European Awareness
Scenario Workshops
Summary Proceedings of the
Second Meeting of National Monitors
15th of May 1998
Luxembourg
Jean Monnet Building, room M2
INDEX
Newcomers begin here! .............................................................................................................. 4
I.
AN OVERVIEW AND HISTORY OF THE EASW .............................................................. 4
1.
What is the European Awareness Scenario Workshop? ....................................................... 4
2.
How did the Workshops come into being? ........................................................................... 6
3.
Would the workshop be useful at the local level? ................................................................. 7
4.
The National Monitors ........................................................................................................ 7
Worshop across Europe ............................................................................................................... 9
II.
MEETING TO SHARE ...................................................................................................... 11

What is a Framework Programme? ................................................................................... 11

The Fifth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development .............. 12
1.
Supply and Demand – a need for Training Actions .................................................... 13
2.
The elements of a successful Training Action ............................................................ 14
Typical training programme outline .......................................................................................... 14
3.
The workshops ............................................................................................................... 17
Sustainable development is still a key priority.......................................................................... 17
Workshops take time to bear the fruit of success .................................................................... 17
Working with local politicians ................................................................................................... 18
EASW and education ............................................................................................................... 21
Bridging the gap between art and science ............................................................................... 21
Getting the right mix ................................................................................................................. 23
How orthodox should we be? ................................................................................................... 23
Adapting the tool ...................................................................................................................... 24
4.
Supporting and promoting the network ....................................................................... 29
5.
A final word ..................................................................................................................... 30
ANNEXE 1: Work programme ................................................................................................... 32
ANNEXE 2: List of the participants ........................................................................................... 36
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-2
-
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-3
-
EUROPEAN AWARENESS SCENARIO WORKSHOP
Second Meeting of National Monitors
15 May 1998
Newcomers begin here!
If you are already familiar with the European Awareness Scenario Workshop, please turn directly
to page eleven.
I. AN OVERVIEW AND HISTORY OF THE EASW
From solar cells to power our homes to shopping on the Internet, today’s world is constantly
changing. We are flooded with information about new technologies which could transform our
lives both socially and economically. What’s more, policies surrounding sustainable development
- that is development which satisfies present needs without threatening the needs of future
generations - are hot on the agenda globally, nationally and locally. Local Agenda 21 and the
European Sustainable Cities Campaign for example, are two political campaigns to promote
local actions to improve global conditions.
New scientific developments can help bring communities together and create a cleaner and
greener tomorrow in our cities. However, these technologies may not be good value for money
or they be exclusive to only those who can afford them. If the world of technology, research and
development can connect with industry and society, however, we stand a better chance of
implementing socially, economically and environmentally acceptable technologies that can really
benefit society. Of course, economic, technological, political and cultural obstacles to innovation
will differ from country to country and from city to city. As a result, local decisions have to be
made if long-term solutions are to be found.
Traditionally, decision makers have relied heavily on “expert opinion” to help them. Although the
role of these advisers is undoubtedly important, the people who are going to be affected by the
changes should also be consulted. A genuine dialogue between all stakeholders should be a
part of the decision making process. After all, it is the residents and local businesses who will
have to live and work under the new policies. This is where the European Awareness Scenario
Workshop comes in.
1. What is the European Awareness Scenario Workshop?
The European Awareness Scenario Workshop (EASW) is a tool to support and facilitate the
active participation of people from across society, in discussions surrounding any virtually any
topic. It has been used to focus on the sustainable development of cities and possible
technological solutions. As Tjeerd Deelstra of the International Institute for the Urban
Environment says, “The EASW method facilitates the active participation of societal groups on
technological developments concerning the sustainable development of cities. An EASW can
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-4
-
make citizens aware of opportunities to make the cities more sustainable by effectively using
(new) technology.”
The workshops offer a forum to gauge the supply and demand of innovation, as well as
encouraging public debate and creating a balanced relationship between the community,
technology and the environment. The tool is not only used for raising awareness and providing
information; it can also be used to identify responsibilities and priorities. The workshops involve
more people in planning and decision-making processes, with the hope that realistic solutions
can be found to urban problems.
In each workshop, around 30 people meet for two days. Using a structured, yet flexible,
methodology, the group are called to think about - and perhaps answer - two key questions:

How should behaviour be changed to achieve sustainable living and to what extent should a
technology-based solution be considered?

Who is responsible for the solution of problems - the individual, the local authority or a mix
of both?
As Lars Karlsson says, “The central element of the method is the dialogue with the aims that the
participants develop their own visions and later their options for actions and measures, based
upon their own experiences. The workshop process is a combination of different moderated
activities; brainstorming methods, construction of visions, presentations, dialogue and
negotiations.” During the two days, participants focus on developing a common vision for their
city. They then move onto generating ideas around what must be done and who is responsible
for achieving this common vision. The result of many workshops is an action plan.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-5
-
2. How did the Workshops come into being?
In 1991, the Danish Board of Technology (DBT) began a project to look at new urban and
residential lifestyles. Called “Barriers to Urban Ecology”, the work tackled waste, energy and
housing problems by running workshops to look at people’s everyday lives in balance with the
environment. They started with basic household activities - such as having a bath and taking out
the rubbish - and built up four scenarios describing a day in the life of an imaginary family, the
Hansens. The scenarios consider both how much technology would be involved and also who
would be responsible for solving the problems. These scenarios form the basis for discussion
and debate. In Denmark, the scenario workshops have made a real difference as the proposals
that emerged were integrated into the Danish government’s urban ecology policies.
The original four scenarios are:
1. High tech individual solutions
2. Low tech individual solutions
3. High tech centrally administered solutions
4. Low tech collective solutions
Individual solutions
2
1
4
Low technology
High Technology
3
Collective solutions involving local authorities
In 1993, the European Commission (EC) began a global investigation to find out about available
participatory tools and methodologies. As part of a programme called VALUE II, the EC aimed to
reinforce the links between researchers and society. The team noted an inventory of about 80
awareness workshop methods and from that list, eight were selected for in-depth study.
Appropriate for use at a local level, the DBT’s Scenario Workshop was selected for further
testing.
The Danish workshop was then adapted for use right across Europe and the awareness
scenario workshop became known as “Sustainable Urban Living”. A feasibility study of the
improved workshop tool was verified at an International Scenario Workshop held in the
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-6
-
Netherlands at the end of 1993. Four cities took part; Ede (NL), Corfu (GR), Mulhouse (F) and
Preston (UK).
3. Would the workshop be useful at the local level?
To ensure that the European Awareness Scenario Workshop would be useful to a range of
different communities, local workshops were held in early 1994, in each of the four cities that
had already met in the Netherlands. Over 200 people were involved in optimising the EASW. In
mid-1994, representatives met again in Luxembourg to discuss their experiences and refine the
way the workshop runs. Finally, the methodology was ready for European dissemination. A tool
kit of manuals, overheads, forms and so on was developed, complete with all the information
and documentation required to run a workshop.
4. The National Monitors
At that point, a scheme began to train people to use the methodology. At each training session,
20 or 30 people, who may be consultants, NGO representatives or city planners, became
acquainted with the methodology. Of those trained, four or five went on to become National
Monitors. These National Monitors are the people responsible in each Member State for the
promotion, planning and execution of a series of EASWs at a European level. As a network, they
share their knowledge and expertise across Europe and further afield.
Although the method is designed to be suitable for all Member States, the demand for the
European Awareness Scenario Workshop has grown more quickly in some countries than in
others. As a result, there are more National Monitors in certain countries. At the latest count,
there were 55 National Monitors and over 60 EASW events had taken place.
EASW - Facts and Figures

