magic: moving towards adaptive governance in complexity ... · magic has basic ingredients - (i)...
Post on 14-Aug-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Moving Towards Adaptive Governance in Complexity: Informing Nexus Security
1. What is special about this project?
2. Quantitative Story-Telling in action – the link between
WP2, WP3 and WP4 and then to WP5 and WP6
3. The role of MuSIASEM in MAGIC
CONTENT OF THE TWO PRESENTATIONS
1. What is special about MAGIC?
1. What is special about MAGIC?
It is not the conventional international EU research project in which
each one of the partners recycles, more or less, what it has already
being doing so far, under a common umbrella that vaguely establishes
a relation among the activities of different Work Packages
It is a heterodox international EU research project in which the
partners will have to do things that they never did before (including
the coordinator!) in a way that was never done before. This is not only
a transdisciplinary project (= pieces from different disciplines have to
be patched into new analytical tools) but it is a “transcientific” project:
it is about producing and using science outside the “conventional
paradigms”. It is inspired by the concept of Post-Normal Science.
1. What is special about MAGIC?
It is not about the quality of the results but it is about the quality
of the process we develop to obtain them. What will be produced
and transferred are not indications about “optimal solutions” or “the
right price of tons of CO2” but a methodological approach to be
used to guarantee the quality of “a process of production and use of
quantitative information for governance”. The process has to be
flexible in order to be tailored on different problems and contexts.
It is about taming the complexity of impredicativity (chicken-egg
predicaments): you must know “the how” to study “the what”, but at
the same time you must know “the what” to decide about “the how”.
When dealing with complexity you have to learn how to integrate
semantic and syntax, because semantic cannot be replaced by syntax.
As a matter of fact, when dealing with complex situation the more
complicated are the models the less they make sense.
What are the implications of working in a
heterodox project like this one?
A serious responsibility for the partners . . .
The impredicative relation (chicken-egg effect) over the activities of
the different WPs implies that the teams working in any WP depend
on the teams working in any other WP and vice versa. This means
that we have to agree on a program of work and then execute it:
= WP2, WP3, WP4, WP5, WP6, WP7 cannot live without each other,
and WP1 is the life support systems of all of them . . .
In fact we have all to learn and to teach to each other how to integrate
different pieces of transdisciplinarity knowledge and how to do science
in a different way. And we have to “learn from” and “to teach to” other
social actors how to check the quality (usefulness and fairness) of the
story-telling used to frame the issue of sustainability for governance
Not as risky as continuing to work on obsolete projects . . .
How risky is working in a heterodox project?
Research is called research because we do not know what we will find.
Nobody would say that when writing conventional proposals fearing that
research funds will not awarded . . . But in this case we got the money.
And we got the money exactly because we said that we want to try to do
something different!
So we should not be scared to be heterodox, because it seems that the
conventional paradigm adopted so far for generating quantitative
analysis and for framing the issue of sustainability is losing credibility.
In this situation it pays to explore alternative approaches to quantitative
analysis.
This project can really make a difference
And this is an additional responsibility for the partners . . .
MAGIC has basic ingredients - (i) the right mix of expertise in the
consortium; (ii) a set of innovative analytical tools; (iii) a clear vision in
relation to science for governance; (iv) an effective interface with the
EU commission; (v) a strategic plan; (vi) economic resources to be used
to give visibility to its activities. HOWEVER, to make the difference
we need also “commitment” and “hard work” from all of us.
After almost ten years of economic stagnation, with environmental
and social problems exploding out of control all over the planet, for
the first time in decades both the establishment and the general public
are considering the possibility that the actual system of controls is no
longer capable of interpreting the signals coming from the external world.
Probably this may explain why we got the money for MAGIC.
What has to be achieved in this meeting?
