOGNITION(bad framing)

THE QUALITY OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGED USED FOR GOVERNANCE

POST-NORMAL SCIENCE

Impredicative lock-in

Justificationnarratives

WHY should we dosomething

Normativenarratives

WHAT should beachieved

Explanationnarratives

HOW will it beachieved

Analysis of policy narratives to avoid the “epistemic box” attractor

An example of normative hypocognition

Is a radical decarbonization of our economy in 30 years possible?

Checking the quality of the normative narratives

the economy has to jump, as soon as possible into a massive generation of electricity using alternative (intermittent) sources

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-germany-emissions/ The Budget Committee of the German Parliament

They bring you the pizza eachworking day for lunch at a priceof 8 €/pizza

They bring you the pizza, within30 minutes, whenever you wantat a price of 12 €/pizza

They bring you the pizza only when they like (and often they don’t)at a price of 5 €/pizza

Intermittent

(PV, wind)

Checking the quality of the explanation narratives

“when the cost of the kWh of alternative sources will be more competitive their use will scale-up replacing the conventional sources of electricity”

Base

loaders

Peakers

Data source: Enipedia - 2015

Acknowledging the existence of two types of power capacity used so far to

produce electricity – loaders and peakers – with different characteristics

Renner A. and Giampietro M. (2020) Discourses of European electricity decarbonization: Contesting narrative credibility and legitimacy with quantitative story-telling - Energy Research & Social Science Vol 59 -101279

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101279

Lessons learned in the MAGIC journey:POST-NORMAL SCIENCE in action . . .

identifyingconcerns

prioritizingconcerns

framing ofthe problem

identifying relevant knowledge claims

extended peer community extended peer community

orthodox analysiswithin differentepistemic boxes

generatingscientific evidence

generatingscientific evidence

generatingscientific evidence

generatingscientific evidence

Quantitative Story-Telling across epistemic boxes

Fitnessfor purpose

?

POST-NORMAL SCIENCE

The 3 lenses used to check the quality of governance for sustainability

#1 - Checking the quality of the framing

Who have prioritized the chosen concerns?How have they been chosen? Why have they been chosen?

Whose concerns are acknowledged?Whose concerns are ignored?Whose concerns will be addressed first?

What are the concerns to be addressed?What is the priority given to existing concerns?

JUSTIFICATION NARRATIVESPRIORITIZING CONCERNS

#2 - Checking the quality of theproposed policies

* Are they feasible?(compatible with external limits)* Are they viable?(compatible with internal limits)

* What are the gains and losses across the various indicators of performance (impact matrix)* Who are the winners and losers among the various social actors(equity matrix)

How do these policies look when considering an evolutionary view?

NORMATIVE NARRATIVESFRAMING PROBLEMS

#3 - Checking the quality of theprocess used to decide

What information is missing for a better informed decision?

Can we organize the availableinformation into a more robustdecision support tool?

Can we implement proceduresbased on participatory processes allowing a robust co-production of knowledge claims and a fairer deliberation?

EXPLANATION NARRATIVESIMPLEMENTING SOLUTIONS

“To make sense of the complexity of the world so that they can act, individuals and institutions need to develop simplified, self-consistent versions of that world. The process of doing so means that much of what is known about the world needs to be excluded from those versions, and in particular that knowledge which is in tension or outright contradiction with those versions must be expunged . . .”

dysfunctional cases of uncomfortable knowledge have to be ignored in the official story-telling

We have to contrast “socially constructed ignorance”by flagging the importance of uncomfortable knowledge

Rayner, S., 2012. “Uncomfortable knowledge: the social construction of ignorance in science and environmental policy discourses” Economy and Society, 41(1): 107-125.

Knowledge Gaps in quantitative analysis of sustainability

The models used to measure sustainability progress are still tainted by the simplifications associated with reductionism – they address causality, a scale and a dimension at the time – and therefore they are in trouble when dealing with the nexus. This type of scientific input enhances the silo-governance syndrome.Moreover the usefulness of economic narratives in sustainability analysis is limited, because economic analysis assumes that it will always be possible to have prices. This translates into the assumption that the system will always operate in a situation of moderate scarcity (invisible hands and technical innovations will always substitute limiting resources). That is, economic narratives cannot be used to detect “real” sustainability troubles coming.

There is a lot of scientific knowledge relevant for the study of sustainability in quantitative terms:(1) relational analysis (how to establish quantitative link across scales); (2) non-equilibrium thermodynamics (the state-pressure relation); (3) energetics (rules for the accounting of transformations of energy forms); (4) hierarchy theory (how to handle semantic representations across scales); (5) biosemiotics (how to standardize the analysis of the process of self-organization of living systems); (6) theoretical ecology (the analysis of systemic properties such as resilience and adaptability); (7) Biophysical economics (studying the biophysical roots of the economic process). This wealth of knowledge is totally ignored - UNCOMFORTABLE KNOWLEDGE - in favor of simplistic models quite poor in semantic entailments.

Thank you for your attention!

The present work reflects only the author's view and the Funding Agency can not be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

http://magic-nexus.eu

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme - grant agreement No. 689669.

https://www.facebook.com/MagicNexusEu/

#MAGIC_NEXUS @MAGIC_NEXUS

for more information visit our website