60 events promoted Europe-wide (2000 qualified participants)

30 people employed

70 organisations

Expected target sectors:

Urban planning and regeneration

Transportation/mobility

Information Technology
When the EASWs had been running for over two years, a clear need emerged for the National
Monitors to meet together to compare their experiences, suggest improvements and look to the
future. Last year, the First Meeting of National Monitors was held and following its success, it
looks set to become an annual event.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-7
-
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-8
-
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
-9
-
Workshop
Location
1995
Environment Park and the urban opportunity
Torino, Italy
Environmental Charter for Lavrion
Lavrion, Greece
Community Planning: Renewable energy strategies
Glasgow, UK
Turin Community Planning
Torino, Italy
Community Planning Forum for renewable energy
Lyon, France
Sustainable Urban Living
Corfu, Greece
1996
Community Planning Forum - Innovative energy policy
Barcelona, Spain
Transfrontalier energy problems
Cuneo, Italy
Redevelopment of the Bagnoli area
Napoli, Italy
The Library of the Future
Copenhagen, Denmark
Local Agenda 21 – starting the process and keeping it going
Munich, Germany
Ideal Home of 2016 and Sustainable Development
Athens, Greece
Course Urban Ecology at Copenhagen Cultural University
Copenhagen, Denmark
Future Dutch education systems
Bilthoven, The Netherlands
1997
Sustainable Future Development of Central Bilbao
Bilbao, Spain
The Co-operative Movement in Slovakia
High Tatras, Slovakia
Environmental Emergencies, local sustainable development, building recovery and
quality of life
Oriolo, Italy
Job Creation
Kalmar, Sweden
Traffic, mobility and the quality of life in a historical centre
Perugia, Italy
Urban Environment Issues
Sevilla, Spain
Environmental futures for the city
Orvieto, Italy
Women and the Internet
Innsbruck, Austria
Tourism and Sustainable Development
Kos, Greece
Clustering companies to minimise waste products
Gotland, Sweden
Sewage Treatment of the future
Lingby, Denmark
Future visions for sustainable traffic and transport systems
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Gender participation in the definition of the future city
Pamplona, Spain
Ecological Workshops in Education
Athens, Greece
1998
Work in Europe 2010 – Development of the Labour Market
Vienna, Austria
Integration of Africans in Austria
Vienna, Austria
The Future of the village of Hirschbach
Vienna, Austria
The regional realisation of Agenda 21
Oststeiermark, Austria
Future of Education, ICTs, Multimedia and Edutainment
Vienna, Austria
Standards for environment and employment
Kolding, Denmark
The sustainable information society
Aalborg, Denmark
Branden Serger Informationsstrategie 2006
Berlin/Teltow, Germany
Formulating an Environmental Charter
Lavrion, Greece
Information and Communication Tools and services for local communities
Sesto/San Giovanni, Italy
Beyond the confines of the communicative configuration
Bologna, Italy
Urban Mobility
Oerias, Portugal
Urban regeneration
Bilbao, Spain
Challenges to sustainability
Bristol, UK
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 10
-
Some examples of European Awareness Scenario Workshops
II.
MEETING TO SHARE
On 15 May 1998, the Second Meeting of National Monitors took place in Luxembourg. After a
warm and encouraging welcome from Mr Bellardinelli, the group of over 25 National Monitors
spent the morning discussing their experiences of running both workshops and training actions.
The number and variety of workshops and the high level of interest in the training sessions show
that the tool really is in demand.
The afternoon provided a forum for related initiatives to be presented. One project, the European
Theatre of Science is increasing the public’s understanding of science by using drama. Richard
Sclove, who was visiting from The Loka Institute, USA, also presented his work which considers
democratic design criteria and their use in scenario workshops. As in last year’s meeting, the coordinators of Training and Dissemination Scheme Projects provided an update on their work.
Ways to improve the network of National Monitors and to provide support and joint promotion
materials were also a key part of the discussions throughout the day.
The meeting’s structure
A year in the life of the EASW – Sharing workshop experiences
Expanding the network - The Training Actions
Training and Dissemination Scheme Projects and other initiatives
Bringing National Monitors together – The network
Mr Bellardinelli’s opening remarks illustrate that the EASW has perhaps been moving ahead of
its time. “The main thrust of the Second to the Fourth Framework Programmes has been
industrial competitiveness although the Fourth Framework programme has also been concerned
with quality of life,” he says.
 What is a Framework Programme?
It is the overall programme of research activities funded by the European Commission over a
medium-term period, usually five years. The programme is proposed by the Commission after
wide consultation with academia, industry and Member State governments, and then modified
and approved by the Council of Ministers and European Parliament. It is divided into specific
programmes of research which address particular research areas, such as biotechnology and
information technologies, as well as those of a more horizontal nature such as the International
Cooperation (INCO) programme. The First Framework Programme began in 1984.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 11
-

The Fifth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development
Thematic programmes with their associated key actions

Improving the quality of life and management of living resources
Food, nutrition and health
Control of infectious diseases
The cell factory
Environment and health
Sustainable Agriculture, fisheries and forestry, including integrated development of rural areas
The ageing population

Creating a user-friendly Information Society
Systems and services for the citizen
New methods of works and electronic commerce
Multimedia content and tools
Essential technologies and infrastructures

Promoting competitive and sustainable growth
Innovative products, processes, organisation
Sustainable mobility and intermodality
Land transport and marine technologies
New perspectives in aeronautics