We have to start to know and understand better each other. This
is essential to form, as soon as possible, an effective team made of
people with shared goals and a common vision of what to do
Building both a structural organization (by expertise) and a flexible
functional organization (by issue to be tackled) making it possible
to work together after the kick-off meeting
An agreement on a road map for the first 100 days of MAGIC:
(i) due to the fact that WP2, WP3 and WP4 can neither start
nor operate without the inputs of the other two WPs it is essential
to jump-start the process;
(ii) due to the fact that WP4 will later on feed into WP5 and WP6
it is important to decide together the issues to be addressed in WP4
A last special characteristics of MAGIC . . .
At the kick-off meeting there is not a general understanding of
what will be done in the projecy and how. This situation is due to
two main reasons: (i) the concept of “co-production” entails that
the decisions on the case studies and how to apply Quantitative
Story-Telling to them has to be decided together with EU staff
during the project (= now we cannot know exactly what we will do);
(ii) for the special history of the preparation of the proposal (with a
limited involvement of some of the partners);
The fact, that at the kick-off meeting we do not know yet what we will
do, and the fact that we will have to decide together what to do as a
Team, in my view, is a positive one. On the other hand we should
get into this discussion as soon as possible . . . No time to waste.
2. Quantitative Story-Telling in action – the link between
WP2, WP3 and WP4 and then to WP5 and WP6
Call Text - Scope WATER-2b-2015 - Integrated approaches to food security, low-carbon energy, sustainable water management and climate change mitigation
Proposals should aim to: • develop tools and methodologies for
integrating • agriculture, • forestry, • climate change impacts and • adaptation
• with • climate-energy-economic models
and • land-use models,
• using a multi-disciplinary approach; -----------------------^---------------------------------- • consider the potential role, contributions
and limitations of low-carbon options with respect to land and water resources;
• develop a better scientific understanding of the land-water-energy-climate nexus;
• develop integrated strategies and approaches, • at different spatial scales (regional,
national, continental, global), • integrating
• resource efficient land use, • agricultural productivity
improvements, • sustainable water management
and • low carbon energy transition and
• analysing • interactions with the existing
regulatory frameworks and • the potential barriers to
implementation.
Call Text - Impact
Increased understanding of how
water management,
food and
biodiversity
policies are linked together and
to climate
and sustainability goals.
Reduction of the uncertainties about the opportunities
and limitations of low-carbon options, such as
bioenergy technologies and
resource efficiency measures,
in view of relevant near-term policy initiatives.
Contribution to future assessments, including those of the
IPCC, with multidisciplinary and integrated tools.
Sustainable Development goals as the overarching
objectives – but how do the individual goals interact?
Paris+ processes – IPCC or UNFCC – EU inputs?
IPBES looking for new
ways to analyse
MAGIC concept
* Existing narratives – don’t address nexus issues
* Dealing with Hypocognition: models stem
from reductionist analysis their quality depends on the
quality of the choice of narrative
Scale of narratives
* EU scale?
(Commission/Parliament/Co)
* National/Regional?
(CAP regions)
* Global Scale
(planetary boundaries)
* Better analysis addressing the complex, interlinked, multi-
scale character of the nexus (technical incommensurability)
* Better research process in closer partnership with
policymakers, relevant officers, regulators, etc.
