Pluralizing urban futures: A multicriteria mapping analysis of online taxis in Indonesia
In: Futures: the journal of policy, planning and futures studies, Band 154, S. 103260
In: Futures: the journal of policy, planning and futures studies, Band 154, S. 103260
In: International journal of sustainability in higher education, Band 24, Heft 8, S. 1949-1969
ISSN: 1758-6739
Purpose
This study aims to explore barriers and pathways to a whole-institution governance of sustainability within the working structures of universities.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper draws on multi-year interviews and hierarchical structure analysis of ten universities in Canada, the USA, Australia, Hong Kong, South Africa, Brazil, the UK and The Netherlands. The paper addresses existing literature that championed further integration between the two organizational sides of universities (academic and operations) and suggests approaches for better embedding sustainability into four primary domains of activity (education, research, campus operations and community engagement).
Findings
This research found that effective sustainability governance needs to recognise and reconcile distinct cultures, diverging accountability structures and contrasting manifestations of central-coordination and distributed-agency approaches characteristic of the university's operational and academic activities. The positionality of actors appointed to lead institution-wide embedding influenced which domain received most attention. The paper concludes that a whole-institution approach would require significant tailoring and adjustments on both the operational and academic sides to be successful.
Originality/value
Based on a review of sustainability activities at ten universities around the world, this paper provides a detailed analysis of the governance implications of integrating sustainability into the four domains of university activity. It discusses how best to work across the operational/academic divide and suggests principles for adopting a whole institution approach to sustainability.
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 133, S. 193-202
ISSN: 1462-9011
In the governance of urban sustainability transformations, participatory futures practices are increasingly popular. Yet there is a rising awareness that the success or failure of these practices depends on how they are staged and the context in which they are conducted. These contextual factors are often less than ideal, and futures practices take place at the crossroads of many pre-determined agendas and priorities. We distinguish four factors that shape the effects of participatory futures practices: 1) how the institutional landscape constrains or enables a project aimed at urban sustainability transformations; 2) the participatory culture surrounding the project; 3) the project design; and 4) the futures methods applied. We assess these factors in three cities within the European H2020 IRIS Smart Cities project. In each city, project members participated in sessions where they designed citizen engagement using a futures methodology: the novel Scope and Ladder models. Each city reflects a different combination of the four contextual factors. We find that space for exploration and re-imagining can be found and optimized under imperfect conditions. Drawing on the results of the three cases, we conclude with a set of recommendations for the funders, project members and futures organizers of urban sustainability transformation projects.
BASE
In: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/417638
The urban sustainability transformations that are urgently needed will have significant effects on the daily lives of city dwellers. As ways to imagine and co-design sustainable urban futures, experiments within the present-day urban environment are increasingly popular. This paper investigates how such an experimental approach can serve as the base of an applied urban futures game that enables its players to reflect on and imagine ways to address complex sustainability problems. We developed a large-scale mobile urban futures game, Utrecht2040, that provides its players with sustainability content, reflection, and motivation for action. The digital infrastructure of the game and large number of players provided unique opportunities for measuring outcomes. Our results indicate that this type of experimental gaming offers a new way for players to collect existing sustainable practices or 'seeds', and use them to collectively create glimpses into relevant sustainable urban futures. At the individual player level participants reported an increased understanding of sustainability and motivation to act. We conclude that large-scale collective experimental futures games in socio-spatial urban environments are a high-potential avenue for overcoming the "crisis of the imagination" by creating inclusive urban futures that inspire action.
BASE
In: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/418963
The urban sustainability transformations that are urgently needed will have significant effects on the daily lives of city dwellers. As ways to imagine and co-design sustainable urban futures, experiments within the present-day urban environment are increasingly popular. This paper investigates how such an experimental approach can serve as the base of an applied urban futures game that enables its players to reflect on and imagine ways to address complex sustainability problems. We developed a large-scale mobile urban futures game, Utrecht2040, that provides its players with sustainability content, reflection, and motivation for action. The digital infrastructure of the game and large number of players provided unique opportunities for measuring outcomes. Our results indicate that this type of experimental gaming offers a new way for players to collect existing sustainable practices or 'seeds', and use them to collectively create glimpses into relevant sustainable urban futures. At the individual player level participants reported an increased understanding of sustainability and motivation to act. We conclude that large-scale collective experimental futures games in socio-spatial urban environments are a high-potential avenue for overcoming the "crisis of the imagination" by creating inclusive urban futures that inspire action.
BASE
In: Futures, Band 135, S. 102858
Solar geoengineering is gaining prominence in climate change debates as an issue worth studying; for some it is even a potential future policy option. We argue here against this increasing normalization of solar geoengineering as a speculative part of the climate policy portfolio. We contend, in particular, that solar geoengineering at planetary scale is not governable in a globally inclusive and just manner within the current international political system. We therefore call upon governments and the United Nations to take immediate and effective political control over the development of solar geoengineering technologies.Specifically, we advocate for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering and outline the core elements of this proposal.
BASE
In: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/420885
Solar geoengineering is gaining prominence in climate change debates as an issue worth studying; for some it is even a potential future policy option. We argue here against this increasing normalization of solar geoengineering as a speculative part of the climate policy portfolio. We contend, in particular, that solar geoengineering at planetary scale is not governable in a globally inclusive and just manner within the current international political system. We therefore call upon governments and the United Nations to take immediate and effective political control over the development of solar geoengineering technologies. Specifically, we advocate for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering and outline the core elements of this proposal. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > International Policy Framework.