Energy, environment and sustainable development (split into two sections)
Energy and sustainable development
Sustainable management and quality of water
Global change and biodiversity
Sustainable marine ecosystems
The city of tomorrow and cultural heritage
Energy
Cleaner energy systems
Economic and efficient energy for a competitive Europe
Horizontal programmes

The international role of Community research

Innovation and participation of SMEs

Improving human potential
Now, as we move forward into the Fifth Framework Programme, there is much more emphasis
on a broader range of issues, many of which have already provided a focus for the National
Monitors. With globalisation, we face new problems despite the fact that science and technology
has improved the lives of many. The population, for instance, is expected to grow from nearly 6
billion today to 8 billion in the year 2000 and this puts strains on our natural resources. “We are
facing many different problems,” continues Mr Bellardinelli. Global change, the greenhouse
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 12
-
effect, depletion of the ozone layer and deficit of water are just a few. “As we are facing these
problems, the Fifth Framework is defined from another angle. We continue to look at the global
competitiveness of European industry but we are also considering people’s working lives, their
satisfaction in living and living in a clean environment. There is also 20% unemployment and all
these things effect our global competitiveness.” These are the issues that the National Monitors
have already started to tackle using European Awareness Scenario Workshops and there is
expected to be increased demand for this type of participatory method as time goes on.
In many ways, the meeting illustrated the tool’s progression, which is the result of many
individuals’ efforts and hard work. “Certainly,” says Mr Fernandez, “the process isn’t dying with
time.” In fact, if anything, it is growing and blooming. There is a great demand for scenario
workshops across many of the countries in Europe. This is reflected in the oversubscribed
training actions to teach newcomers about the tool. As more people are trained to run
workshops, the demand for the tool also grows. This is highly encouraging especially given the
limited funds on which the initiative runs. With new faces come new ideas and new niches to
apply the tool are crafted. This meeting gave the National Monitors the opportunity to discuss
their experiences and to try to make improvements to all aspects of the tool and the network. Of
course, it is not an exact science and analysis can only really be achieved if the experiences are
broken down into their components and examined. This is shown by Mr Fernandez’s slide
below.
1. Supply and Demand – a need for Training Actions
The demand for EASWs is high across a range of sectors and the training events attract
planners, architects, consultants and non-governmental organisations as well as people from
across academia, the public sector. Both men and women are involved and the events usually
bring in people from different regions.
In the past eight months, training actions have been held in Vienna, Madrid and Rome and
further events will be held later in the year in Toulouse, Luxembourg and Brussels. The training
action organisers are building on the experiences gathered at early events, held in Mallorca and
Naples, for example. And the training is very popular and is usually over-subscribed by a
significant amount.
The Training Action in Madrid
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 13
-
2. The elements of a successful Training Action
Like the workshops themselves, it is difficult to get participants to attend for more than a two-day
session. This means that there is a huge amount to go through in a short amount of time.
Planning and organisation are vital to the success of a training session. It is crucial to select
participants carefully and to construct a detailed timetable of activities.
Typical training programme outline
Day One a.m.:
Welcome, why are we here?
Day One p.m.:
Simulating EASW
Day Two a.m.:
Organising an EASW
Day Two p.m.:
Evaluating the training action
According to Luigi Amodio, people should not be given too much information before the
workshop. “We want people to come as EASW virgins to the training action,” he says, “so that
they come with an open mind. If they want to read all the documentation and supporting
materials later, it can be presented at the workshop and they can access and download it from
the web.”
The NMs at the training session have the opportunity to motivate trainees and to get them really
excited about the method and its potential to be adapted for a range of social and technological
issues. One way to do this is to involve National Monitors from other countries and to present the
trainees with a range of initiatives that have already made use of the EASW method.
All the training actions to date have benefited from a mixture of both presentations and
discussion sessions. The former gives the organisers a chance to explain the method and the
role of the National Monitor thoroughly, while the latter provides a chance for participants to
question the tool and express doubts and concerns.
Perhaps the most important part of the training session, however, is using the tool itself with
concrete case studies. “We learn by doing and by experimenting with the methodology,” Luigi
says. One of the new Spanish NMs, Aurora Justo Moreno, agrees, “The most important thing
about the method is that everyone can participate and speak to give their views on their city.”
The original scenarios and material prepared by IDIS was very useful in Austria and Italy, while
in Kos, the topic of tourism was a very relevant subject for the participants because it is an
important industry for nine months of the year.
Of course, it may not always be possible to run a “real” workshop at the training. But concrete
case studies that the trainees can participate in are essential. According to Teresa Rojo of Pax
Mediterranea, “You need a subject that everyone can identify with to show the usefulness of the
tool. In Madrid, we chose the Future of Spanish Cities. It’s ambitious, I know, and you need a
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 14
-
good introduction to the topic to get people interested. We invited an expert to discuss it with the
group at the beginning of the workshop.”

Training in Kos
The training action in Kos held in September 1997 was followed with a full EASW focussing on
tourism. Athena summarises the event, “The industry had been beginning to fail during the
previous two years and this was not good for the island’s future. Professors from universities,
local specialists from other sectors and tourism experts were invited to the workshop. People
from off the island were also invited. Selection was the most important aspect of the workshop.
We faced some political problems during the workshop but it is the National Monitors’
responsibility to animate the workshop and also to make sure that the training of new people is
done properly and correctly. If there is fighting, the monitor has to stimulate everyone to move
forward. Although the workshop had some problems at the beginning, the participants did ask
for another day. By the end, everyone in the training had a good clear idea of the method.”
All the National Monitors who talked about Training Actions told of how important it is to get
participants to evaluate the success of the event. This way, the process can be continually
improved and refined.
Teresa also believes that it is important to get the new National Monitors to act as a team
following the training. In Spain, the new NMs contact each other by email and fax. Often, they
are asked to comment on each other’s reports and they act as facilitators at each other’s
workshops. To introduce new National Monitors to the rest of the network, training time should
be dedicated to presenting and explaining the website. This gives a focus for workshop
materials, reports and to contact information.
As a result of the training actions, there is now increased demand for workshops. In Spain, there
is interest in Madrid, Málaga, Huelva, Segovia and Toledo y Huesca. One workshop will cover
waste in coastal areas, for example, and another, on Migration in Spain, will take a different
format using a one-day session followed by a second one day session later on.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 15
-