Key Challenges:
Quantitative Story-Telling
If it is complex, then you cannot compress its representation
without losing valuable information - Kolmogorov-Chaitin
The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski
All models are wrong, but some are useful - E. Box
Make it as simple as possible, but not simpler - A. Einstein
The truth is in the eyes of the beholder - old saying
When we had all the answers they changed the questions
- Anonymous
Expected Impacts
WHY
Increased understanding of how water management food and biodiversity policies are linked together and to climate and sustainability goals
Contribute to future assessments (including IPCC) with multidisciplinarity and Integrated tools
Reduction of the uncertainties about the opportunities and limitations of low-carbon options such as bioenergy technologies and resource efficiency measures, in view of relevant near-term policy initiatives
Quantitative Nexus Story Telling
Interactions
BY
Raise awareness of the capabilities of research tools & utility of outputs
Identify key contacts within the commission to act as direct stakeholders In the mixed teams
Scenarios/options analysis co-constructed in mixed teams
Share the results with a wider policy peer-review group
Reshape the tools, methods and outputs in the light of the interaction
Contribute directly to a robust quantitative information being used by the Commission
WP4
WP2
WP6
WP5
WP7
WP7
WP3
WP4
WP7
WHAT
Analysis
Multi-Level Integrated Check on the quality of assessment
OPTION SPACE How to define Feasibility, Viability and Desirability
DIAGNOSTIC State-of-play analysis
SIMULATOR Trade-offs and synergy
generated by policy options
Global Drivers and Planetary Boundaries
Key external constraint on EU
EXTERNALIZATION EU effects on others
WP4 WP5 Quality check on narratives
WP6 Quality check on Innovation assessments
Checking the compatibility across directives
Co-production/Beneficiary
WITH/FOR WHOM
* DG ENV * DG RTD * DG ECFIN * DG CLIMA * DG GROWTH * DG ENERGY
* DG Parliamentary Research Services * Impact Assessment European Added Value * STOA Secretariat)
* JRC * EUROSTAT * European Political Strategy Centre (Ex BEPA)
Policy issues
APPLIED TO INFRASTRUCTURES Processes
EU Commission
EU Parliament
Others
Non EU
* IPCC * Local Government * EU society
NEXUS DIALOGUE SPACE Create and maintain the interaction generating mutual learning WP2
QUANTITATIVE NEXUS STORY-TELLING Creating a framework making possible to analyze the implications of the nexus across scales and dimensions
WP4
NEXUS KNOWLEDGE HUB Interactive Website Hotline Science for governance Infographism/material Training WP7
NEXUS INFORMATION SYSTEM Transactional databases Combination of methods MuSIASEM, Water footprint Discourse and policy analysis Multi-level actor Mapping
WP3
Biofuels – potentiality for increasing energy security in a region
Desalination – potentiality for increasing water and food security in a region
Fracking – how low carbon? How important for energy security within WFD? Social and environmental constraints?
Tradable permits – their performance in reducing GHG emissions
GMOs – potentiality for increasing food security in a region
ADAPTATION: water SUPPLY/REQUIREMENT in rural and urban areas – NEXUS implications
ADAPTATION: energy SUPPLY/REQUIREMENT with alternative sources – NEXUS implications
ADAPTATION: food SUPPLY/REQUIREMENT in self-sufficiency (CAP)– NEXUS implications
How CIRCULAR is the economy and how circular can it be?
The NEXUS and the protection of habitats and soil – incompatibilities among directives?
WP5
WP6
NEXUS Dialogue Space
WP4
Quantitative
Story-Telling
about Nexus
Security
WP3
EU
administration WP1
interactions
during the
project
permanent
platform of
interaction
WP7
NEXUS
Knowledge
Hub Quality check on the
assessment of innovations WP6
Quality check on the
narratives behind policies WP5
CASE STUDIES
WP2
NEXUS Information Space
Jump starting this
in the first 100 days
Dialogue/co-production
with EU staff/institutions
Dialogue/co-production
with other social actors
Defining a road map to “jump start” the process
of interaction across the WPs in the next 100 days
One of the most important objectives
of this kick-off meeting . . .
What are the issues to be addressed in the initial
QST? At which scales? In relation to which aspects
that will become relevant in WP5 and WP6?
