* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Frame data for theory – the start!
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Alternate Futures for Basin Communities Dr Leonie Pearson & Dr Lain Dare Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis Murray-Darling Basin Futures CRN Introduction and framing Aim of workshop: • Share data on “imagined” futures in 6 communities • Frame data for theory • Explore data for policy Frame data for theory – the start! – What capacity is important for purposeful community change? (e.g. Moser & Ekstrom, 2010; Marshall et al. 2012) • The need and willingness to “imagine” and undertake change • How risks and uncertainty are managed • Skills in planning learning and reorganising for change • Flexibility of financial, organisational, human & natural capitals – Does capacity vary by type of ‘imagined’ change? (Wilson et al., 2010, Butzler, 2012, Pearson & Pearson, 2012) • Postulate that communities want different types of change, from: adaptation (small, BAU), transition to transformation (revolution) Methods • Inductive scenario building (Kahane 2012, Pearson et al. in review) • Qualitative analytical techniques – 8 Future Forums in 2013 – 70+ participants mostly community leaders • Questions on: – measures of progress – visions of the future (ideal and reality) – Barriers & opportunities Share the data: What is progress? What do you think are the key themes that our towns would consider as progress? What is progress? Commonalities & Differences Commonalities – all wanted • Increase in population • more secure water • NBN • Greater health services • Community spirit and cohesion Differences • Education was divided into those focused on tertiary (e.g. TAFE and Uni) and others focused on younger aged kids e.g. childcare and schools • Some wanted to value add to current agricultural industries, whilst others wanted to diversify away from agricultural production What is progress? What are the ideal futures? Commonalities & Differences Commonalities – all wanted • Strong cohesive population • Water as value add to industry and town identity • Local decision making and governance Differences • Some relied on water for industry, others not • Type of infrastructure wanted was important, i.e. health, housing, aged care, etc. • Not all saw themselves as ‘farming towns’ ‘Real’ futures vary from ideal • Barriers – Capacity (social leadership, skills, willingness, changing demographics) – Governance (policy, coordination, political leadership) – Climate (climate variation, water dependence) – Economic diversity (irrigated agriculture dependence, manufacturing) – Infrastructure & services (transport, health, education) – Location/isolation (tyranny of distance) – Water (uncertainty, limitations) • Opportunities – Climate (potential productivity) – Capacity (social leadership, skills, willingness, changing demographics) – Innovation (history of innovation) – Infrastructure & services (water and/or community infrastructure) Continuum of change • Enables a considered review of challenges inhibiting and opportunities promoting changed futures • Highlights to all interests the level of change necessary to achieve their ideal and/or real futures • Helps to understand and prioritise policy and programs that promote sustainable community development Unpacking the ideal futures - Leeton Unpacking the ideal futures - Robinvale Unpacking the ideal futures - Renmark Communities on the continuum Framing data for theory – the finish – What capacity is important for purposeful community change? • The need and willingness to “imagine” and undertake change • How risks and uncertainty are managed • Skills in planning learning and reorganising for change • Flexibility of financial, organisational, human & natural capitals Potential policy implications • What policy implications do you think this work has? Thank you - Questions Dr Leonie Pearson [email protected] Dr Lain Dare [email protected] References Butzer KW (2012) Collapse, environment, and society. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109: 3632–3639. Kahane AM (2012) Transformative scenario planning: Working together to change the future, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco. Marshall NA, Park SE, Adger, WN, Brown, K, Howde, SM (2012) Transformational Capacity and the Influence of Place and Identity. Environ Res. Lett. 7(3), 034022. Moser SC, Ekstrom, JA (2010)A framework for diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:22026-22031. Pearson, L., Wilson, S., Kashima, Y. Lusher, D. and Pearson, C., (submitted) Imagined futures in Murray-Darling Basin communities: Mental models of the past and future scenarios. Public Policy Pearson, L. and Pearson, C. (2012) Societal Collapse or Transformation and Resilience, Letter to Editor, PNAS- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, online [www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1207552109] Pelling, M. 2010. Adaptation to Climate Change: From Resilience to Transformation, Routledge, London. Redclift, M. (2002). Sustainable development: Exploring the contradictions. Routledge. Wilson, S., Pearson, L., Kashima, Y. Lusher, D. and Pearson, C., (2013) Separating adaptive maintenance (resilience) and transformative capacity of socio-ecological systems, Ecology and Society 18(1): 22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05100-180122