Training in Vienna
The Austrian training action also led to some interesting new initiatives such as the workshops
which Christine Ugbor of the Vienna Academy for the Future is planning. These will cover two
very different topics; “Integrating Africans into Austria” and “The future of edutainment.”
The first of these will cover topics like employment and job creation, industrial relations,
technological changes in the work place, migration and the intercultural labour market. It will also
look at social issues like discrimination, racism and drug-related problems. “We are hoping for
an explosive workshop,” says Christine, “It’s a fantastic tool to show people to make them aware
of European issues. You have to take the orthodox version and then modify it.” The second
workshop’s focus will be quite different. Christine explains, “It will cover the role of different
media such as the Internet, television and radio. We will look at the challenges both for youth
and for other ages and see what we can do.”
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 16
-
3. The workshops
Participating in a training action is the first step for most National Monitors. They then go on to
organise, run and evaluate workshops, often with the help and support of experienced NMs. As
you can see from the chart on page six, many workshops have taken place or are planned to
take place this year.
Sustainable development is still a key priority
At the last meeting of National Monitors, much of the discussion focussed on sustainable
development, Local Agenda 21, Urban Ecology and the environment in cities. Many of the more
recent workshops still cover these topics. Morten Elle of the Technical University of Denmark
was involved in a workshop on the future of waste water systems for example and he found that
it was successful in terms of introducing scientists to the tool and inspiring them to understand
the method.
Workshops take time to bear the fruit of success
On the other hand however, he felt that the local action plan is “far too visionary and too off in
the future” to be a success with local people. Teresa Rojo suggests, however, that “many
actions for sustainable solutions are not realistic in the beginning.” According to Teresa, you
can’t label anything as a failure until at least five years has passed.
This proved to be the case for Isabel Velazquez, of GEA 21, who ran a workshop in Pamplona in
June 1997. It allowed women to put forth their ideas for the city’s Master Plan. Over 90 women
of different ages and from different parts of society joined the workshop which was organised in
just two weeks, running to a very low budget. “The introduction to the workshop focussed on
gender participation in the Master Plan. Technicians, citizens and women’s groups and
associations were all represented. They were all included in building a model of the city in the
future – the Master Plan. The workshop was highly appreciated by the local media,” Isabel
explains. “In some ways, there was no immediate result, but the city called us one year later to
do another workshop and to continue the process,” she says. “You do a workshop and then at
the local level, it has a life of its own.”
Of course there are many measures of success. Getting the authorities to hold a workshop in
itself shows that they are willing to seriously begin to consider the debate. In the case of the
Pamplona workshop, the organisers managed to convince the authorities that running a
workshop would be far more beneficial than a holding conference. They argued that in a
conference, only a few people share their views. “EASW is a useful tool for debating rather than
just for giving expert presentations,” confirms Isabel. Persuading decision makers is one of the
key challenges for National Monitors. So, even if the action plan isn’t followed exactly, the
workshop itself may be considered a success in itself; it brings people together to share ideas
and this is the first step in understanding others’ viewpoints
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 17
-
Working with local politicians
Many of the National Monitors talked about the barriers they had to break down often involved
local politics. Jens Holck comes from the Danish Centre for Urban Ecology, which was set up as
a result of one of an earlier workshop. He spent much time working towards a workshop on
urban regeneration in Kolding, although there were many barriers along the way. “The politicians
got cold feet,” he says. One issue was that the method was viewed as undemocratic by the
politicians because it meant choosing 10 or 15 residents, who are keen to participate, from a
population of 6000. The other issue was a question of semantics. The politicians thought that the
word “expert” would scare people away. But after some persuasion, Jens eventually got the
workshop off the ground.
First of all, the groups in this initiative took a very local view on problems such as the “traffic
around the corner and local playgrounds.” They did not consider the environmental and
economic aspects of sustainability. In the end, the workshop ran six months after the groups
were set up and three times as many residents participated, along with “external people” (who
were really experts!).
Finally, however, the group began to measure their work against more difficult social,
environmental and economic goals. It goes to show that persistence slowly pays off. It also
shows, as Mr Fernandez points out, “it can be dangerous to expect short-term results because
you risk twisting the tool too much.” It is up to each NM to judge the internal politics which will
naturally vary from case to case. Lars Karlsson offers a further view,” With the politician
problem, we must expect an element of confrontation. We shouldn’t forget it. We have to deal
with it. Also, we don’t need to use politicians or experts formally. You can make alternative roles
for example. Or you may need to have a previous process before you start the actual workshop.”
Jens is now working with the Technical University of Denmark to launch a project for Danish
utilities. According to him, “They are very conservative and don’t always see all the problems.
Their solutions mean just turning the valves a little but I don’t think this is the way to solve
problems.”
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 18
-

Is technology assessment compatible with democracy?
The issue of democracy in technology assessment is often a difficult one. Richard Sclove, of the
Loka Institute 1 in the United States put forth some rather thought provoking ideas about
participatory approaches to technology assessment and ways to make decisions about science
and research more democratic.
His work revolves around two simple premises that seem, on the surface, to be very
straightforward. The first of these is that people should have a say in important decisions that
affect their lives. In other words, democracy is a pretty good idea. The second premise is that
technology is has a large influence on people’s lives. Putting these two ideas together leads
logically to the conclusion that it would be a good idea to democratise technology.
The next question is “What does it mean to democratise technology?” To answer this, Richard
explains that you need democratic procedures and institutions so that people can participate and
be represented in decisions about developing or using technology. This makes sense but,
according to Richard, there is also a more subtle requirement. “Technology has an incredible
ability to shape and influence social and political relations,” he says, “This means that you don’t
just need democratic process. You have to make sure that technological developments in a
society are also supporting, perpetuating and improving democratic social relations.”
What’s more, society is swimming in a sea of technology and the rate of technological change is
only getting faster. Richard believes that the western world has made some progress towards
assessing the economic, environmental and health and safety implications. No nation, however,
has managed to deal effectively with the social, cultural and political repercussions of
technology. This is partly because we feel the effects of a multitude of technologies together.
Individual technologies – the telephone, the car, or the computer – cannot be dealt with in
isolation.
As a result, Richard proposes some provisional criteria for distinguishing democratic from nondemocratic technologies. Of course, these criteria are not definitive. Instead, they need to be
debated and refined to suit each given situation. To make technology compatible with
democracy, Richard sees a need for a participatory approach that can assess a range of
technologies against a multiple set of criteria. Some criteria may be concerned with sustainability
or social inclusion but democratic criteria could also be added.
Morten Elle’s original scenarios deal with many different technologies at once and they are
accessible and easy to understand. Richard Sclove learned about the EASW method and
became involved with the Fleximodo project while working at the Danish Board of Technology.
He began to consider adapting the EASW method to include attention to democracy as a goal, in
1
Please note that the speaker makes the important distinction between loka and loca and
informed the audience that his institute was not one full of crazy Spanish women!
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 19
-
addition to the workshop’s key theme, which could be sustainability, social cohesion or
accessibility, for example.
With this in mind, he looked at the urban ecology scenarios in depth and also analysed the
proceedings from EASW exercises in Corfu. Looking for ways to help stimulate attention to
democracy, he has come up with four sets of questions to be asked in a scenario workshop,
either after the vision-making stage, or after the action plan has been created.
The four sets of questions are concerned with:
1. Technology and Social Relations
2. Technology, Personal Growth and Social Learning
3. Technology and Governance
4. Technology and Sustainability
Each of the four groups of participants can take a set of questions and spend an extra 30 to 45
minutes to evaluate their ideas against democratic criteria. Then, the visions or action plans can
be altered accordingly. This innovative approach to combining democracy with technology
assessment needs to be tested. Prof Sclove is looking for collaborators who would be interested
in experimenting by introducing the democratic questions into a scenario workshop.
For more information contact: Richard Sclove, The Loka Institute
Tel: +1 413 559 5860
Fax: +1 413 559 5811
e-mail: resclove@amherst.edu
http://www.amherst.edu/~loka
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 20
-
EASW and education
Bengt-Olof Grahn from Gotland feels that the participants in a scenario workshop need a certain
degree of understanding about basic ecological issues before they attend a workshop because
the timetable is so tight. To him, the role of education in sustainable development is vital. He
finds that most people are anxious to understand ecological interactions in their own city,
however, which is encouraging.
In a recent self-training project called the Global Action Plan for the Earth, people in Gotland met
with eight or nine other households in their village or building. They then study their behaviour
and consumption in day-to-day tasks with regard to waste, water, energy and transport. This way
they learn to consume less. This is a good way to make people aware and change their way of
thinking,” says Bengt-Olof. “You have to make some very tough decisions about your lifestyle. It
gets under your skin and no government or authority can do it for you. You have to do it for
yourself.”
Bridging the gap between art and science
Breaking down the barrier between science and the general public is not an easy task. Three
science theatre companies, Pandemonia in Amsterdam, Klara Soppteater in Stockholm and
Spectrum in London, are rising to the challenge in the European Theatre of Science project.
What is science theatre?
“It is an educational form of theatre which was started independently in the United States and the
United Kingdom in the 1930s,” explains Lea. Science centres and museums need a way to
captivate their audiences while explaining scientific concepts. “The demonstrators find that
putting on a red nose or a costume helps keep the audience’s attention,” Lea continues.
Molecule Theatre in the UK pioneered collaborations between scientists, writers and actors to
put on plays. With industry sponsorship, they toured around science museums and schools,
informing and educating as they entertained children.
The Klara Soppteater in Sweden found that the public also enjoys seeing real, live scientists
taking part in plays. Their approach is to serve soup while performing a play about a relevant
scientific subject such as genetics, obesity, astronomy, the brain and evolution. It may sound
straightforward to produce a play about science and involve a few scientists, but according to
Lea, it is a lot of hard work. For a start, it is very difficult to get scientists involved because they
see it as a risky venture; their hard-earned careers can easily be destroyed if they say the wrong
thing at the wrong time.
On the other hand, actors have to ask a lot of questions to be able to understand the subject
matter and this “illiteracy” can take a long time to rectify. But, after much effort in a creative and
relaxed environment, both parties benefit. The scientists can show their side of the story and
also gain better understanding about the concerns of the public. The actors learn more about
science and see the personalities of the scientists involved. Together, they can teach the public
through drama and start to tackle the problems of science’s image.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 21
-
The European Theatre of Science project takes this further and is creating bridges between the
two widely divergent cultures of science and art. The project centres round the Science Theatre
Laboratory. The space where they work, a venue in one of seven European cities, is known as
the test tube, explains Lea. “We then introduce scientists, who may be experts or students. Then
the creative element, the actors, writers and visual artists are added, along with educators,
curators and teachers. The three artistic directors from the project are the catalysts and for three
very intensive days, we heat up the mixture and hope for a positive reaction!”
The aim is to provide everyone with an enthusiasm for theatre and to share tools and techniques
to communicate ideas about science and technology effectively. The workshop has very
practical outcomes and the partners are creating a network in each country they visit. They also
expect to enthuse the participants enough to spawn a “trans-national multiplication of events”
which will spread science theatre across Europe. These will be backed up by an on-line
database that the new networks can both add to and consult.
In terms of innovation, the project won’t lead to a drop in unemployment figures over night and it
doesn’t have any direct impact of SMEs. “But,” says Lea, “We believe we have a very original