Even though the decisions on the co-produced QST will
be taken together with EU staff in WP5 and WP6, we can
still identify in the jump-starting phase a few examples of
“elephants in the room” related to problems of
FEASIBILITY, VIABILITY and DESIRABILITY
Expected Impacts
WHY
Increased understanding of how water management food and biodiversity policies are linked together and to climate and sustainability goals
Contribute to future assessments (including IPCC) with multidisciplinarity and Integrated tools
Reduction of the uncertainties about the opportunities and limitations of low-carbon options such as bioenergy technologies and resource efficiency measures, in view of relevant near-term policy initiatives
Quantitative Nexus Story Telling
Interactions
BY
Raise awareness of the capabilities of research tools & utility of outputs
Identify key contacts within the commission to act as direct stakeholders In the mixed teams
Scenarios/options analysis co-constructed in mixed teams
Share the results with a wider policy peer-review group
Reshape the tools, methods and outputs in the light of the interaction
Contribute directly to a robust quantitative information being used by the Commission
WP4
WP2
WP6
WP5
WP7
WP7
WP3
WP4
WP7
WHAT
Analysis
Multi-Level Integrated Check on the quality of assessment
OPTION SPACE How to define Feasibility, Viability and Desirability
DIAGNOSTIC State-of-play analysis
SIMULATOR Trade-offs and synergy
generated by policy options
Global Drivers and Planetary Boundaries
Key external constraint on EU
EXTERNALIZATION EU effects on others
WP4 WP5 Quality check on narratives
WP6 Quality check on Innovation assessments
Checking the compatibility across directives
Looking at the story-telling actually in use to frame sustainability
issues and to determine the choice of quantitative models used to
generate “evidence based policies” we have to decide “which
QST” we want to do and “how we will do it”:
VIDEOS – Bizarre situations – explaning PPTs - documents
WP4
WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE STORY TELLING
THAT WE WANT TO PROPOSE IN RELATION
TO THE CHOSEN ISSUE?
WP2
With Whom?
WP3
How?
HOW TO DO THE QUANTITATIVE CHECKS?
Using MuSIASEM to integrate analytical models and data
HOW TO GENERATE A ROBUST CO-PRODUCTION?
Who to contact within the EU? How? How to better tailor
the story-telling on their concerns?
what
issues
what
checks
what
interactions WP2
WP4
WP3
100 days
jump start
1. What issues should be considered in the jump-start phase?
2. How could they be better framed in a process of QST?
3. What other alternative issues should be considered?
WP5
WP6
Critical overview of the actual
processes generating the choice of:
Narratives behind directives
Narratives behind innovations
implications for the
interaction between
EU policies
implications for the
interaction between
EU policies institutions
100 working days – 20 weeks
kick-off
meeting
summer
school
training
session
15 June 15 Oct 15 Sept 15 Jul 15 Aug
First inputs
of QST
Individuation of NIS applications at different
scales: global, EU, national level, and local WP3
Individuation of NDS actions for the chosen
applications: who to contact,? how?, getting
preliminary feedbacks about the initial QST WP2
WP3 -NIS
Should we focus on
Feasibility, Viability,
or Desirability for
falsification?
What grammars is
needed?
How to generate the
data needed from
available sources?
How to visualize
the results?
WP2 - NDS
Which DG could be
interested?
Whom to contact in the
DG?
What about Eurostat?
How to contact them?
Can we already talk to
someone we know to
get feedbacks?
How to use institutional
leverage (JRC)?
WP4-QST
What is the message
we want to give?
What is an effective
communication?
Deciding about the
content of the folder:
* Videos
* Interactive PPTs
* Short documents
* List of web material
* Additional Reading
Impredicative Decisions Loop
Silvio’s corner – Post-Normal Twitting
The sobering wisdom of Vaclav Smil
Skeptical Energetics – Charlie Hall
Climatic Monitoring – by C.A.
Water level logger – by ?
Andrea’s corner – evidence based or policy based?
THESE ARE JUST IDEAS . . . To be discussed
Fracking observer – by Cristina Madrid (Yale)
We need a
“The Nexus Time
Task Force”!
Teams by expertise
OTHERS . . .
WATER
ENERGY
POLICY
DATA ANALYSIS
# of people
# of people
# of people
# of people
Tasks forces
QST in WP4 Tasks forces QST
in WP5 and WP6
Tasks forces
in WP7 Knowledge
Hub
Website
The Nexus Time
Planet/EU
EU/National
National/Local
MAGIC general objective
• New paradigm on Nexus science for governance
Nexus analysis? Nexus Security? Nexus Consistency?
• Translate new ideas into the Commission
How does the Strategy 2020 tackle the Nexus?
How does Quantitative Story Telling work (1)
* Oh My God - the emperor has no clothes!
