Quantitative story telling

Loading...

來自 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 的課程

Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems: the Nexus between Water, Energy and Food

14 個評分

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems: the Nexus between Water, Energy and Food

14 個評分

In this course you will become familiar with the ideas of the water-energy-food nexus and transdisciplinary thinking. You will learn to see your community or country as a complex social-ecological system and to describe its water, energy and food metabolism in the form of a pattern, as well as to map the categories of social actors. We will provide you with the tools to measure the nexus elements and to analyze them in a coherent way across scales and dimensions of analysis. In this way, your quantitative analysis will become useful for informed decision-making. You will be able to detect and quantify dependence on non-renewable resources and externalization of environmental problems to other societies and ecosystems (a popular ‘solution’ in the western world). Practical case studies, from both developed and developing countries, will help you evaluate the state-of-play of a given community or country and to evaluate possible solutions. Last but not least, you will learn to see pressing social-ecological issues, such as energy poverty, water scarcity and inequity, from a radically different perspective, and to question everything you’ve been told so far. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Part of the results and case studies presented have been developed within two projects: MAGIC and PARTICIPIA. However, the course does not reflect the views of the funding institutions or of the project partners as a whole, and the case studies were presented purely with an educational and illustrative purpose.

從本節課中

Module 8. Time for "something completely different": from the Cartesian dream to quantitative story-telling via evidence based policy

We are ending the course with something a bit different (thanks to our guest lecturer Andrea Saltelli). This week we leave quantitative assessments behind, and take some time to reflect upon why it is important to do analyses in a different way. We will introduce the concepts of post-normal science and quantitative story-telling – this will allow you to think deeply about how you frame your analyses in the future.

Why frames matter; social construction of ignorance8:32

A field example10:08

Quantitative story telling10:02

與講師見面

Mario Giampietro
ICREA Research Professor
Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA)
Andrea Saltelli
Guest researcher
Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA)
Tarik Serrano
Post-Doc Researcher
Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA)

Okay, we are to that last section about the entire cycle.

And this is the promised quantitative storytelling.

You have already heard from Lapo in the previous presentation how important is that you

look at the possible different frames for

a given issue without being blind to the power relation,

which underpin each and every different frame.

It is for this that we say that you had to do

an impact assessment study something linked to the use of frames.

So, what is quantitative storytelling?

Well, you may have different way of looking at this.

This could be like a truism.

There is always one more side of the coin.

Now, there is always more than one story.

You could say that this is something we are invited to do by philosophers,

you will see what I mean in a second.

This could be an extension of sensitivity auditing or this could be

even a way to help the process of extended peer community.

So, I promised you the philosopher,

this is Friedrich Nietzsche,

which many of you may have read and loved,

and he says that you don't never have absolute knowledge,

you only have relative knowledge.

And what he constitutes the real objectivity is the addition,

is a composition of all these different ways of looking at an issue.

In this quote, which is very often made you will find it everywhere,

Nietzsche is particularly post-modern.

So, what is the proposal made by quantitative storytelling? It's very simple.

Instead of selecting one frame and do a lot of

quantification and number crunching in this frame, he says,

"Let's explore more frames and do some maybe simpler kind of quantification only to see

what frames pass a number of elementary text," and we will describe this in a second.

Let me give you an example first, though.

I want to show you the result of a study where a number of investigators have questioned

people in their liking or disliking of genetically modified food and substances.

And the result of the study was surprising in a sense,

because we normally hear discussion on GMO framed in

terms of whether this food is good or not for our health.

If you look at what the people interviewed in the study replied,

what concern they had on GMO,

many of them rise points of this nature: "Why do we need GMO?

Who decided that they should be used or developed or put on the market?

Why were not we better informed about this food before they reached the market?

That issue of choice,

this is the labelling issue.

"Are we given a real choice to select whether we want this food or not?"

And then the last point which for me is

particularly relevant and for this reason I will read it.

"Do regulatory authorities have sufficient power and resources to effectively

counterbalance large companies who wish to develop these products?"

So, in other words, if you look at what really bothers people

about GMO is an issue of power relationship and the

fear that the citizen may be not protected by

its own regulatory authority when these are

confronted by very powerful industrial interests.

But as I said at the beginning,

this story which we read in the newspaper is a totally different story.

Here is an example from the Economist,

and the Economist in this issue was very much upset because in Vermont,

an American state, Montpelier,

capital of Vermont, food labelling scheme had been finally adopted and

this force for the economy is very bad and

the result of food scare propagated by some kind of,

sort of the flowers generation,

And here I want to show you another example of framing,

which I found is particularly disturbing and this is a letter signed

by more than 100 Nobel laureates to attack Greenpeace because,

as you can see in this letter,

Greenpeace has been opposed to the dissemination of Golden Rice.

We are again in the field of GMO and this letter

reads as a very aggressive piece of document because it says,

"Greenpeace has spearheaded opposition to Golden Rice,

but this Golden Rice is indeed very good because if you...

It's a rice which has a higher content of

a principle which could be useful to fight vitamin A deficiency (VAD).

And so this could help really poor countries and children

in poor countries because..." I'm still reading from the letter,

so this is the text of the letter signed by the Nobel Prize.

So, two million disease could be prevented using this GMO because this disease is very...

Affecting children, making them blind.

Affecting up to half a million children every year.

Many die as a result of this VAD,

and again Golden Rice is presented as,

of course, an antidote to this disease.

So, "Opposition based on emotion and dogma should be stopped."

And then the letter concludes saying,

"How many poor people in the world must die

before we consider this a crime against humanity?"

So, this is a framing clearly,

a very strong framing of an issue.

But if you look at the literature on the subject,

you will discover that there is a lot of problem associated with this Golden Rice.

I'm not saying that the opposition is right.

I'm saying that it's not so

a clear-cut case that you could accuse people of crimes against humanity.

Let's see what the argument are.

One is that nutritionally, apparently, this food,

this Golden Rice does not really have such an increased content in the beta carotene,

which is the active ingredient.

Golden Rice, even more importantly,

has not been authorized for commerce yet.

Many countries have fought vitamin A deficiency by simply providing for more food.

Which is not said that you had to fight VAD using this particular kind of food.

Golden Rice, as the name suggest, is yellow.

In many countries, the color yellow is used,

it's useful to detect the possible existence of a micro toxin.

So, Golden Rice would prevent these detection and hence could be dangerous in this sense.

When you tamper with the genes of rice to produce this expected more beta carotene,

unfortunately, you decrease the yield.

So, this is also something,

a reason why farmers might not want or intend to use this Golden Rice.

I'm using this to show you that if you open the frame of the Nobel prizes,

you see that there is a lot of things going on and this is not a simple case of

obtuse ecologist opposing something which would save humanity.

So, in quantitative storytelling what you would like to

do is to test on whether a given frame is feasible,

whether it is viable and whether it is desirable.

And what do I mean by each of these?

Well, we will go through each of them in turn.

And feasibility, in feasibility you consider the system as

a black box which has to use input from outside and produce an output.

And, at the same time,

also depleting possible stocks.

So, if you wish, feasibility is an analysis of

the constraints with the external world of the system you are trying to assess.

A compatibility with external constraints.

This is a slide I borrowed from Mario.

So, those are processes outside human control.

With viability instead, I look inside the box and I see whether

the system can actually perform all the functions which had been requested.

Assuming that the input from outside,

from the fund, is there by default.

So, this is a, if you wish,

a compatibility with internal constraints.

And the last check which is suggested in

quantitative storytelling is that of desirability. What is desirability?

This has to do with whether a narrative

is relevant and is wished and desired by a particular group actor.

And this way may eventually... You can clearly see that this

may lead to a conflict because if you are a chicken or if you are a cow,

you may have conflicting ideas on what should be eaten on the Christmas table. Thank you.

探索我們的目錄

免費加入並獲得個性化推薦、更新和優惠。

Coursera 致力於普及全世界最好的教育，它與全球一流大學和機構合作提供在線課程。

© 2018 Coursera Inc. 保留所有權利。

通過 App Store 下載

通過 Google Play 獲取