workshop trade-off analysis - cgiar_21 feb 2013_group discussion_2.tradeoffs and impact
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Workshop Trade-off Analysis - CGIAR_21 Feb 2013_Group discussion_2.Tradeoffs and impact](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061111/545416dcaf7959e10b8b5771/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Researchers role and tools in the innovation process
The question: Can we, at different scales, show that knowledge of trade-offs make a difference
The case: In a complex resource scarce world single issue objective/policies are of inferior and perhaps damaging.
In a political sense, the opposing parties lobby the policy maker or public opinion – informed involvement in presenting trade-offs is necessary.
Informing the debate- detrimental trade-offs are often perceived as worse than the actual trade-offs (e.g. conflicts between farmers and foresters)
Decisions made are often non-rational, therefore we should identify where science plays a role (e.g flooding in Bangkok Vs dry season irrigation)
But can we demonstrate that considering trade-offs at higher scales have helped (questions over whether the impact that the analyses of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Development Goals made…communication?)
![Page 2: Workshop Trade-off Analysis - CGIAR_21 Feb 2013_Group discussion_2.Tradeoffs and impact](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061111/545416dcaf7959e10b8b5771/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Researchers role and tools in the innovation process
Our role:
•Credibility, relevance and legitimacy-these 3 buttons need to be pressed at the same time. Mix the emphasis depending on your audience but include the 3 aspects.
•Rigorous and pre-emptive science must be on-going and provide more examples of trade-offs and inform the debates with evidence based work.
•Pre-emptive – knowledge about slowly variables is long term.
•Recognise where in the “issue cycle” that science plays a role•Dedicated communication teams – we cant be all things to everyone- mix of the science message and the public apsects
![Page 3: Workshop Trade-off Analysis - CGIAR_21 Feb 2013_Group discussion_2.Tradeoffs and impact](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061111/545416dcaf7959e10b8b5771/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Politi
cal p
rom
inen
ce
pe
ople
* in
fluen
ce *
con
cern
Stage of the issue cycle
Scoping Stakeholder Negotiation Implemen- Re-eva- analysis response tation luation
Is it a problem?
Cause-effect mechanisms
Who’s to blame?
What will it cost?
Regulate and/or reward
Implement & monitor
Evaluate, re-assess
Who’ll have to pay?
What can be done to stop, mitigate, undo or adapt?
How much and where?
Who will monitor compliance? Litigation
Tomich et al. 2004