* Oh My God - there is an elephant in the room!
EPISTEMOLOGICAL BREAKDOWN
Using a video or some hard evidence to show
that we are dealing with a case of
“Socially Constructed Ignorance”
“To make sense of the complexity of the world so that they can act,
individuals and institutions need to develop simplified, self-consistent
versions of that world. The process of doing so means that much of
what is known about the world needs to be excluded from those
versions, and in particular that knowledge which is in tension or
outright contradiction with those versions must be expunged . . .”
dysfunctional cases of uncomfortable knowledge
have to be ignored in the official story-telling
“socially constructed ignorance”
Rayner, S., 2012. “Uncomfortable knowledge:
the social construction of ignorance in science
and environmental policy discourses”, Economy
and Society, 41(1): 107-125.
Video US Presidents on energy
How does Quantitative Story Telling work (2)
Using common sense and simple examples to
suggest that an alternative story-telling may be used
to complement and provide additional insights
in relation to the chosen issue
PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE STORY TELLING
Using quantitative analysis capable of checking the:
FEASIBILITY, VIABILITY and DESIRABILITY
to compare the robustness, usefulness and fairness
of the story-telling considered
The owner of a bakery in the center of Paris
make good profit because he transforms grains
(flour) – a commodity – into fresh bread
and pastries – high value products
A farmer producing wheat does not
make good profit because he produces a
commodity (redundant in its function),
he competes on the market by keeping
low the price, operating at a low return
on the investment of production factors
Large landowners in colonial times
(thousands and thousands of hectares) Small farmer ploughing his land
(less than 1 hectare)
Oil Minister of Saudi Arabia
(297 Billion Barrels reserves)
Solar PV to power a rural house
(10 kW capacity)
WHAT MAKES THEM RICH
IS THE SIZE OF THE FUND
WHAT MAKES THEM RICH
IS THE SIZE OF THE STOCK
WHAT MAKES THEM POOR
IS THE FLOW/FUND RATIO
WHAT MAKES THEM POOR
IS THE FLOW/FUND RATIO
Fuente: Hall C.A.S., Lambert, J.G., Balogh, S.B. (2014) EROI of different fuels and
the implications for society. Energy Policy 64 141–152
DEPLETION OF STOCKS 100 MJ
This is what
makes you
rich!
Labor Technical
capital Energy Materials
$ costs
$ Revenues BUYING FROM
THE MARKET
$ costs
Economic
Return
Too Low!
Subsidies!
* The product of the total volume of fossil fuels consumed in 2012 (excluding
electricity production) and the average spot prices (import prices) of coal, oil and natural
gas PLUS the product of the volume of electricity consumed in 2012 times and the
average wholesale price of electricity in Europe (without any taxes, transmission and
distribution costs or costs of conversions).
Alberici et al. 2014 Subsidies and costs of EU energy Ecofys by order of the EC, 11/2014
Energy subsidies vs. Expenditures on energy*
in EU28 in 2012
•Energy subsidies: 122 billion €2012 - 0.9% GDP
•Expenditure on energy: 335 billion €2012 - 2.5% GDP
• Subsidies/Expenditures: 36.4%
Egypt (2011)
Energy subsidies 8.5 % GDP
Food subsidies 2.0% GDP
Expenditures in education 3.5% GDP
* IEA/OECD 2015 - IEA Fossil-fuel Subsidies Database – Data from the IEA’s World Energy
Outlook 2015 – IEA:Paris
* Commoner 2012 - A guide to the Political Economy of Reforming Energy Subsidies, IZA Policy
Paper 52 – 12/2012
How does Quantitative Story Telling work (3)
BACKING-UP THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE
STORY TELLING WITH QUANTITATIVE
ANALYSIS
Using quantitative analysis capable of checking the:
FEASIBILITY, VIABILITY and DESIRABILITY
to compare the robustness, usefulness and fairness
of the story-telling considered
Making available this information presented in different
forms [(i) for the general public; (ii) for experienced users;
(iii) adopting scientific standards] using the Knowlege
Hub and covering both technical and social aspects
Quantitative Story Telling uses MuSIASEM to keep
coherence in an integrated assessment of FEASIBILITY,
VIABILITY and DESIRABILITY, requiring different
disciplinary approaches and different scales
the following slides are presented to illustrate WHAT
QST does, and not HOW to do it ( training workshop)
Total
Human
Activity
8,760 hours/year
per capita
100% of THA
POPULATION
SIZE
8-10% (700 – 880 h/year)
Workforce in
Paid Work
Disposable
Human
Activity
Education, Leisure
Cultural-Religion
Unpaid work
Household Chores
Commuting
20-25%
(1,760 – 2,190 h/year)
(700 – 900 h/year) 8 - 10%
(360 – 410 h/year) 4 - 5%
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Unemployment 5-10% work force
SERVICES &
GOVERNMENT BUILDING &
MANUFACTURING
ENERGY &
MINING
AGRICULTURE &
FISHERY
62% of PW
> 500 h/year p.c.
