Abstract
Knowledge production and learning related to ESTPs face significant
challenges, with implications for effective science-policy interactions.
Scientific knowledge about ESTPs is increasingly reflected in IPCC
assessment reports, but governance actors are not yet using
this growing knowledge base sufficiently. Lack of awareness,
misconceptions and learning challenges limit the demand for, and
use of, existing scientific insights. At the same time, engagement with
tipping points in the social sciences and humanities is lagging.
The knowledge needed to understand, assess and support
governance efforts related to ESTPs in a polycentric setting must be
solutions-oriented, context-specific and actor-relevant. Anticipatory
knowledge and related capacities for making sense of and acting
with regard to uncertain futures (e.g. complex systems thinking) are
essential tools for decision makers. Currently dominant patterns of
knowledge co-production and science-policy engagement do not
foster learning and anticipatory capacity-building sufficiently to
generate robust and actionable knowledge for policy. To effectively
support governance efforts related to ESTPs across multiple scales,
knowledge production should be inter and transdisciplinary, and
increasingly participatory. Developing capacities for anticipation
requires expanded use of methods like participatory scenario
development, roleplay simulations and storytelling, which combine
quantitative and qualitative data, foster participants’ ability to deal
with uncertainty, and strengthen long-term agency.
Experiments with some of these approaches are currently taking place
in global knowledge-generating institutions like the Intergovernmental
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(IPBES). However, more profound changes to current science-policy
interface institutions and processes will be needed to support effective
decision making on ESTPs. The needed knowledge-production and
capacity-building processes are more resource intensive and require
more time (longer and more frequent engagement) than common
science-policy interactions. They are also difficult to include in the
scope of international institutions like the IPCC. Regional (e.g. Arctic
Monitoring and Assessment Programme) and national scientific
organisations (e.g. national academies of science) and policy advisory
bodies might be best suited to drive innovation and progress in this
domain.
challenges, with implications for effective science-policy interactions.
Scientific knowledge about ESTPs is increasingly reflected in IPCC
assessment reports, but governance actors are not yet using
this growing knowledge base sufficiently. Lack of awareness,
misconceptions and learning challenges limit the demand for, and
use of, existing scientific insights. At the same time, engagement with
tipping points in the social sciences and humanities is lagging.
The knowledge needed to understand, assess and support
governance efforts related to ESTPs in a polycentric setting must be
solutions-oriented, context-specific and actor-relevant. Anticipatory
knowledge and related capacities for making sense of and acting
with regard to uncertain futures (e.g. complex systems thinking) are
essential tools for decision makers. Currently dominant patterns of
knowledge co-production and science-policy engagement do not
foster learning and anticipatory capacity-building sufficiently to
generate robust and actionable knowledge for policy. To effectively
support governance efforts related to ESTPs across multiple scales,
knowledge production should be inter and transdisciplinary, and
increasingly participatory. Developing capacities for anticipation
requires expanded use of methods like participatory scenario
development, roleplay simulations and storytelling, which combine
quantitative and qualitative data, foster participants’ ability to deal
with uncertainty, and strengthen long-term agency.
Experiments with some of these approaches are currently taking place
in global knowledge-generating institutions like the Intergovernmental
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(IPBES). However, more profound changes to current science-policy
interface institutions and processes will be needed to support effective
decision making on ESTPs. The needed knowledge-production and
capacity-building processes are more resource intensive and require
more time (longer and more frequent engagement) than common
science-policy interactions. They are also difficult to include in the
scope of international institutions like the IPCC. Regional (e.g. Arctic
Monitoring and Assessment Programme) and national scientific
organisations (e.g. national academies of science) and policy advisory
bodies might be best suited to drive innovation and progress in this
domain.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Section 3: Governance of Earth system tipping points |
| Publisher | University of Exeter |
| Chapter | 3.4 |
| Pages | 49-56 |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2023 |
