Formal Group Modelling as a Deliberative Platform at the Science-Policy-Democracy Interface

Transkript

1 Formal Group Modelling as a Deliberative Platform at the Science-Policy-Democracy Interface Peter Schlyter 1, Harald Sverdrup 1,2, Ingrid Stjernquist 1, Deniz Koca 2, Salim Belyazid 3 1. Environmental and Resource Dynamics Group, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden 2. Biogeochemistry Group, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Lund University, Sweden 3. Belyazid Communications and Consulting, Bollebygd, Sweden

2 Rationale The Swedish EPA were to revise/modify the national environmental objectives An unhappiness at SEPA with current indicators and progress towards EO in the mountain areas

3 The EO work identifies the need for wide stake-holder participation Essential for de-centralised implementation among a multitude of actors Needed when monitoring of compliance is difficult Needed when local adaptation is wanted

4 A shift in focus Input legitimacy (procedural logic) Formally correct, transparent, fair Output legitimacy (consequential logic) Problems solved or reduced, efficiency

5 The Mission Analyse the work to reach the Parliamentary Environmental Objectives with the objective Magnificent Mountains as an example Analyse conflicts Analyse the administration and management Make an analysis of the future Propose a research programme

6 About Problems Problems manifest through symptoms You are not seeing the problem. You are observing its symptoms We can only understand problems by its behaviour use CLDs

7 We choose to use a systems perspective a modelling approach involve all stake-holders in CLD-based group modelling with concurrent open peer review

8 Why use models? Communicate understanding and create common mental maps of problems and phenomena Sort the important from the redundant System thinking, analysis and dynamics is needed when there is to much information, too much understanding and too many questions to answer, but when we have no order and ranking

9 Stake-holders Rovdjursföreningen, Krister Persson Polarforskningssekretariatet, Olle Melander Naturskyddsföreningen, Bengt-Göran Carlsson Länsstyrelsen Norrbotten Ren/Markförvaltning, Erik Gustavsson, Gunilla Manbré Länsstyrelsen i Norrbotten Kultur/Miljö Gunilla Edbom Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten, Markförvaltning Torleif Eriksson Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten, Miljöskydd Peter Vennman Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten, Kultur/Miljö Jeanette Joelsson Länsstyrelsen Jämtland Naturvård, Ruben Johansson Länsstyrelsen Jämtland Ren/Markförvaltning, Jens Andersson LRF (Lantbrukarnas riksförbund), Eilert Apelqvist Jordbruksverket, Svante Nilsson Försvarsmakten, Lars Moe, Mikael Köhler Fastighetsverket, Sven Hagström Föreningen Sveriges Fäbodbrukare, Kristian Olofsson, Pauline Palmkrantz Energimyndigheten, Fredrik Dahlström Ekoturismföreningen, Maria Kjellström Dorotea kommun, Nicke Grahn Bergsstaten, Jan-Olof Hedström Ajtte, Svenskt fjäll- och samemuseum, Kjell-Åke Aronsson Malung-Sälens kommun, Ingemar Kyhlberg Destination Funäsdalen, Hans-Ola Törnberg Norra Dalarnas Turistråd, Joacim Johansson Vägverket, GunnBritt Mariedahl Tillväxtverket, Kerstin Lindblad Rikspolisen/Fjällräddning, Bengt-Göran Wiik Nätverket Norden, Östen Stenlund SNOFED/Snöskoter, Elisabet Jonsson, Pär Persson Sametinget, Ingrid Rehnfeldt Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning (SGU) Christina Lundmark Svenska Turistföreningen, Pelle Andersson Svenska Kraftnät, Katrin Seuss Svenska Jägareförbundet, Hans Geibrink SSR (Svenska samers Riksförbund) Jörgen Jonsson, Helen Larsson SSCO/Snöskoter, Jan Sund SLAO samt Svensk Turism, Hans Gerremo Riksantikvarieämbetet. Rikard Sohlenius Naturvårdsverket, Per-Olov Wikberg, Lena Sundin Rådström, Hördur Haraldsson, Bo Nilsson, Anna Von Sydow, Kristian Skånberg, Nils Hallberg SKISTAR, Anders Aspholm