35% of PW
< 300 h/year p.c.
3% of PW
< 25 h/year p.c.
< 1% of PW
< 10 h/year p.c.
Active
Population Physiological
Overhead
50%
Dependent
Population
Physiological
Overhead
100% 50-60%
40-50%
75-80% (6,570 – 7,000 h/year)
Reproduction & maintenance of individuals
SPAIN 2007
Product.-Consum. Factors (Flow and Fund elements)
Energy (GJ p.c./y)
Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)
Power Capactity (kW p.c./y)
Metabolic Characteristics (Flow/Fund ratios)
Intensity Power Capactity (MJ/kW)
Exosomatic Metabolic Rate (MJ/hour
Level n-1 Household sector
44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6
Level n-2 Service & Government
56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1
Level n-3 Building & Manufacturing
41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3
Level n-3 Energy & Mining
13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1
Level n-3 Agriculture 4.5 48 1.5 92 3.0
Level n whole society
159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2
Level n Whole society 159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2
Level n-1 Household
sector
44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6
Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)
work force
Population structure of Japan
In China there is 1 hr
of work out of 5 hrs
of human activity!
In Italy there is 1 hr
of work out of 13 hrs
of human activity!
Product.-Consum. Factors (Flow and Fund elements)
Energy (GJ p.c./y)
Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)
Power Capactity (kW p.c./y)
Metabolic Characteristics (Flow/Fund ratios)
Intensity Power Capactity (MJ/kW)
Exosomatic Metabolic Rate (MJ/hour
Level n-1 Household sector
44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6
Labor time in the Household
from 6 hrs/day to 40 minutes!
commuting shopping leisure
from 6 hrs/week to 2 hrs/week
SPAIN 2007
Product.-Consum. Factors (Flow and Fund elements)
Energy (GJ p.c./y)
Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)
Power Capactity (kW p.c./y)
Metabolic Characteristics (Flow/Fund ratios)
Intensity Power Capactity (MJ/kW)
Exosomatic Metabolic Rate (MJ/hour
Level n-1 Household sector
44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6
Level n-2 Service & Government
56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1
Level n-3 Building & Manufacturing
41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3
Level n-3 Energy & Mining
13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1
Level n-3 Agriculture 4.5 48 1.5 92 3.0
Level n whole society
159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2
Level n-3 Agriculture 4.5 48 1.5 92 3.0
Labor time in Agriculture
Productivity of labor: 1 kg of grain per hour
Productivity of labor: 700 kg of grain per hour
If the work force of a society is just producing
its own food that society will never become rich . . .
