I wish I was a sociologist as this must be heaven for them. The
melting pot of different cultures, world views, political positions,
disciplinary backgrounds and contrasting agendas is the character of the
meeting. To map and understand this is of course impossible, but enough for a
large sociological research programme. The misunderstanding of terms depending
on different perspectives is making the interaction between participants in the
meeting into a micro-representation of the problems that we are facing
globally. There is no lack of good will or joint ambitions to create this
science policy interface. Yet, we fail to communicate in a language and with terms
that make sense to all and hence we have mistrust on several levels. We can
regard the whole event as a huge “experiment” – an experiment that I would
assume being a sociologist “wet dream”.
Concerning what we are doing, the message from yesterday is
basically the same; it is uphill with very little substantial progress. Whenever
the term “stakeholder” shows up, it is put in square brackets (for those of you
unfamiliar with the process it means that it is something that is not agreed
upon and that needs to be resolved later). As “stakeholders” from the
scientific community it is of course vital that we are allowed to play a
central role in this science-policy interface. We should be allowed to nominate
experts and be seen as significant contributors to the process. Without us, there
is no translation of science to policy. The problem is though, given the definition
of stakeholders that we live with, and as mentioned in the contact group that I
participated in today, that the Argentina representative’s children and Sir Bob
Watson’s mother are also stakeholders. No surprise that several governments
have a problem in allowing stakeholders to having a significant role in IPBES!
To provoke my fellow SCB representative Guy Pe’er (which
tends to say the opposite) I would say that there is no ground for optimism and
what remains is hope – hope without very little substance to back it up. So my “hope”
is that we can provide a slightly more optimistic blog tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment