Anonymous

“Reality Provides us with facts so romantic that imagination itself could add nothing else”
Jules Verne.

.
•
Tecnol ógico de Monterrey (HS), Mexico City
•
McGill University – B.Sc., Montréal (Canada)
•
Universit é du Québec à Montréal, M.Sc. & Ph.D.
•
University of Texas at Austin (MSI), Post-Doc (1998-1999)
•
Texas A&M Univ - Corpus Christi (1999-2002)
•
Columbia (Biosphere) (2002-present)


Atmospheric chemistry and health impact (PAHs)

Radiatively important aerosols (direct and indirect impacts)
 “ Short circuit” in the carbon cycle?

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/sipa/envp/louchouarn/courses/

Patrick Louchouarn
Columbia University
“I’ll be so brief, I am already finished”
Dali

 Introduction
• Addressing the “Grand Challenges in Environmental
Sciences”
 On common grounds
• Defining and acknowledging (un)certainty in assessing/managing environmental change: a discursive approach
• Defining risks and the role of experts in public
(environmental) policy
 Concluding Remarks
• The role of education (of scientists and policymakers)

Prof. Richard Smalley, 1996 Nobel Laureate (Chemistry)
1.
Energy
2.
Water
3.
Food
4.
Environment
5.
Poverty
6.
Terrorism&War
7.
Disease
8.
Education
9.
Democracy
10.
Population
UN’s Millenium Development Goals
Task Force 1 on Poverty and Economic Development
TF 2 on Hunger
TF 3 on Education and Gender Equality
TF 4 on Child Health and Maternal Health
TF 5 on Major Diseases (HIV/AIDS, Malaria, TB)
TF 6 on Environmental Sustainability
TF 7 on Water and Sanitation
TF 8 on Improving the Lives of Slum Dwellers
TF 9 on Open, Rule-Based Trading Systems
TF 10 on Science, Technology and Innovation

“Grand Challenges in Environmental Sciences” (2001)
1.
Biogeochemical Cycles (human perturbations)
2.
Biological Diversity (ecological & functional importance)
3.
Climate Variability (increase precision and predictive capacity)
4.
Hydrological Forecasting (changes in resources and demands)
5.
Infectious Diseases and the Environment (ecological & evolutionary aspects of infectious diseases)
6.
Institutions and Resource Use (role of institutions in management/fate of natural resources)
7.
Land-Use Dynamics (anthropogenic impacts of land-use change/dynamics)
8.
Reinventing the Use of Materials (green chemistrynanotechnology, recycling)

“Grand Challenges in Environmental Sciences” (2001)
6. Institutions and Resource Use
 Systematic understanding of the role of institutions in shaping the use of natural resources (markets, legal and regulatory structures at regional to international levels, collaborative resource governance, heterogeneous stakeholders and management structures)
 Elucidate internal and external conditions that affect institutions’ capacity for adaptive change !
NAS accepts (unconsciously?) the role of science in shaping policy
Departure from common axiology and culture of science developed since 19 th Century and reinforced in mid-20 th Century

Science: The Endless Frontier ( 1945)
(
Vannevar Bush - Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development
)
"New frontiers of the mind are before us, and if they are pioneered with the same vision, boldness, and drive with which we have waged this war we can create a fuller and more fruitful employment and a fuller and more fruitful life."
Franklin D. Roosevelt - November 17, 1944
"Without scientific progress no amount of achievement in other directions can insure our health, prosperity, and security as a nation in the modern world."
Isolation of basic Science and the quest for knowledge
V. Bush - 1945
 Implies a “ purity ” of the scientific process ( independent from the political process)
 Provides a service to society by “fueling” its progress (war against disease, National security, public welfare)
 indirectly linked to the political process

Re-Thinking Science
(
Helga Nowotny Chairwoman of the EC’s European Research Advisory Board )
Europe : “The old paradigm of scientific discovery “characterized by the hegemony of disciplinary science,with its strong sense of an internal hierarchy between the disciplines and driven by the autonomy of scientists and their host institutions, the universities” is being superseded (but not replaced) by a new paradigm of knowledge production
 “socially distributed, application-oriented, trans-disciplinary and subject to multiple accountabilities”.
USA : NRC’s report on scientific advisory committee (2004): “Political considerations should not play a role in the process of deciding whom to appoint to policy panels”
 “But in fact politics is unavoidable in the empaneling process. The real question is whether we want to openly confront this reality or allow it to play out in the proverbial backrooms of political decision making”. ( R. Pielke Jr. 2005 )

The “ neutrality ” of science in societal (and political) debates is still viewed as
 ultimate quality of this (social) knowledge-production activity
 a warranty for reliability and legitimacy of this knowledge
“As scientists debate the various sides of politicized issues, their involvement undermines the assumptions that have given experts their power and the neutral arbiter of truth”
( S. Bocking, “Nature’s Experts: Science,
Politics, and the Environment” Rutgers Univ. Press, 2004 )
“By participating in political debates as advocates for (special) interests, scientitst are reducing their claim to authority”.
( R. Pielke Jr. “A part but apart from politics”, Nature 2005 )

QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

Scientists as Activists and the Legitimacy of Science
“ The Administration and the Scientist ”
Jim Hansen (2005): I have been told by a high government official that I should not talk about “dangerous anthropogenic interference” with climate,
The opinions and interpretations that I express today are my personal views. I am a government employee, but I am on leave today, I travel here at my expense, and I speak as a private citizen […]. I hope to convince you that I am knowledgeable about climate change and that the information I provide warrants your consideration , but the views that I present have no official sanction.
“ The Corporation and the Scientist ”
HydroQuebec (2002): “For boreal reservoirs, IRN quotes mainly Eric
Duchemin who is an environmental activist of the Union Québécoise pour la
Conservation de la Nature, a Canadian environmental group that has opposed any hydro project in the last 15 years”
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

The acceptance of a valid definition (and role) of uncertainty in science is not as critical as clearing the confusion that arises when science “ argues with itself ”.
When people hold a strong idea that science is somewhat certain and predictable, then a strong puzzlement arises when scientists have more than one answer for an issue and disagree among themselves.

When the strongest symbolism becomes a confusing notion
“It seems that metaphors in science carry a greater burden then in metaphors of literature or history”.
Alan Lightman (2004 - A sense of the mysterious: Science and the human spirit)
A. Moberg et al. (2005) Nature

Critics say we shouldn’t’ act on the Kyoto protocol or even curb GHG emissions before we obtain confirmation of climate change from “ sound science ”
“Soundness” of science is defined in terms of perceived (un)certainty
1) Forcings
Hansen, J. 2004 (2004) Defusing the global warming time bomb,
Scientific American , 290, 68-77 .

Taking the forcings at face value

 The FCCC definition of climate change requires detection and attribution of climate change leading to "dangerous interference”
 There is NO CONSENSUS on the definition of Climate change, let alone on what constitutes “dangerous anthropogenic interference” with the climate system (
R. Pielke Jr. (2004). What is climate change? Issues in
Science & Technology . Jul. 9
).
 Minimizes the need for decarbonization of the energy system and for the reduction of human and environmental vulnerability to climate
 FCCC disregards adaptive measures and will only consider mitigation under strong scientific consensus. But there IS scientific consensus !

 IPCC notes that under its definition of climate change, effective action requires "decisionmaking under uncertainty”
 But much of the uncertainty in climate change scenarios is related to non-science issues (demographics, economy, energy production, innovative technology diffusion)
 “Decisionmaking under uncertainty” is a challenge familiar to decisionmakers and research communities in social sciences

 Social Security:
– Social Security is projected to start paying out more in benefits than it collects in taxes in
2018
– Can pay full promised benefits only until 2042
(solvent until 2052)
QuickTime™ and a
TIF F ( Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.
 How can solvency be restored to Social
Security?
– massive tax increases
– massive benefit cuts
– Investment of payroll taxes in privatized accounts
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) dec ompressor are needed to s ee this pic ture.

Process of Public Environmental Policy
( S. Cohen, 2001 )
 Environmental policy

Closely connected to issues of economical development and income (wealth) distribution
 Environmental policy thus appears as a set of individual and collective patterns of choices about resource deployment and management

Social learning
 The assignment and distribution of benefits and costs creates political conflicts that both impede and distort social learning

Filters on information flow

Process of Public Environmental Policy
Process of environmental policy is characterized by disjointedincremental steps and heterogeneous structures

Large number of separated centers
Eventually, decisions happen
 Clean Water and Clean Air Acts, Superfund Program.
 However, this process becomes highly complex when it deals with deep uncertainty with respect to the behavior of non-linear systems (i.e. ecosystems, climate, etc)

Process of Public Environmental Policy
 Decision models under deep uncertainty DO exist:
 Scenario-Based Planning (discursive process)
 Help groups of individuals reach consensus on strategies even when members cannot agree on the most likely future
(Does not systematically correct for fallacies in human reasoning)
 Computer Assisted Reasoning (inductive process)

Determination of robust regions (domains of choices)
 Market-based (diffusion of innovative technology)
Lempert R.J. (2002) and Robalino D.A. and Lempert R.J. (2000)




Its about minimizing potential deleterious impacts in face of incomplete information (managing risk)
Risk avoiders try to minimize the potential for “ misfortunes of the second kind ” (“accept something they should have rejected” -
Type II errors )
By doing so, they increase the potential for “ misfortunes of the first kind ” (“reject something they should have accepted” - Type I errors )
Accept null hypothesis
Reject null hypothesis
H o
State of Nature
Global Change does not occur
Correct Conclusion Type I Error
H
1
Global Change is real
Type II Error Correct Conclusion