contribution to make to create a climate of innovation and life long learning.” Indeed, many of the
plays are designed to stimulate children’s interest in science and technology and in this way the
project is working at the grass roots and taking a long term approach to the problem of the
public’s appreciation of science.
“Theatre is not a cheap option,” admits Lea, “It’s not as far reaching as television and it’s not like
a video that you can repeat ten times a day. Actors get tired after three presentations.” But the
difference is that theatre can respond quickly to changes and “life action” – meeting face to face
rather than sending a fax or an email – remains a valuable form of communication.
Although the ETS project is not directly related to the EASW initiatives, science theatre could be
a useful approach in some workshops. Actors could bring scenarios to life with short plays or
sketches, making the method more accessible to a wider audience. Lea reminds us that actors
don’t necessarily need a stage to perform and they can, most importantly, help break down
barriers by making us laugh.
To find out more, contact:
Lea Witmondt, Stichting Pandemonia
Tel: +31 20 6920772
Fax: +31 20 6634760
e-mail: ets_pand@dds.n
l http://cordis.lu/innovation/src/estprj.htm
The EASW method can be used effectively as a tool to increase people’s understanding of
issues surrounding sustainability. Athena Veneti from the Mediterranean Information Office was
a high school teacher when she realised that the method could be adapted to be used by young
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 22
-
people. “The students are often more interested than adults and they take the workshop more
seriously,” she explains. From her experience running three such events, she says, “The results
are amazing and they help to put the ideas of sustainable development into young people’s
heads. This is important as these young people will be tomorrow’s leaders. Following successful
workshops in Greece and Denmark, Athena is taking the initiative further afield to India and
Tunisia.
Getting the right mix
Even mixing in young people to “adult” workshops can help stimulate fresh perspectives
because they are less inhibited than adults and they contribute more readily. That’s not to say,
points out Christiane Ademilua-Rintelen, that the experience of older people is not valuable. A
mixture of ages and backgrounds will often open up the workshop. Of course, it is always
important for the National Monitor to get the balance of participants right for the workshop to be
a success. This can also mean bringing in people from other regions or countries to share their
experience or solve local political problems. The danger that must be avoided in this case,
Morten points out, is that too many outsiders can jeopardise the success of the resulting action
plan.
How orthodox should we be?
Although sustainability can still, of course, be approached usefully with EASW, the tool is also
increasingly being used to discuss a wider range of issues and problems. Social inclusion,
education, mobility, information society, health and job creation have all found a forum for
discussion through EASW. Granted, many of these topics are included in the sustainability
debate but the method is flexible enough to accommodate each of them separately. This also
shows that the tool can also be used to tackle issues that are less about technology and more
about society and culture.
Some National Monitors are adding new twists to the method to make it fit the local situation or
to make it more accessible. In Massimo Bastiani’s traffic and mobility workshop, each of the four
groups displayed their scenario ideas through posters detailing “Protests and Proposals”, i.e.
their protests about current transport systems and their proposals for ways to improve the
situation.
Another novel idea came from Teresa Rojo who found that using the “Technology and
Sustainability” axes, shown on page three, were more appropriate than using the full scenarios
in a workshop for architects in Bilbao to discuss planning in an urban park in the city’s
Abandoibarra sector. The disused industrial area is a large, 35 Ha piece of land, near to the
Nervion River. In this case, the scenarios were too complicated because the group had not
already moved very far in the sustainability debate. As a result, the workshop did not look so
much at the question of “who” should be responsible. It was more about looking at the
differences between high and low technology and sustainable or non-sustainable solutions.
Highly sustainable solutions were defined as those which could be used for a long time and
would be reliable for 30 years or more. “Types of technology in buildings was extremely relevant
in this case. The workshop was simple but for them it was useful. In building their visions in the
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 23
-
group discussion, they used Lego and maps. You can be innovative in your solutions,” Teresa
says. The architects presented their conclusions to the public authorities, who came in at the
end of the session.
Adapting the tool
At last year’s meeting, there was much more debate about whether or not it was appropriate to
alter the tool and use it in different ways and on different topics. This year, it was pretty much
accepted that the tool could be moulded and adapted. Massimo Bastiani, who presented reports
from workshops held in Italy on the Information Society and Future Strategies for Traffic and
Mobility, summarises it concisely, “The methodology is like a dress and you have to adapt the
dress to wear it in different situations. National Monitors have the capacity to modify the dress.”
Lars Karlsson of Hippopotamus Education explains why the workshop can moulded quite easily,
“The scenario workshop is made of components – vision making, written scenarios, petit comité
- that can be used in different ways, depending on how we combine them.” It makes sense to
sometimes bring in other tools or to rely upon the vision making aspects more than the written
scenarios. Christine Ugbor agrees and believes that it can be helpful to be orthodox to start with
when people are learning about the method. This way, they understand the tool and can go on to
modify it according to their own requirements.
Lars has also worked with many different methods, including study or research circles,
workbooks, teamwork and workflow games. Most recently, he has become interested in the 6E
approach (ergonomics, ecology, emissions, efficiency, economy, energy) which takes
organisations through fifteen steps to give an overall view of people, working life and the
environment. The key, according to Lars, is to choose the right tool for the right application.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 24
-
The Innovation Programme Public Awareness action :
From the EASW * initiative to the TDSP * projects.
Understand
Structures
& Paths
Develop
Relating to TDSPs
Improve
Tools
Test
Up-date
Tools
AWARENESS AND
COMMUNICATION
INFRA-STRUCTURES
AND NETWORKS
Cluster of Tools
Optimize
Networks of
Actors
Establish
interrelated
Tools / Networks
Promote
Networks
of Actors
Involvement
of Actors
Identification
of Actors
Support mechanisms
EASW: European Awareness Scenario Workshops
TDSP: Training & Dissemination Schemes Projects
The Training and Dissemination Scheme Projects (TDSP) aim to promote communication
and awareness about many aspects of Innovation. This is shown above in Mr Fernandez’s slide.
One such TDSP, which Lars co-ordinates, is called the European Continuous Improvement
Circle (ECIC). The project is helping SMEs, local and regional authorities, communities and
other organisations to prepare to constantly work in continually changing environments. After all,
the organisations that will be successful in the future will be the ones that are the most
innovative in the way which they use their resources to move into new markets. The technique
the project uses is the study circle.
The ECIC on-line, multimedia tool kit, operates an open system for communication, training and
problem solving so that best practices can be shared and principles of innovation can be
fostered.
To find out more about ECIC, contact:
Lars Karlsson, Hippopotamos Education
Tel: +43 1 5356768
Fax: +43 1 5356768
e-mail: l.karlsson@magnet.at
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 25
-
Expanding EASW
The Fleximodo project, as its name suggests, is working to make EASW more flexible. Tjeerd
Deelstra from the International Institute for the Urban Environment presented an update on the
project which started in January 1997 and will end in December 1998. The Fleximodo team is
developing and disseminating new scenario workshops that can deal with different subject matters.
As well as scenarios for urban ecology, Fleximodo will provide National Monitors with scenarios for
urban mobility, information and communication technologies and urban regeneration.
Themes for the three new scenario modules:

Urban Mobility: The major urban functions of living, working, shopping and recreation

Information and Communication Technologies: Social life, economy, education and access to
information and communication

Urban Regeneration: Job creation, crime prevention, social life and well-being
Urban
Mobility
ICT
Urban
Ecology
Regeneration
Urban
Single1
Hybrid 1
Hybrid 2
Hybrid 3
Ecology
Various
Rennes, France
Newcastle, UK
Bologna/Venice/
Cities
17 October 1998
4-6 September
Vicenza
1998
?
Single 2
Hybrid 4
Hybrid 5
Oerias, Portugal
Tel Aviv (Israel)
Volos, Greece
15-16 May 1998
August 1998
17-18 July 1998
Single 3
Hybrid 6
Sesto San
Calvia, Mallorca
Giovanni
23-25 October 1998
Pre-1998
Mobility
ICT
12 December
1997
Urban
Single 4
Regeneration
Bilbao, Spain
28-29 May 1998
The synergetic matrix of scenarios
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 26
-
These, and “hybrid workshops” combining the different scenarios, are currently being tested
across Europe. The project partners are also adapting the methodology to suit different
workshop durations and working styles. “Given local and cultural differences, two alternative
programme versions have been developed on the basis of the original EASW programme: an
“extended programme and a Southern European” style programme,” says Tjeerd. “Additionally,
two one-day programmes have been conceived. One is on the basis of several workshops held
in the Netherlands, another on the basis of several pilots in Southern Europe.”
The resulting scenario documentation will add new dimensions to the toolkit by helping other
National Monitors save time in preparing future workshops. As a result, the wheel will not have
to be re-invented for each workshop.
Other projects are also working with adapted versions of the scenario workshop method. For
example, DG V is using the tool to look at creating employment. They are currently running a
pilot scheme.
To find out more, contact:
Tjeerd Deelstra, International Institute for the Urban Environment
Tel: +31 15 2623279
Fax: +31 15 2624873
e-mail: urban@theOffice.net
http://www.idis.unina.it/fleximodo/fleximodo.html
As part of the Fleximodo project, a workshop on Urban Information and communication tools
and facilities was held in Sesto / San Giovanni. This area of Northern Italy supported the steel
industry in the 60s and 70s. It now has high levels of unemployment and the local policy makers
see that information and communication technologies could provide new jobs. Multimedia
companies like Sony and Epsom have already moved into the region. “However, Valeria
Giannella explains, “there are few links between the big and small firms and this is what the
authorities wanted to encourage.”
The organisers timed the workshop to coincide with the opening of the new Proxima centre
which raised the profiles of both ICT issues and the EASW method in the press. As with every
event, this one had its limits. It was difficult to generate practical ideas that could be part of a
follow up. “Many of the participants were more interested in the pleasure and social aspects of
ICTs instead of high tech and new jobs.” This was partly because there wasn’t enough time to
generate a common ground and partly because not enough experienced entrepreneurs were
available. “But, as a result of the event, ICT use has been stimulated, enterprises are cooperating and a course on the Internet for 25 people is planned,” says Valeria Giannella.
Awareness about social inclusion is another important outcome from the workshop and EASW
has been chosen to help plan a public park in the area.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 27
-
Increasing Awareness about the Information Society – ACTORES
Like Fleximodo, ACTORES is a Training and Dissemination Scheme Project. ACTORES
stands for Awareness on the use of Communication Technologies as an Opportunity for
Regional Economic and Social development. The six members of the project team, from Italy,
Austria, the UK, Spain and Portugal, are creating awareness about ICTs by setting up training
mechanisms for public institutions and the citizens. The approach that the project is innovative,
using an approach known as DIAM or the dedicated integrated action mechanism. This
mechanism includes a range of both conventional and new approaches – newsletters,
workshops, training sessions, as well as case studies and on-line fora. “The focus,” explains
Osvaldo La Rosa, “is on strategy rather than the technologies themselves. All activities are
evaluated for their efficiency and information flows from one activity into another” The five areas
the project works on are: urban telematics, tele-services for citizens, urban technology for
sustainability, social cohesion and tele-education.
The idea is to share best practice on the use of information and communication technologies in
each of these areas. Workshops have been held in Austria and Italy to discuss ICTs for
government and electronic signatures respectively.
More information is available from:
Osvaldo La Rosa, Rete Urbana delle Rappresentanze
Tel: +39 06 860911
Fax: +39 06 86091292
e-mail: o.larosa@rur.it
http://www.municipia.org/actores
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 28
-
4. Supporting and promoting the network
This Second Meeting of National Monitors showed that there is value added by bringing
everyone together into a European network, rather than working in isolation. Lars Karlsson
points out that there is cohesion through the method as everyone is using the same procedure to
talk about things on a local level. The content may be different but there is a need to share the
results of similar workshops across the network. For example, it would be useful for him to know
more about the Spanish approach to urban issues which is quite different from that of the
Swedes’. According to Lars, the latter want to make the city look like the countryside whereas
the former deals with towns as towns. “Everyone starts from different points of view and we can
all teach each other something,” he says.
Aleardo Furlani from Innova came to the meeting to present a programme to enhance the
National Monitors network. He sees the group as “a unique network to promote a social
environment favourable to innovation.” This network can offer the type of support that Lars
mentions but it has the potential to do much more if everyone is active and interested in using
and promoting the EASW method.
At the moment, some of the listed National Monitors have other interests and priorities. There
are also other people who aren’t formally recognised as part of the network but who are
extremely active in workshop initiatives. The network should therefore be reviewed to make sure
that the best people are included.
Once everyone is in place, the network members should continue to share their ideas, improve
their contacts and synergies as well as looking for opportunities for co-operative actions within
the group. The existing 55 National Monitors have a wide range of skills and capabilities and
these could be combined more effectively. By exchanging information and ideas, the network
can generate high quality workshops that perhaps challenge new areas in different ways. Cost
savings and a more effective marketing strategy could be achieved by defining a communication
