This document provides an overview of a presentation given by Andy Stirling on 'Nexus Methods' at the ESRC Methods Festival. It discusses the complex and interconnected nature of issues related to the food-water-energy nexus. It notes that while there are many quantitative and qualitative methods that can be applied to nexus issues, they all involve subjective framings and no single method can capture the full complexity. The presentation advocates a reflexive approach that acknowledges the conditional nature of knowledge and assessment in this domain.
Report
Share
Report
Share
1 of 48
More Related Content
Andy Stirling - nexus methods
1. ‘Nexus Methods’
opening up democracy as rigour
Andy Stirling
SPRU & STEPS Centre
University of Sussex
presentation to conference session on Nexus Methods
ESRC Methods Festival
University of Bath
5th
July 2016
www.steps-centre.org/
www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/
www.multicriteriamapping.com
www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/people/peoplelists/person/7513
2. How Shall We Play This?
1000
1130
1100
1130
1200
1230
STEPS
Methods
talk then
discussion
Andy
Stirling
Open Space
volunteers
convene
groups
Session1breakSession2
Nexus Methodology
talk then discussion
Andy Stirling
Open Space
volunteers
convene
groups
STEPS
Methods
Andy
Stirling
OPTION 3OPTION 1 OPTION 2
4. What is ‘the Nexus’?
food
water
energy
Substantive imperatives for ‘joined up policy…?
… or instrumental
pressure for policy justification?
5. What is ‘the Nexus’?
climate
development
food
environment
water
security
globalisation
energy
population
migration
urbanisation
6. Phenonema Under Scrutiny
•social and material world
•“systems” and “contexts”
•“scales” and “levels”
•“actors” and “networks”
•“values” and “interests”
•“frames” and “narratives”
•“causes” and “effects”
•processes and relations
•“knowledges”,“incertitudes”
•“positives” and “negatives”
•“structures” and “agents”
•“actions” and “reactions”
•“imaginations” and “visions”
•“metrics” and ”indices”
Complexity is not made by pathways methods…
…but addressed by them – brings a need for “reflexivity”
7. cost-benefit analysis
risk assessment
decision analysis
multiattribute utility theory
technology assessment
life cycle analysis
optimisation modelling
Bayesian networks
extended accounting
data mining
delphi methods
Quantitative Culture Qualitative Culture
A Juicy Opportunity for Appraisal Disciplines!
No shortage of candidate ‘Nexus methods’
scenario workshops
focus groups
participatory appraisal
stakeholder deliberation
ethnomethodology
collaborative design
capabilities assessment
strategic appraisal
action research
cooperative research
study groups
8. Energy regulation: most mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
A Key Common Problem: Concealed Ambiguity
9. 0.001 0.1 10 1000
externality’: cUS/kWh (after Sundqvist et al, 2005)low RISK high
coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
wind
solar
biomass
Energy regulation: most mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
A Key Common Problem: Concealed Ambiguity
10. 0.001 0.1 10 1000
coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
21
wind
solar
biomass
n =
‘externality’: cUS/kWh (after Sundqvist et al, 2005)
minimum maximum25% 75%
low RISK high
Energy regulation: most mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
A Key Common Problem: Concealed Ambiguity
11. coal
oil
gas
nuclear
hydro
36
20
wind 18
solar 11
biomass 22
31
21
16
n =
…‘sound science’, ‘evidence based’ Nexus analyses justify many policies
Energy regulation: most mature, sophisticated comparative analysis…
A Key Common Problem: Concealed Ambiguity
12. All Quantification is Qualitatively Framed
Equally true of qualitative research, but this is better appreciated
23. The Conditionality of Assessment
knowledge
practices
fundamental
nature
biophysical environments
societies &
economies
cultures &
instituions
But knowledge is
produced by people,
with cultures,
pursuing practices
in institutions
So it is jointly
shaped to reflect
both social and
natural orders
27. reflexivity over subjectivity, contingency, contextuality
reflectionoverrobustness,quality,error‘Reflexivity’ is not about ‘Anything Goes’
normatively and/or
epistemically wrong
normatively and/or
epistemically right
CONCEPTUAL SPACE OF ALL
CANDIDATE POSSIBILITIES
FOR WHAT IS NORMATIVELY
OR EPISTEMICALLY ‘RIGHT’
KEY
28. normatively and/or
epistemically wrong
normatively and/or
epistemically right
naïve realism
“one thing is precisely right”
mainstream fallibilism
“one thing is approximately right”
caricature relativism
“all things are equally right”
conditional plurality
“contrasting things are equally right…
xxxx…but much else is just plain wrong!”