40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 0
20
40
60
80
100
% lab in AG % GNP in AG
Percentage of labor force and GDP in agriculture
versus GDP per capita (US$ - 1991)
GDP per capita
% l
ab
or
forc
e i
n a
gri
cult
ure
%
GD
P i
n a
gric
ult
ure
All developed countries have less than 5% of their work force in agriculture
SPAIN 2007
Product.-Consum. Factors (Flow and Fund elements)
Energy (GJ p.c./y)
Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)
Power Capactity (kW p.c./y)
Metabolic Characteristics (Flow/Fund ratios)
Intensity Power Capactity (MJ/kW)
Exosomatic Metabolic Rate (MJ/hour
Level n-1 Household sector
44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6
Level n-2 Service & Government
56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1
Level n-3 Building & Manufacturing
41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3
Level n-3 Energy & Mining
13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1
Level n-3 Agriculture 4.5 48 1.5 92 3.0
Level n whole society
159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2
Level n-3 Energy &
Mining 13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1
Labor time in Energy and Mining
Productivity of labor: 0.01 truck of coal-equivalent needing two workers . . .
Productivity of labor:
1,400 trucks of coal
per worker per day
96% 89% 63%
SPAIN 2007
Product.-Consum. Factors (Flow and Fund elements)
Energy (GJ p.c./y)
Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)
Power Capactity (kW p.c./y)
Metabolic Characteristics (Flow/Fund ratios)
Intensity Power Capactity (MJ/kW)
Exosomatic Metabolic Rate (MJ/hour
Level n-1 6 1.6 Household sector
44.5 7,825 27.0
Level n-2 Service & Government
56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1
Level n-3 Building & Manufacturing
41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3
Level n-3 Energy & Mining
13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1
Level n-3 Agriculture 4.5 48 1.5 92 3.0
Level n whole society
159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2
Bio-Economic
Pressure
8% < 0.1% 2.5%
3. The role of MuSIASEM in MAGIC
Chosen Story-Telling (Nexus Security)
Nexus Information Space (Quantitative Analysis)
Nexus Dialogue Space (Validation)
Quantitative Story-Telling Checking the Option Space
(Desirability, Viability, Feasibility)
Knowledge Co-Production
There is nothing “magic” about MuSIASEM, it is just an
organized accounting method (e.g. excel spreadsheet)
It is how we use MuSIASEM that should generate the
MAGIC that we want in QST
The falsification of a narrative does not require an
exhaustive information about all the details of the
territory. What we need is a map telling us that there
are no bridges to go there (VIABILITY CHECK) or
that there is not enough land for doing what we want
to do (FEASIBILITY CHECK)
We have to look for those characteristics that make the
chosen narrative: unfeasible or unviable or undesirable . . .
MuSIASEM helps in making possible a a coherent
accounting across non-equivalent descriptive domains
(1) The metabolic pattern of social-ecological systems
the following slides are presented to illustrate WHAT
MuSIASEM does, and not HOW ( training workshop)
FUNDS FUNDS
Agro-ecosystem
FLOWS metabolized by ecosystems
sink supply
A.
B. C.
D.
FLOWS metabolized by society
wastes inputs
PATTERN ECOSYSTEM
ACTIVITY
PATTERN SOCIETAL ACTIVITY
• Solar radiation • Water cycle • Nitrogen cycle • Carbon cycle • Other cycles
FAVORABLE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
imports
exports
$
$
COMPATIBLE
SIZE
POPULATION Extensive variables
1,000,000 people (needing food for a year)
FLOW-FUND RATIOS Intensive variables
300 kg p.c./year (food requirement)
300,000,000 kg/year (food consumed)
300,000,000 kg/year (food supplied)
Land uses Extensive variables
500,000 hectares (producing food for a year)
FLOW-FUND RATIOS Intensive variables
600 kg/ha/year (food yield)
Rural Urban
Funds of the ecosystems
FLOWS metabolized by ecosystems
sink supply
A.
B. C.
D.
FLOWS metabolized by society
wastes inputs
PATTERN ECOSYSTEM
ACTIVITY
PATTERN SOCIETAL ACTIVITY
• Solar radiation • Water cycle • Nitrogen cycle • Carbon cycle • Other cycles
FAVORABLE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
1,000,000 people (needing food for a year)
1,000 kg p.c./year (food requirement)
1,000,000,000 kg/year (food consumed)
400,000,000 kg/year (food supplied)
50,000 hectares (producing food for a year)
8,000 kg/ha/year (food yield)
Fossil Energy STOCKS
Technical inputs Emissions
$
imports
exports
$
600,000,000 kg/year (food supplied)
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Urban
SIZES ARE NOT
COMPATIBLE DEPLETION
DEGRADATION
EXTERNALIZATION
A.
