FUTURES

* The world in 2025 – Rising Asia and socio-ecological transition (816KB PDF icon)
Brussels, 2009, EUR 23921 EN, ISBN 978-92-79-12485-3, ISSN 1018-5593, DOI 10.2777/2539, 28 pages

Recent developments in the world and the strong European commitment to a regulating globalisation argue in favour of a forward looking analysis. “The World in 2025” first underlines the major future trends: geopolitical transformations in terms of population, economic development, international trade and poverty. Secondly, it identifies the likely tensions: natural resources (food, energy, water and minerals), migrations or urbanisation. Finally, it defines possible transitional pathways: towards a new production and consumption model, towards new rural-urban dynamics, towards a new gender and intergenerational balance. “Rising Asia and socio-ecological transition” is the explicit sub-title that could be an inspiring source for the future strategy of the European Union.

* The World in 2025 – Contributions from an expert group (7.40 MB PDF icon)
Brussels, 2009, EUR 23864, ISBN 978-92-79-11482-3, DOI 10.2777/41493, 390 pages

The European expert group on "The World in 2025" has developed a prospective analysis based on the current state of the world and its historical evolution, including economic and societal changes and new geopolitical configurations.

This prospective exercise incorporates the demographic, economic, trade, financial, environmental, technological and social dimensions as well as the issues of migration, security and governance.

"The World in 2025" contains the contribution of the individual experts as well as scenarios outlining future developments over the next fifteen years.

* METRIS Report – Emerging Trends in Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities in Europe (1.8 MB PDF icon)
Brussels, 2009, EUR 23741, ISBN 978-92-79-11136-5, DOI 10.2777/57083, 144 pages
METRIS stands for Monitoring European Trends in Social Sciences and Humanities. The aim of METRIS is to support the European Research Area (ERA) in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (SSH). This is particularly important for these sciences, because their knowledge is embedded into national systems, and the ERA brings about novel insights and perspectives that result from comparing national systems and situations as well as rising above such comparisons. European level research in SSH forms an important support for European policy-making.

This first report from a METRIS expert group identifies important new and emerging trends in social sciences and humanities in the 5 themes of the framework programme:
o Growth, employment and competitiveness in a knowledge-based society;
o Combining economic, social and environmental objectives;
o Major trends in society and their implications;
o Europe and the world;
o The citizen in Europe.

In addition the report highlights some themes that cut across these areas (such as migration for example) as well as some examples of cutting edge research that lie outside the thematic coverage of the Framework Programme, such as new conceptualizations of space, the rise of visual and affective themes in social sciences and themes that arise from the breaking down of the boundaries between the sciences.

It is envisaged that the reflection of expert groups will be combined with a sound monitoring system to form a powerful supporting instrument for the advancement of the ERA in SSH. It will provide for a collective understanding of the state of the art, trends, needs, challenges and research policies for SSH across Europe and in all its Member Countries, and will thus support the advancement of SSH in Europe through coordinated research efforts and coordinated research policy interventions.




* Report on the seminar "Anthropological perspectives in a changing Europe - Bringing people in", which took place in Florence 23-24 October 2008. (1.11MB PDF icon)
Brussels, 2009, EUR 24160, ISBN 978-92-79-13622-1, ISSN 1018-5593, doi 10.2777/53840

An initiative of the Director of the "Science, Economy and Society Directorate", Jean-Michel Baer, this seminar was organised both to encourage the participation of humanities scholars in the SSH Work Programme and to contribute to the Directorate’s preparation of its 2012-2013 road map. 18 anthropologists from Europe and beyond participated in discussion on the specific contribution the discipline can make to the programme.
Presentation by anthropologists such as Michael Herzfeld from Harvard University, Marc Abélès from the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, and Christina Garsten from the University of Sweden, were followed by discussions around the following questions:
o What is the current state of anthropological research on Europe and Europeans?
o How can anthropology help us to understand how abstract notions of "Europe", "European" and "European citizenship" are enacted and embodied by individuals in their everyday lives?
o How can anthropology shed light on the way individuals in Europe experience and react to globalisation?

