Session 4.2
Where science meets the user. Living lab method to support the co-development of the new urban climate model PALM-4U
Antonina Kriuger 1, Saskia Dankwart-Kammoun 2, Irina Heese 2
1 Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS), Helmholtz Zentrum Hereon, Germany; 2 TU Dortmund University, Germany
Cities and urban areas are sensitive to climate change and its effects, such as heat waves, droughts, heavy rainfall or air pollution. Due to high population density and concentration of other resources combined with modified atmospheric processes, cities in particular must be adapted to the consequences of global climate change. High-performance urban climate models with various applications can form the basis for prospective planning decisions, however, as of today no such model exists that can be easily applied by non-experts outside of the scientific community.
In the second phase of the research program “Urban Climate Under Change” [UC]², funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, the new urban climate model PALM-4U (Parallelized Large-Eddy Simulation Model for Urban Applications) is being further developed into a practice-oriented and user-friendly product that meets the needs of municipalities and other practice users. The project ProPolis, one of the three joint research modules in [UC]², aims at the operationalization of PALM-4U in planning practice.
Our contribution focuses on the ProPolis central targets: the development of a continuation strategy, ensuring the practicability of PALM-4U and capacity building. With the development of an easy-to-use and intuitive graphical user interface (GUI), comprehensive manuals, support services and trainings we aim to enable practitioners to apply the model independently for their real-case planning measures. In order to fulfill these targets, we follow the principles of a living lab approach to implement an intensive transdisciplinary collaboration with our practice partners from German municipalities and private business. Such distinctive feature of living labs as systemic involvement of users in all development phases within a realistic application setting has proved to be effective in digital innovation.
Correspondingly, our work is conceived as an iterative process divided into exploration, experimentation and evaluation phase. Practice partners play a key role in each step, from the definition of PALM-4U application fields and test cases (exploration) to the testing (experimentation) and assessment of the model practicability (evaluation) together with the respective capacity building services. For this purpose, we provide moderated “Experimentation Rooms” (called Ex-Labs in the project) in form of both centralized and individual workshops. The Ex-Labs offer a central place to present the concepts, gather requirements, discuss the results and facilitate the mutual learning among practice partners and GUI developers. Additionally, we established a Community of Practice forum as a transdisciplinary place for user advice and exchange of experience. It can be considered as a complementary activity to the Ex-Labs and other support services for PALM-4U users.
This poster contribution illustrates the interim conclusions of the exploration phase including the impact of transdisciplinary processes on both the model and GUI co-development. We reveal the essential success factors for the effective service co-development in real usage situations, for example clear agreements and communication on the model development process along with foreseen application benefits in various application settings. Furthermore, financial and organizational continuity of the developed services after the end of the project are among the focal points for the permanent operationalization of PALM-4U.
The ENSO Paradigm: The need for an adaptive, climate-centered policy planning framework
John Charles Altomonte, Daniel Ratilla
Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines
The Philippines remains one of the most at-risk nations in the world from worsening climatic factors. In particular, the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle has far-reaching implications across several sectors and ecosystems that are increasing in severity due to climate change, necessitating a paradigm shift across all aspects of governance. Despite this, temporally, policy planning has remained unchanged, utilizing arbitrary time periods. An examination of previous policies reveals an emphasis on target- and time-based outputs, and a general lack of adaptive approaches necessary towards program sustainability. Acknowledging the cross-sectoral impacts of climate change and the ENSO cycle in particular, we argue for the need for a co-production among different sectors and disciplines of a policy planning framework. Our framework takes from the initial structure of Laverick & Labonte (2000), integrating the temporal aspect of ENSO to inform the planning process through socio-ecological indicators. The framework is structured to foster an iterative and integrative approach characteristic of adaptive management. Consequently, it would take into account climatic cycles which affect typical calendrical weather patterns as a sustainable and adaptive approach towards achieving climate resilience. Such a planning framework would benefit from an ontological cross-pollination from different disciplines such as the agricultural, social science, and public health sectors, as well as local native communities who are traditional knowledge and culture bearers of a given geographical area. It favors adaptive management in place of monolithic planning and management regimes by taking ecological considerations and transdisciplinary perspectives into account. This would benefit policy-makers and their stakeholders by efficiently utilizing limited time and resources while enriching opportunities for linkages across fields and communities. From a practical perspective, application of the framework does not necessitate a significant ontological leap. Rather, our framework is designed to be easily applied to existing and prospective public policy.
Non-certified experts or Jane and Joe Public: Stakeholders within a thematically open transdisciplinary research approach
Ina Opitz 1 & 2
1 Berlin University Alliance, Germany; 2 Technische Universität Berlin, Germany
In Transdisciplinary Research (TDR) processes, stakeholders who are involved in addition to scientists are understood as non-certified experts. The decisive criterion is their practical and local expertise, which complements the scientific expertise and aims to enhance the cooperative production of applicable new knowledge and knowledge exchange. Up to now, criteria such as the social role or decision making of stakeholders are not much relevant within TDR (Defilia and Di Giulio 2018). In addition to the TDR approach, Citizen Science(CS) follows an “opportunity-based approach” which allows all citizens, also called laypersons or volunteers, to contribute to the research in a requested way (Pettibone et al. 2018). Within TDR and CS approaches, research topics and questions, are normally set by scientists before stakeholders are additionally involved.