Precaution vs.
Resilience
 Europe has moved strongly in favor of Precautionary
Principle (Climate Change, GMOs)
 U.S. seems more inclined towards Resilience Principle
( c.f. Wildavski): building capacity (adaptations)
 To give the critics of PP some credit, this principle is rather loose on the definition of science (un)certainty
 However, we fail to recognize that the discussion of
(un)certainty is one of statistical likelihood of any event occurring

Risk Assessment/Management
 And, not all risks are the same!
“when we have two options for actions where the same unwelcome event will occur with different probability, the conclusion for a decision under uncertainty is clear: each rationally thinking human being would choose the option for action with the lower probability of occurrence”
(Klinke A. and Renn O. 2001)

Risk Assessment/Management
 Not all risks are the same!
Damocles
Typical of technological risk (extent of damage inversely proportional to probability of occurrence): High damage - Low probability of occurrence
High persistency!

Nuclear disaster, dam failure, chemical accident

Risk Assessment/Management
 Not all risks are the same!
Pythia
Damocles
Large uncertainty in probability of occurrence, extent and cause of damage
High persistency!

Human intervention in ecosystems (dams, artificial groundwater recharge)

GHG and CFC releases

Risk Assessment/Management
 Not all risks are the same!
Cassandra
Pythia
Damocles
Paradox : Probability of occurrence is known as well as extent of damage
(confidence level is low)
Long latency which generates little mobilization

Anthropogenic climate change

Loss of biodiversity

Risk Assessment/Management


Not all risks are the same!
Neither is their management.
(Klinke A. and Renn O. 2001)

Baromètre IRSN 2004
Risk perception in France
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) dec ompressor are needed to s ee this pic ture.
Social issues amount > 50% Environmental concerns ~13%

Baromètre IRSN 2004
Perception of role and acceptance of experts
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) dec ompressor are needed to s ee this pic ture.

Congressman Vernon J. Ehlers (2001)
Unlocking Our Future: Towards a New National Science Policy
“US science policy is outdated; the American public does not understand science or its practice; US scientists are not sufficiently engaged in the political process ”
 The majority of jobs in the 21 st Century will depend on scientific and technical expertise.
 Science curricula should be inquiry-based and involve hands-on (minds-on) experimentation so “children” can experience the thrill of learning science.

Science of Learning
Construction of Meaning
Mental Models
Educational Theory & Pedagogy
Active Learning that accounts for
Motivations, preconceptions, prior knowledge, cognitive skills, metacognition, context,
And social interactions
Information
Technology
Representations
Simulations
Information Managmt
Communication
Instructional materials
Learning
Environments
Authentic Inquiry
Nature of Science
Scientific knowledge
Scientific models
Complex data sets
Community

Mental models (metaphors)

Physical models
 Computer simulations/Mathematical models
 Visualization of complex real data sets
Feedback to learner Knowledge
Centered
Learner
Centered
Assessment
Assessment
Centered
Learning
Objectives
Learning Outcomes
Designs of effective learning environments following
The How People Learn (NAS, 2001) Framework

Prof. Richard Smalley, 1996 Nobel Prize Laureate (Chemistry)
1. Energy
2.
Water
3.
Food
4.
Environment
5.
Poverty
6.
Terrorism & War
7.
Disease
8.
Education
9.
Democracy
10.
Population
Today the world runs on ~14 terawatts of power, (220 10 6 barrels of oil/day)
2050 : we’ll need 28 terawatts (>440 10 6 barrels of oil/day)

st
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
Ph.D. Degrees in Physics as a Percentage of GDP
The Sputnik
Generation
0.01
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
GDP is expressed in constant 1996 dollars (in million)
Source: American Institute of Physics & National Science Board,
Science and Engineering Indicators, 2002.
Social/political/ethical (economical) cause for intellectual mobilization

Scientism : The claim that science is disinterested and extrasocial, that its truth claims are self-sustaining without reference to philosophical assertions, and that science represents the only legitimate mode of knowledge”
( I. Wallerstein, 2004 )
Our (apparent) social insistence to preserve the idea of scientism as the modus operandi of science is paradoxically what delegitimizes science:
 Supports claims from (nihilistic) relativists that there exists no universal truth and that all knowledge assertions are subjective
 More importantly, generates the perception that any social implication on the part of scientists falsifies the scientific process
 removes it from its purity and therefore undermines its reliability/credibility

 Knowledge production: Participatory process
“Reliable knowledge can become socially robust only if society perceives the process of knowledge production to be participative . This, in turn, depends upon a reciprocity in which the public understands how science works, but, equally, science understands how the public works”
Nowotny et al. (2003) “ Mode 2 revisited: the New production of Knowledge”, Minerva.
 Regulatory science can work only within the framework of an ethically defensible and socially acceptable distribution of burdens of proof
(H. van den Belt and B. Gremmen (2002) Between precautionary principle and “sound science”: Distributing the burdens of proof. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental
Ethics . 15: 103-122).

Alain (Emile Chartier)
Robert Frost