B. C.
D.
Funds of the society
FLOWS metabolized by society
wastes inputs
STOCKS
HOW MUCH SOCIETAL ACTIVITY
IMPORTS
$
FLOW/FLOW SECURITY
Metabolic Pattern of Socio-Ecological System
in the “Delirium of Urban Elites”
Ma
kin
g
Deb
ts
Prin
tin
g
Mo
ne
y PONZI
SCHEME
POPULATION SIZE (independent variable)
CONSUMPTION PER CAPITA (independent variable)
GROWING UNEQUITY
TRANSITIONAL STATE
Global debt has increased by $57 trillion since 2007, outpacing world GDP growth
246 269 286
Gloobal stock of debt outstanding by type
US$ trillion, constant 2013 exchange rate
February 2015
Total debt
as % of GDP
+ 57 trillion
87
142
199
2000 2007 2Q 2014
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/economic_studies/debt_and_not_much_deleveraging
199 trillion =
286% world GDP
the following slides are presented to illustrate WHAT
MuSIASEM does, and not HOW ( training workshop)
MuSIASEM helps in making possible a a coherent
accounting across non-equivalent descriptive domains
(2) The NEXUS security Tool-kit
People THA
HH
Primary Energy Sources
Energy Carriers
Mines
EM
Minerals
Aquifers blue water
WS
PW
Post-Harvest
Transport
Healthcare Education
SG
Government
Media Leisure
Financial
Tourism
Distribution AG
Managed Agroecological Funds
Food
Internal View
External View
Manufacturing
Industry Post-Harvest
Construction
BM
PC
THE PROCESSOR
An epistemic tool to explore the complex organization of functional
and structural elements across levels and scales
Internal fund
elements
Internal flow
elements
Resources Waste, Emissions
Pollutants
Internal Secondary Inputs
External Primary Inputs
INTERNAL
VIEW
EXTERNAL
VIEW
It provides the external
referent of the expected
values of benchmarks at
each hierarchical level
It makes it possible to do
the scaling of metabolic
characteristics across levels
Result
AG
WS
EM
BM
Processes outside
human control
Primary Sectors Secondary Sector SG
Tertiary Sector
HH
Final Consumers
institutions
institutions
know-how
know-how
language
values
identity
BEP
SEH
know-how
Soils Aquifers Terrestrial
Ecosystems Aquatic
Ecosystems Local
Atmosphere
Globl
Atmosphere
Flows Funds
AG
EM WS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 8
Gross Requirement
of INTERNAL inputs
WHOLE
SOCIETY
ECOLOGICAL FUNDS
SG
Gross Requirement of EXTERNAL inputs
AG
WS
HA PC BW F2
AG
EM
WS
BM HH
Societal
Funds
External
Material
Flows
Internal
Material
Flows
F1 E2 E1 LU
SG VIABILITY
FEASIBILITY
DESIRABILITY
Natural Stocks
Ecological Funds
SUPPLY
SINK
energy
carriers
nutrient
carriers
blue
water
power
capacity
human
activity land
uses
Animal, fishes & crops
Primary Energy Sources
Aquifers & Green Water
EM
Enduses matrix
Sudoku
Environmental Impact Matrix
dSi
-dSe
Identity
Externalization Matrix
SG HH
BM WS
AG EM
Expected
benchmarks END USES
MATRIX
DESIRABILITY
2
4
5
6
7 ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT MATRIX
FEASIBILITY
DOMESTIC
EXTERNALIZATION MATRIX Primary External Inputs
RAW
MATERIALS
Secondary Internal Inputs GOODS &
SERVICES Boost given by
trade & credit EMBODIED
IMPORTS
SUDOKU
EFFECT
VIABILITY
HH
EM BM
WS
top related