reflexivity over subjectivity, contingency, contextuality
reflectionoverrobustness,quality,error‘Reflexivity’ is not about ‘Anything Goes’
reflexivity: ‘right’ answers & solutions
vary by framings of questions & problems
molecular biologists
ecologists
economists
sociologists
31. integrated
assessment
largely qualitative mostly quantitative
EPISTEMIC CULTURE
explicitly mixed
STYLEOFENQUIRY
deductivestyleabductivestyleinductivestyle
QUALITATIVE APPREHENSION HYBRID APPRAISAL EMPIRICAL QUANTIFICATION
GROUNDED METHODS
INTERPRETIVE ANALYSIS QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT
social
assessment
longitudinal
methods
cladistic
taxonomy
natural
experiment
value chain
analysis
monitoring
multi-sited
ethnography
scientometrics
surveillance data
mining
econometrics
case
studies
network
analysis
narrative
analysis
historiography
comprehensive
archive research
historical
method
discourse
analysis
process
tracing
situational
analysis
studying up
systems
theory`
soft systems
theory`
information
theory
meta
analysis
life cycle
approaches
optimisation
modelling
Bayesian
models
probabilistic
risk analysis
uncertainty
analysis
APPRECIATIVE APPROACHES
MIXED THEORY
EVALUATIVE TECHNIQUES
environmental
assessment
evaluation
methods
statistical
methods
spatial
analysis
critical
pedagogy
technology
assessment
panel
studies
social
indicators
technometricscontent analysis
social
experiment
randomised
control trials
remote
sensing
agent-based
modelling
needs
analysis
road-
mapping
ethno-
methodology
action
research
counter-
factuals
co-word
analysis
RESEARCH
METHODS
innovation
histories
evidentiary
presumptions
systems
histories`
precautionary
appraisal
critical
accounting
influence
mapping
post-normal
science
resilience
analysis
alternatives
assessment
critical
triangulation
cross-frame
analysis
imaginaries analysis
arts
catalyst
capabilities
assessment
sensitivity
analysis
key: analytic / interactive method
costbenefit
analysis
ecological
footprint
32. integrated
assessment
largely qualitative mostly quantitative
EPISTEMIC CULTURE
explicitly mixed
STYLEOFENQUIRY
deductivestyleabductivestyleinductivestyle
QUALITATIVE APPREHENSION HYBRID APPRAISAL EMPIRICAL QUANTIFICATION
GROUNDED METHODS
INTERPRETIVE ANALYSIS QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT
social
assessment
extended
foresight longitudinal
methods
cladistic
taxonomy
natural
experiment
value chain
analysis
monitoring
multi-sited
ethnography
scientometrics
surveillance data
mining
econometrics
delphi
analysis
photo-
elicitation
case
studies
network
analysis
narrative
analysis
historiography
comprehensive
archive research
historical
method
discourse
analysis
process
tracing
situational
analysis
studying up
systems
theory`
soft systems
theory`
information
theory
meta
analysis
life cycle
approaches
optimisation
modelling
Bayesian
models
probabilistic
risk analysis
uncertainty
analysis
APPRECIATIVE APPROACHES
MIXED THEORY
EVALUATIVE TECHNIQUES
environmental
assessment
evaluation
methods
statistical
methods
spatial
analysis
opinion
surveys
attitudinal
scaling
structured
deliberation
dissensus
groups
citizen
science
crowd
sourcing
scenario
workshops
futures
visioning
performative
approaches
focus
groups
semi-structured
interviews
critical
pedagogy
decision
analysis
contingent
valuation
multicriteria
mapping
Q method
gaming
techniques
open
space
technology
assessment
constructive
technology
assessment
interactive
diagrams
panel
studies
social
indicators
technometricscontent analysis
social
experiment
experimental
economics
randomised
control trials
remote
sensing
interactive
visualisation
interactive
modelling
agent-based
modelling
paricipatory
backcasting
needs
analysis
road-
mapping
ethno-
methodology
situational
activism
action
research
biography
counter-
factuals
co-word
analysis
participatory
theatre
RESEARCH
METHODS
social multicriteria
analysis
stakeholder
negotiation
innovation
histories
concurrent
evidence
evidentiary
presumptions
systems
histories`
precautionary
appraisal
critical
accounting
do-it-yourself
juries
influence
mapping
post-normal
science
resilience
analysis
alternatives
assessment
critical
triangulation
cross-frame
analysis
power
tools
imaginaries analysis
deliberative
polling
diversity
mapping
co-operative
research
collaborative
design
arts
catalyst
community
art
participatory
rural appraisal
study
groups
capabilities
assessment
planning
cells
sensitivity
analysis
key: analytic / interactive method
costbenefit
analysis
ecological
footprint
33. INPUTS
(aspects taken into
account within
practice of research
or appraisal)
problems,
options,
pros / cons,
issues,
uncertainties,
perspectives
INPUTS
(things that are
taken into account)
Pro
blems, options, pros
/ cons, issues,
uncertainties,
perspectives
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
OUTPUTS
(aspects that are conveyed
outwards into wider discourse)
’Plural conditional’ conclusions…
… if X then A … if Y then B …
Rigour in Nexus-Focused Methodologies
Combining reflexivity about framing and reflection about error
in informing policy and politics
34. narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
decision
analysis
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
sustainability
safety
impacts
Rigour in Nexus-Focused Methodologies
Combining reflexivity about framing and reflection about error
in informing policy and politics
35. narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
citizen’s juries
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
Rigour in Nexus-Focused Methodologies
Combining reflexivity about framing and reflection about error
in informing policy and politics
36. narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
citizen’s juries
participatory
appraisal
q-method
scientometric
mapping
open
space
multicriteria
mapping
extended
foresight
citizen’s juries
decision
analysis
stakeholder
negotiation
participatory
sensitivity analysis
cost-benefit
analysis
risk
assessment
interactive
modelling
structured
interviews
participant
observation
multi-site
ethnographic-
methods
citizen’s juries
consensus
conference
open
hearings
concurrent
evidence
critical
narratives
intervention
futures
PIPA
plural
photovoice
system
histories
innovation
histories
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
Rigour in Nexus-Focused Methodologies
Combining reflexivity about framing and reflection about error
in informing policy and politics
37. spot-the-
narrative
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
citizen’s juries
decision
analysis
participatory
rural appraisal
stakeholder
negotiation
q-method
sensitivity
analysis
deliberative
mapping
scientometric
mapping
open
space
cost-benefit
analysis
risk
assessmen
t
interactive
modelling
structured
interviews
narrative-based
participant
observation
multi-site
ethnographic-
methods
citizen’s juries
consensus
conference
open
hearings
dissenting
opinions
multi-criteria
mapping
extended
foresight
stakeholder
negotiation
cost-benefit
analysis
risk
assessment
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
Power Closes Down Nexus Research and Appraisal
Pressure to command authority, foster trust, secure acceptance, manage blame
38. expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Challenges for Research and Appraisal
Reflexively means actively balancing bias in conventional appraisal
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
participatory
appraisal
q-method open
space
multicriteria
mapping
participatory
sensitivity
analysis
intervention
futures PIPA
plural
photovoice
system
histories
innovation
histories
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
39. narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Power Closes Down Research and Appraisal
A responsibility for neutrality means independent innovation research and
policy appraisal should deliberately counter pressures for closure
MONODISCIPLINARITY
eg:
Q-method comes out of social psychology
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
40. narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Power Closes Down Research and Appraisal
A responsibility for neutrality means independent innovation research and
policy appraisal should deliberately counter pressures for closure
MONODISCIPLINARITY
- enquiry is structured by community practices
- institutionalised as “normal science” within paradigm
- authority through self-confident coherence
eg:
in Q-method analysis is subject to
particular assumptions and conventions
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
41. MONODISCIPLINARITY
- enquiry is structured by community practices
- institutionalised as “normal science” within paradigm
- authority through self-confident coherence
Participatory methods can
also be monodisciplinary
eg:
participatory panel
follows particular rules
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Power Closes Down Research and Appraisal
A responsibility for neutrality means independent innovation research and
policy appraisal should deliberately counter pressures for closure
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
42. narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Power Closes Down Research and Appraisal
A responsibility for neutrality means independent innovation research and
policy appraisal should deliberately counter pressures for closure
CROSS-DISCIPLINARITY
- task- and context-specific
- allows cross-critique and triangulation
- authority through juxtaposition
eg:
participatory panel provides
complement to discourse analysis
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
43. MULTIDISCIPLINARITY
- enquiry structured hierarchically
- impressive scope, reassuring applicability
- authority through integration
eg:
integrated assessment
global panels
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Power Closes Down Research and Appraisal
A responsibility for neutrality means independent innovation research and
policy appraisal should deliberately counter pressures for closure
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
44. INTERDISCIPLINARITY
- enquiry structured by collaboration
- attention targeted on focal problem
- authority thro’ fidelity in addressing complexity