BASE
Solar geoengineering is gaining prominence in climate change debates as an issue worth studying; for some it is even a potential future policy option. We argue here against this increasing normalization of solar geoengineering as a speculative part of the climate policy portfolio. We contend, in particular, that solar geoengineering at planetary scale is not governable in a globally inclusive and just manner within the current international political system. We therefore call upon governments and the United Nations to take immediate and effective political control over the development of solar geoengineering technologies. Specifically, we advocate for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering and outline the core elements of this proposal.
BASE
Solar geoengineering is gaining prominence in climate change debates as an issue worth studying; for some it is even a potential future policy option. We argue here against this increasing normalization of solar geoengineering as a speculative part of the climate policy portfolio. We contend, in particular, that solar geoengineering at planetary scale is not governable in a globally inclusive and just manner within the current international political system. We therefore call upon governments and the United Nations to take immediate and effective political control over the development of solar geoengineering technologies. Specifically, we advocate for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering and outline the core elements of this proposal.
BASE
In: Prettner , R , Te Molder , H , Hajer , M A & Vliegenthart , R 2021 , ' Staging Expertise in Times of COVID-19 : An Analysis of the Science-Policy-Society Interface in the Dutch "intelligent Lockdown" ' , Frontiers in Communication , vol. 6 , no. July , 668862 , pp. 1-12 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.668862
The corona crisis of 2020 took many by surprise. Quite suddenly, politicians had to make drastic decisions to guarantee public health, affecting basic civil liberties. In justifying their decisions, politicians internationally reverted back to a direct staging of experts to legitimize their proposals for what internationally became known as the "lockdown". In this article we analyze the performance of the Dutch government that, early on, labeled its approach to COVID-19 as an "intelligent lockdown". Our analysis examines the dramaturgy of expertise during this period. We selected two interrelated "stages": the official press conferences, fully controlled by the government, and the responses on Twitter, as focal channel for critique from the general public, but also from opposition parties and (alleged) experts. 26 press conferences of the Dutch Prime Minister were analyzed and a search for the most popular posts on Twitter referring to the press conference(s) was carried out covering the period between March 6th and May 29th, 2020. The results show that the technocratic framing of expertise remained stable during the sampling period, regarding the undisputed status of expertise as the clear-cut basis for decision-making in uncertain times. Framing on Twitter challenged the omnipotence of the experts advising the government in various ways, namely, by referring to dissenting opinions of other experts, by questioning the underlying motives of experts' advice or by pointing out that the policies were clearly contrary to everyday experience. We argue that it is not so much the facts themselves that are at stake here but hidden moralities, which include the government's alleged complacency while asking citizens to blindly trust, its unpredictable behavior in the light of the promised straight line between scientific evidence and policy making, and its motivated behavior while claiming that the facts speak for themselves.
BASE
The corona crisis of 2020 took many by surprise. Quite suddenly, politicians had to make drastic decisions to guarantee public health, affecting basic civil liberties. In justifying their decisions, politicians internationally reverted back to a direct staging of experts to legitimize their proposals for what internationally became known as the "lockdown". In this article we analyze the performance of the Dutch government that, early on, labeled its approach to COVID-19 as an "intelligent lockdown". Our analysis examines the dramaturgy of expertise during this period. We selected two interrelated "stages": the official press conferences, fully controlled by the government, and the responses on Twitter, as focal channel for critique from the general public, but also from opposition parties and (alleged) experts. 26 press conferences of the Dutch Prime Minister were analyzed and a search for the most popular posts on Twitter referring to the press conference(s) was carried out covering the period between March 6th and May 29th, 2020. The results show that the technocratic framing of expertise remained stable during the sampling period, regarding the undisputed status of expertise as the clear-cut basis for decision-making in uncertain times. Framing on Twitter challenged the omnipotence of the experts advising the government in various ways, namely, by referring to dissenting opinions of other experts, by questioning the underlying motives of experts' advice or by pointing out that the policies were clearly contrary to everyday experience. We argue that it is not so much the facts themselves that are at stake here but hidden moralities, which include the government's alleged complacency while asking citizens to blindly trust, its unpredictable behavior in the light of the promised straight line between scientific evidence and policy making, and its motivated behavior while claiming that the facts speak for themselves.
BASE
In: Futures, Band 132, S. 102793
Integrated assessment models (IAM) and resulting scenarios have become increasingly institutionalised and relevant in the science-policy interface of climate policy. Despite their analytical strengths to conceive low-carbon futures, their co-evolution with the transnational science-policy interface of climate politics has also led to a focus on a specific set of techno-economic futures that are typically based on a relatively narrow set of assumptions. This deviates attention from alternatives that are hardly studied by IAMs, but might be more desirable from a societal perspective. We argue that research-based models and scenarios should support rather than narrow down deliberations on possible and desirable futures and provide an impetus to enact socially desirable change. Accordingly, we propose three future directions regarding the development and use of IAMs: 1) incorporate a plurality of perspectives on plausibility and desirability through iterative participatory engagement and worldview-based scenario exploration, 2) seek collaboration with the arts and humanities to expand the range of imagined futures beyond the status quo and 3) make projected futures more tangible and experiential so that diverse societal actor groups can understand and genuinely engage with them. By deploying the indisputable analytical strengths of IAMs optimally within these suggestions, we believe they can facilitate broader societal debates about transformative pathways to low-carbon futures.
BASE