10 Stake-holders Rovdjursföreningen, Krister Persson Norra Dalarnas Turistråd, Joacim Johansson Polarforskningssekretariatet, Olle Melander Vägverket, GunnBritt Mariedahl Naturskyddsföreningen, Bengt-Göran Carlsson Tillväxtverket, Kerstin Lindblad Länsstyrelsen Norrbotten Ren/Markförvaltning, Rikspolisen/Fjällräddning, Bengt-Göran Wiik Erik Gustavsson, Gunilla Manbré Nätverket Norden, Östen Stenlund Länsstyrelsen i Norrbotten Kultur/Miljö Gunilla Edbom SNOFED/Snöskoter, Elisabet Jonsson, Pär Persson Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten, Markförvaltning Torleif Eriksson Sametinget, Ingrid Rehnfeldt Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten, Miljöskydd Peter Vennman Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning (SGU) Christina Lundmark Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten, Kultur/Miljö Jeanette Joelsson Svenska Turistföreningen, Pelle Andersson Svenska Kraftnät, Katrin Seuss Länsstyrelsen Jämtland Naturvård, Ruben Johansson Svenska Jägareförbundet, Hans Geibrink Länsstyrelsen Jämtland Ren/Markförvaltning, SSR (Svenska samers Riksförbund) Jörgen Jonsson, Helen Larsson Jens Andersson SSCO/Snöskoter, Jan Sund LRF (Lantbrukarnas riksförbund), Eilert Apelqvist SLAO samt Svensk Turism, Hans Gerremo Jordbruksverket, Svante Nilsson Riksantikvarieämbetet. Rikard Sohlenius Försvarsmakten, Lars Moe, Mikael Köhler Naturvårdsverket, Per-Olov Wikberg, Lena Sundin Rådström, Hördur Fastighetsverket, Sven Hagström Haraldsson, Bo Nilsson, Anna Von Sydow, Kristian Skånberg, Nils Föreningen Sveriges Fäbodbrukare, Hallberg Kristian Olofsson, Pauline Palmkrantz SKISTAR, Anders Aspholm Energimyndigheten, Fredrik Dahlström Ekoturismföreningen, Maria Kjellström Dorotea kommun, Nicke Grahn Bergsstaten, Jan-Olof Hedström Ajtte, Svenskt fjäll- och samemuseum, Kjell-Åke Aronsson

11 Process Group modelling Literature review Stake-holder queries Mountain researcher workshop Open dialogue during the whole process

12 Steps in creating a model 1. Define the problem to be solved 2. Discover characteristics and hierarchies 3. Sort info into: Causes Effects Driving factors to adjust Mechanisms Important from unimportant 4. Test and adjust

13 A Simple System with Linked Loops Population R B time

14 B Behaviour and time

15 Group Modelling Sessions

16 Results The SEPA environmental focus too narrow to reach the EO s The State s legitimacy was perceived as low by all stakeholders and the perception an impediment to reach EO s More local participatory management needed

17 Need for more local management Political weight + + Delegated responsibility Effective institutions and regimes Legitimacy

18 The Stake-holders Ideal Situation Power Results Text Bureacracy Research Forskning Call/Comission Consultation Bureacracy Consultation Partricipation Participation State industry Lokal befolkning

19 An Example: The Saami Identity

20

21 The Saami: Conclusions For the Saami EO are too narrow a concept For the Saami EO is just a part of total sustainability For the Saami social effects are crucial, but they are not considered in the current EO s For the Saami concensus solutions based on real, not pro forma, consultations a requirement for trust What is true for the Saami is in reality a generally valid principle also for other stake-holders in the area

22 Group Modelling 1. Modelling provided a platform for dialogue 2. All could participate on an equal basis as CLDʼs allowed collective definition of relationships and processes for the modelled area 3. Modelling efficiently defused old conflicts as focus was shifted towards processes rather than the goals of any given stake-holder

23 Group Modelling 4. All participants, and the Swedish EPA, gained a better understanding of the mountains environment (both in a physical and social sense) and identified new relationships and previously unidentified causes for stake-holder conflicts and poor environmental objective achievement. 5. A joint and in the end non-contested CLD-model over the social, economic and environmental dynamics in the Swedish mountains was developed. 6. The joint analysis underpinned a stake-holder based proposal for a research programme developed during the group modelling sessions.

24