eg:
collaborative networks
multiple partnerships
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Power Closes Down Research and Appraisal
A responsibility for neutrality means independent innovation research and
policy appraisal should deliberately counter pressures for closure
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
45. TRANSDISCIPLINARITY
- enquiry reflects wider extant framings
- flexible to divergent contexts
- authority thro’ salience and legitimacy
eg:
co-designed with
stakeholders
narrow
broad
closing down opening up
expert / analytic
participatory /
deliberative
Power Closes Down Research and Appraisal
A responsibility for neutrality means independent innovation research and
policy appraisal should deliberately counter pressures for closure
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
46. Mapping Perspectives for Deliberation
Multicriteria Mapping ‘opens up’ politics and power in expertise
Analysis of 12 UK government GM advisors (2001)
47. Mapping Perspectives for Deliberation
Multicriteria Mapping ‘opens up’ politics and power in expertise
Analysis of 12 UK government GM advisors (2001)
organics
low input
intensive
GM 1
GM 2
GM 3
organics
low input
intensive
GM 1
GM 2
GM 3
48. UK Government
ecology chair
organics
low input
intensive
GM 1
GM 2
GM 3
organics
low input
intensive
GM 1
GM 2
GM 3
UK Government
safety chair
GM industry
research executive
Green NGO
scientist
Acknowledging assumptions, values, uncertainties ‘plural & conditional’
approach is rigorous & democratic
… if A, then x; … if B, then y
Multicriteria Mapping ‘opens up’ politics and power in expertise
Mapping Perspectives for Deliberation
Editor's Notes
roland: analytic believe in method, intuitive believe in results
Abstract
The governance of science and technology is conditioned by some pervasive fallacies and fantasies. None are more extensive or deeply embedded, than those concerning the ability of human agency deliberately to control key features of interest in the world. Aspects and implications of the associated dilemmas arise both in the ways knowledge itself is understood, as well as the styles of intervention that society seeks to undertake. Common to both areas, are the neglected dynamics of power - encouraging exaggeration both of the quality of knowledge and the tractability of action.
Focusing on the example of energy systems, this talk will quickly review some of the practical policy implications. It will argue for attention to a range of neglected 'broader based' methods for 'opening up' policy appraisal of energy systems. It will also conclude for greater attention to governance strategies that do not depend on claims and aspirations to control. Again, some practical implications will be discussed relating to resilience rather than stability in energy systems and transformation rather than deterministic transition. In all these respects, a concrete energy policy strategy that repeatedly comes to the fore is that of deliberate diversification.
Here we will refer to other quantitative appraisal methods like risk analysis, decision analysis, environmental assessment, lifecycle assessment, wellbeing appraisal which is quite precise, where comparing the various options, you can get clear, objective distinctions.
Here you see the ordering of choices in a single study through risk analysis which is scientific and evidence based, and which gives a clear picture of the best and worst case scenario
Dynamic Sustainabilities’ and earlier STEPS work outlines case for:
‘broadening out the inputs of appraisal’ (options, issues, scenarios, uncertainties, methods, values, perspectives);
‘opening up the outputs of appraisal’ (moving from ‘unitary prescriptive’ to ‘plural and conditional’ representations of the issues to policy making and wider political debates.
This is a novel and fundamental distinction, transcending conventional divides between expert and participatory, quantitative and qualitative, deliberative and analytic, natural and social scientific methods.
There exists a wide diversity of different aspects and dimensions of appreciation – styles of method and stages and tasks in appraisal – in which this can be undertaken . A STEPS Methodology thus needs to address this complexity in a clear, practical, flexible, interdisciplinary way – sensitive to contrasting contexts and perspectives.
As practised in the complex, diverse and dynamic realities of academic research and policy appraisal, each individual coinventionally-named method typically displays considerable latitude in the ways in which it is implemented in practise – spanning contrasting dimensions & degrees of ‘opening up’ and ‘closing down’. So it is difficult to generalise.
As practised in the complex, diverse and dynamic realities of academic research and policy appraisal, each individual coinventionally-named method typically displays considerable latitude in the ways in which it is implemented in practise – spanning contrasting dimensions & degrees of ‘opening up’ and ‘closing down’. So it is difficult to generalise.