protocol and common display styles. This would make presenting the tool in joint mailings,
events and promotions a much easier task.
That’s not to say that the tool is not already being promoted widely by existing NMs. Many local
authorities have been convinced to use a workshop. Involvement also tends to create
enthusiasm for the tool, as we have seen with the training actions. Morten explains, “The best
way to disseminate is to invite people to participate.”
Many initiatives also gain favourable attention in press and NMs have found means to promote
the network through other related networks. Luigi Amodio told the group about promotion
through the ECSITE network (European Collaborative of Science, Industry and Technology
Exhibitions). He will be presenting EASW at their November conference in Lisbon. He hopes this
will help widen the understanding of the role of participatory approaches for science and
technology.
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 29
-
The web site offers a common forum for National Monitors to share information and ideas. Set
up in 1997, it was redesigned in 1998 to bring it into line with the Increasing Awareness activity
of the Innovation programme and to improve the user interface. Papers and reports about
different initiatives and workshops can be posted there and subsequently downloaded. The web
site also offers contact details for the National Monitors. The bulletin board function has been
under-used by National Monitors to date. It is easy to join existing threads of discussion and
even to set up new threads. The CORDIS representatives invited the group to make better use
of it.
You can find the website at: http://www.cordis.lu/easw/home.html
5. A final word
The success of the EASW method is down to the hard work of many individuals and it is a
difficult task to sum up a full year’s activities in just one day. The method can both encourage
innovation uptake and help communities to question social, environmental and economic issues.
Demand for the tool is high but there are still many new areas it could be applied successfully to
involve more people in planning for a better tomorrow. After all, as Mr Bellardinelli says, “What
we will find in new millennium, is what we will bring. This means that there are no gifts and
everything is good and is what we will build.”
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 30
-
ANNEXE I
WORK -PROGRAMME
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 31
-
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 32
-
Work-Programme
Arrival - Registration
10.00
09.30 -
Official Welcome by M. BELLARDINELLI
10.15
10.00 -
Objectives and context by F. FERNANDEZ
10.30
10.15 -
Balance of one year in the dissemination of EASW
12.00
10.30 -
Presentations of about 5 minutes followed by discussion on:
A.
B.
C.
D.
Reasons for success or failure
Opportunities, demand, obstacles
Missing things, stimulation
Envisaged workshops
The EASW - IRC Training action
13.00
12.00 -
Presentations by a Panel of NM’s in charge of Training Actions followed by
discussion on:
A.
Identified demand
B.
C.
New trends
Follow-up actions
Break for Lunch
13.00 - 14.30
Training and Dissemination Schemes Projects and other initiatives
14.30 15.30
a)
The European Theater of Science. From Scientific Culture to
Innovation.
b)
A view from the New World.
c)
Short presentations on some TDSPs projects followed by discussion on:
A.
B.
C.
Opportunities for National Monitors
Synergies already identified between TDSPs projects and NM’s initiatives
Linkage and Networking with other National and Community initiatives
Towards a co-operative model for EASW National Monitors
16.00
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 33
-
15.30 -
New tools to support the work of NM’s
The CORDIS WWW EASW Home-Page
16.30
How to make the best use of it. Possible new features.
16.00 -
Summary of the Day and Conclusions
16.45
16.30 -
Closure of the Workshop by M. BELLARDINELLI
17.00
16.45 -
Coffee will be served along working sessions in the morning and
afternoon
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 34
-
ANNEXE II
LIST OF THE PARTICIPANTS
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 35
-
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 36
-
X
Name
Surname
Mrs
AdemiluaRintelen
Christiane
Mr
Karlsson
Lars
Mrs
Schneider
Bernhard
Mrs
Ugbor
Christian
Mrs
Wehinger
Mrs
Mr
Company
Amt der NÖ
Landesregierung
Abteilung RU4Koordinierungsstelle
fûr Umweltschutz
Hippopotamos
Bildungsberatungs
Gmbh
Cou
ntry
AT
Phone
Fax
+43 02742200
+43 02742200/5280
E-Mail
AT
+43 1 5356768
+43 1 5356768
l.karlsson@magnet.at
AT
+43 2 85372358
+43 2 85376140
Schneider@wvnet.at
Vienna Academy for
the Future
AT
+43 1 5356768
+43 1 5356768
Beatrix
TUC Upper Austria
AT
+43 1 5356768
+43 1 5356768
Day
Jennifer
Cordis Bxl
BE
+32 2 2381794
+32 2 2381798
Mc Keown
Tim
Cordis Co
BE
J.day@intrasoft.be
+32 2 2381798
Mr
Van de Ven
Anthony
Eurocities
BE
+32 2 5520879
+32 2 5520889
a.vandeven@eurocities.
be
Mr
Elle
Morten
Technical University
of Denmark
DK
+45 45 936411
+45 45 936412
me@ivtb.dtu.dk
Mr
Jens
Danish Centre for
Urban Ecology
DK
+45
+45 8940 5884
jhc@dcue.dk (off)
jhc@email.dk (Pr)
Aurora
Arpegio, Madrid
ES
Mrs
HolckChristiansen
Justo
Moreno
Rojo
Teresa
Pax Mediterranea S.l.
ES
+34 91 5646379
+34 91 5649200
+34 95 4922390
+34 95 4657601
Mrs
Velázquez
Isabel
GEA 21
ES
+34 91 4481823
+34 91 5329660
ivelazquez@gea21.com
Prof. Agrafiotis
Demostenes
National School of
Public Health
GR
agraf@compulink.gr
Mrs
Veneti
Athéna
Mediterranean
Information Office
GR
Mr
Amodio
Luigi
Fondazione IDIS
IT
+30 1 6466243
+30 1 64662433
+301 3247490
+301 3225240
+39 81 7352221
+39 81 7352280
IT
+39 75 9221640
+39 75 9221640
archbast@krenet.it
Mrs
paxmed@arrakis.es
mio-eeenv@ath.forthnet.gr
amodio@zeus.idis.unin
a.it
Arch. Bastiani
Massimo
Mr
Blanchi
Mauro
Innova S.r.l
IT
+39 06 68803253
+39 06 68806997
Mrs
Cobello
Laura
Istituto Ambiente Italia
IT
+39 091 6812172
+39 091 6817289
amb.it.sicily@imd.it
Mrs
Fascione
Valeria
Fondazione IDIS
IT
+39 081 7352221
+39 081 7352280
fascione@zeus.idis.unin
a.it
Mr
Furlani
Aleardo
Innova Srl
IT
+39 06 68803253
+39 06 68806997
a.furlani@innova-eu.net
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
- 37
-
X
Name
Surname
Company
Cou
ntry
Phone
Fax
E-Mail
Mr
La Rosa
Osvaldo
RUR
IT
+39 06 86091268
+39 06 86091292
o.larosa@rur.it
Mr
Kelly
Eamonn
Intrasoft
L
+352 44 10122261
+352 44 10122359
e.kelly@intrasoft.lu
Mr
Deelstra
Tjeerd
NL
+31 15 2623279
+31 15 2624873
urban@theOffice.nl
Mrs
Witmondt
Lea
International Institute
for the
Urban Environment
Pandemonia
NL
+31 20 6920771
+31 20 6634760
Ets_pand@dds.nl
Mr
Grahn
Bengt-Olof
Gotlands Kommun
SW
+46 498 269212
+46 498 269211
bengtolof.grahn@gotlan
d.se
Mrs
Webster
Catherine
Ecotec Research and
Consulting
UK
+44 1222 226398
+44 1222 226398
Catherine_webster@ec
otec.co.uk
Mr
Sclove
Richard
The Loka Institute
USA +1 413 5595860
+1 413 5595811
Mr
Bellardinelli
Mario
L
Mr
Fernandez
Fernandez
Francisco
Mrs
Van Boxsom
Chris
Head of Unit
DGXIII - D2
European
Commission
Principal
Administrator
European
Commission
Secretary
European
Commission
Second Meeting of National Monitors – 15 May 1998
L
L
- 38
-
Resclove@amherst.edu