* The European Foresight Monitoring Network, Collection of EFMN Briefs - Part 1 (5.7MBPDF icon)
EUR 23095 EN, 2008, 481 pp. - ISBN 978-92-79-07448-6

Foresight identifies future research and innovation priorities going within and beyond the Lisbon strategy and contributes to building a strong European Research Area. It helps in the early identification of emerging issues that could have far-reaching implications for European Science and Technology in the long run. It contributes to the analysis of changes in the global research system and their possible implications for European research policy. The Foresight Monitoring Network (EFMN) is a Europe-wide network inspired and financed by the European Commission in the framework of the Foresight Knowledge Sharing Platform implemented under the Research Framework Programme. The EFMN initiative identifies the big scientific, technological and social challenges of tomorrow, contributing thus to the main priorities of the socio-economic sciences and humanities research.
Through a continuous monitoring and mapping of ongoing and emerging Foresight activities conducted not only in Europe, but also in other regions of the world, the EFMN project identifies “hot topics” noteworthy for their novelty or importance and contributes to the dissemination of this relevant information through the production of short foresight policy briefs. It covers countries as varied as the EU Member States, Japan, China and Korea, the US, Canada and Brazil. Those briefs that were written between 2004 and 2007 summarize the results of recently terminated or on-going foresight activities dealing with crucial topics such as the hydrogen economy, the knowledge-based development of rural economies or the sustainable exploitation of marine resources.

Policymakers must radically alter their views of migration, and see it as a vital adaptation to climate change rather than as an unwanted consequence or a failure to adapt.

Richer countries... need to stop panicking about a mass influx of migrants that is unlikely to happen

This means that poorer nations need to prepare for climate change at home by building up infrastructure and basic services in small towns located in rural areas that could become destination hubs for local migrants.

Options include policies that promote access to non-farm jobs in small rural towns and a more decentralised distribution of economic opportunities.

To do so, they should first of all focus on increasing the capacity of local governments and institutions in small towns to support local economic development, provide basic services and regulate equitable access to natural resources.

Richer countries, meanwhile, need to stop panicking about a mass influx of migrants that is unlikely to happen and instead focus on helping the poorer countries to face climate change.

As the richer countries have emitted most of the greenhouse gases that cause climate change, they have a duty to address the problem."

...

...(graphics have got lost)
From the BBC's Perfect Storm 2030 coverage,
where correspondents explore the forecast by UK chief scientist John
Beddington, of a "perfect storm" of food, water and energy shortages in
2030.

Ed Miliband says he is in "the persuasion business". So how do you
persuade people when research suggests that many of them don't trust
your message?

The secretary of state for energy and climate change told the BBC recently
that his job is to convince people "to make big changes" in their
lives. Unless that happens, he warns, the planet and our way of life
will be damaged for generations to come.

But Whitehall research reveals that:

"[M]istrust is a critical issue which is potentially a major barrier to people becoming more pro-environmental".

Government is suspected of "using" the environment to increase
taxes. What's more, people don't like politicians telling them how to
lead their lives.

There is still deep scepticism. Despite virtually unanimous academic
opinion, half of us still believe science is divided on whether
mankind's activities contribute to climate change.

And more than a quarter of us don't think our individual behaviour makes any difference to the environmental crisis.....

Rather than simply beseeching us to "save the planet", ministers hope they can convince us in other ways.

"Use non-environmental motivations," their advisors recommend.

"Recognise the role of social norms, identity, and status for moving towards greater adoption of pro-environmental behaviours."

In other words, appeal to the things that matter to people right now - their wallet and their self-esteem.

That's why much of the Act on CO2 campaign is built on the idea that saving the planet equals saving money.

Ministers are told:

"There is no single solution that will motivate a mainstream audience to live a greener life."

In fact, the government's experts have identified seven distinct types of people:

"[S]even clusters each sharing a distinct set of attitudes and beliefs towards the environment".

Are you a "positive green" or a "stalled starter", a "waste watcher" or a "sidelined supporter"? When it comes to climate change, we have all been categorised.

...segmented strategy

Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty

The Royal Society has published the findings of a major study into geoengineering the climate. The study, chaired by Professor John Shepherd FRS, was researched and written over a period of twelve months by twelve leading academics representing science, economics, law and social science.
"

The future of the Earth could rest on potentially dangerous and unproven geoengineering technologies unless emissions of carbon dioxide can be greatly reduced, the latest Royal Society report has found.

Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty (published today,1st September, by the Royal Society) found that unless future efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are much more successful than they have been so far, additional action in the form of geoengineering will be necessary if we are to cool the planet.  Geoengineering technologies were found to be very likely to be technically possible and some were considered to be potentially useful to augment the continuing efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing emissions.  However, the report identified major uncertainties regarding their effectiveness, costs and environmental impacts.

Professor John Shepherd, who chaired the Royal Society's geoengineering study(2), said, "It is an unpalatable truth that unless we can succeed in greatly reducing  CO2 emissions we are headed for a very uncomfortable and challenging climate future, and geoengineering will be the only option left to limit further temperature increases. Our research found that some geoengineering techniques could have serious unintended and detrimental effects on many people and ecosystems - yet we are still failing to take the only action that will prevent us from having to rely on them.  Geoengineering and its consequences are the price we may have to pay for failure to act on climate change."

The report assesses the two main kinds of geoengineering techniques Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and Solar Radiation Management (SRM).  CDR techniques address the root of the problem rising CO2 and so have fewer uncertainties and risks, as they work to return the Earth to a more normal state.  They are therefore considered preferable to SRM techniques, but none has yet been demonstrated to be effective at an affordable cost, with acceptable environmental impacts, and they only work to reduce temperatures over very long timescales. 

SRM techniques act by reflecting the sun's energy away from Earth, meaning they lower temperatures rapidly, but do not affect CO2 levels.  They therefore fail to address the wider effects of rising CO2, such as ocean acidification, and would need to be deployed for a very long time.  Although they are relatively cheap to deploy, there are considerable uncertainties about their regional consequences, and they only reduce some, but not all, of the effects of climate change, while possibly creating other problems. The report concludes that SRM techniques could be useful if a threshold is reached where action to reduce temperatures must be taken rapidly, but that they are not an alternative to emissions reductions or CDR techniques. 

Professor Shepherd added, "None of the geoengineering technologies so far suggested is a magic bullet, and all have risks and uncertainties associated with them.  It is essential that we strive to cut emissions now, but we must also face the very real possibility that we will fail.  If "Plan B" is to be an option in the future, considerable research and development of the different methods, their environmental impacts and governance issues must be undertaken now.  Used irresponsibly or without regard for possible side effects, geoengineering could have catastrophic consequences similar to those of climate change itself.  We must ensure that a governance framework is in place to prevent this."

Of the CDR techniques assessed, the following were considered to have most useful potential:

• CO2 capture from ambient air this would be the preferred method of geoengineering, as it effectively reverses the cause of climate change.  At this stage no cost-effective methods have yet been demonstrated and much more research and development is needed.
• Enhanced weathering this technique, which utilises naturally occurring reactions of CO2 from the air with rocks and minerals, was identified as a prospective longer-term option.  However more research is needed to find cost-effective methods and to understand the wider environmental implications.
• Land use and afforestation the report found that land use management could and should play a small but significant role in reducing the growth of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.  However the scope for applying this technique would be limited by land use conflicts, and all the competing demands for land must be considered when assessing the potential for afforestation and reforestation.

Should temperatures rise to such a level where more rapid action needs to be taken, the following SRM techniques were considered to have most potential:

• Stratospheric aerosols these were found to be feasible, and previous volcanic eruptions have effectively provided short-term preliminary case studies of the potential effectiveness of this method.  The cost was assessed as likely to be relatively low and the timescale of action short.  However, there are some serious questions over adverse effects, particularly depletion of stratospheric ozone.
• Space-based methods these were considered to be a potential SRM technique for long-term use, if the major problems of implementation and maintenance could be solved. At present the techniques remain prohibitively expensive, complex and would be slow to implement.
• Cloud albedo approaches (eg. cloud ships) the effects would be localised and the impacts on regional weather patterns and ocean currents are of considerable concern but are not well understood.  The feasibility and effectiveness of the technique is uncertain.  A great deal more research would be needed before this technique could be seriously considered.

The following techniques were considered to have lower potential:

• Biochar (CDR technique) the report identified significant doubts relating to the potential scope, effectiveness and safety of this technique and recommended that substantial research would be required before it could be considered for eligibility for UN carbon credits. 
• Ocean fertilisation (CDR technique) the report found that this technique had not been proved to be effective and had high potential for unintended and undesirable ecological side effects.
• Surface albedo approaches (SRM technique, including white roof methods, reflective crops and desert reflectors) these were found to be ineffective, expensive and, in some cases, likely to have serious impacts on local and regional weather patterns."