But which criteria are relevant for the (pre-)selection of stakeholders, if a TDR process starts before the main research topic is set and no specific practice expertise of stakeholders can yet be identified? Within the Berlin University Alliance (BUA), an excellence association of the four biggest research institutions in Berlin - the Technische Universität, the Freie Universität, the Humboldt-Universität and the Charité Universitätsmedizin - we are currently developing a new format called Berlin Citizen Forums (BCF) to foster knowledge exchange between stakeholders and research institutions.
Within this format, we start with the involvement of stakeholders before the research topic and question are set. The aim is therefore not only to develop practice-relevant research questions for the future. Rather, the BCF are about to identify new research topics through an open and cooperative process using a transdisciplinary research mode. Thus, the main challenge for the BCF regarding the stakeholder involvement, is to remain thematically open at the beginning of the process, and to generate a practicable approach with group sizes and purposeful discussions for all participants to reach an effective outcome.
Learning from both, TDR and CS, we would like to discuss questions of (pre-) selection, motivations of possible stakeholders, and criteria for stakeholder involvement, e. g. diversity in expertise and types of knowledge, interests, accessibility and capability. In the discussion, we also want to reflect other influencing factors, such as requirements of scientific processes, pre-definitions of planned formats and practices, the culture of research institutions and our role as managers, mediators, organisers and scientists within the process. With the BCF-approach, we want to expand the transdisciplinary research mode by considering not only not-certified experts, but also Jane and Joe Public with their specific questions, expertise and interests, as important stakeholders for participation within TDR projects and processes.
Literature:
- Defila, Rico; Di Giulio, Antoinetta (2018) Partizipative Wissenserzeugung und Wissenschaftlichkeit – ein methodologischer Beitrag. In: Di Giulio A., Defila R. (eds) Transdisziplinär und transformativ forschen. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21530-9_2
- Pettibone, Lisa; Blättel-Mink, Birgit; Balázs, Bálint; Di Giulio, Antoinetta; Göbel, Claudia; Heubach, Katja; Hummel, Diana; Lundershausen, Johannes; Lux, Alexandra; Potthast, Thomas; Vohland, Katrin; Wyborn, Carina (2018): Transdisciplinary Sustainability Research and Citizen Science: Options for Mutual Learning. In: GAIA, 28 (2), 222-225. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.27.2.9
Are inter- and transdisciplinary research projects self-transformative devices? Values of Nature and Nature's Contributions to People in ValPar.CH
Iago Otero 1, Joëlle Salomon Cavin 2, Emmanuel Reynard 1 & 2, Roger Keller 3
1 CIRM-UNIL, Switzerland; 2 IGD-UNIL, Switzerland; 3 GI-UZH, Switzerland
The operationalization of inter-/transdisciplinarity (Id-Td) and its capacity to generate transformative change have been suggested to require a self-transformation of researchers and stakeholders (Otero et al., 2020). Self-transformation refers to the acquisition of embodied knowledge, aptitudes and values in collective processes that address the underlying drivers of unsustainability. In Id-Td research on Nature and Nature's Contributions to People (NCP), the question of values (instrumental, intrinsic and relational, Arias-Arevalo et al. 2017) is especially relevant. The need for scientists to become more reflexive about their values and normative positions has been recently highlighted in a call for pluralistic perspectives on nature (Pascual et al., 2021). In theory, Id-Td research projects on NCP could be the framework within which researchers and stakeholders transform themselves by questioning their own mindsets while learning from colleagues. However, we lack evidence on whether and how self-transformation processes can occur in concrete projects, as well as how to trigger them through project management.
We address this gap by investigating the project “Values of the ecological infrastructure in Swiss parks (ValPar.CH)". ValPar.CH is commissioned by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment to an interdisciplinary research partnership composed of several Swiss universities, and belongs to the Action Plan of the Swiss Biodiversity Strategy. The project examines the benefits and added values of the Ecological Infrastructure (EI) in parks of national importance until 2024. The EI is considered the basis to ensure NCP. By means of semi-structured interviews, surveys and participant observation, we explore the experience of ValPar.CH researchers and stakeholders in terms of Id-Td interactions and their values and perceptions on nature, NCP and EI. We use a model of Id-Td that focuses on the dynamic interactions between the 6 basic components: research object, research subject, institutional context, methodology, paradigm, and serendipity (Otero et al., 2020). Transformation processes are studied under the lens of the three spheres of transformation, i.e. personal, political, and practical, focusing on the personal one, which relates to beliefs, values and worldviews (O’Brien and Sygna, 2013).
The poster will present the main aspects of this research and some preliminary results. In so doing it will address one of the central themes of the conference, namely how can we increase the integrative potential of Id-Td while keeping the necessary pluralism and contributing to an alternative future.
Arias-Arevalo, P. et al. 2017. "Exploring intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values for sustainable management of social-ecological systems." Ecology and Society 22 (4).
O’Brien, K., Sygna, L., 2013. Responding to climate change: the three spheres of transformation, in: Proceedings of Transformation in a Changing Climate. University of Oslo, Oslo, pp. 16–23.
Otero, I. et al., 2020. Designing Inter- and Transdisciplinary Research on Mountains: What Place for the Unexpected? Mountain Research and Development, 40, D10.
Pascual, U. et al., 2021. Biodiversity and the challenge of pluralism. Nature Sustainability.
