Publications
Quality assurance of knowledge claims in governance for sustainability: transcending the duality of passion vs. reason Journal Article
Giampietro, Mario; Bukkens, Sandra G. F.
In: International Journal of Sustainable Development, 18 (4), pp. 282, 2015, ISSN: 0960-1406.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Complexity, Integrated assessment, Knowledge claims, Multi-criteria analysis, Quality control, Science for governance, Sustainable Development
@article{Giampietro2015,
title = {Quality assurance of knowledge claims in governance for sustainability: transcending the duality of passion vs. reason},
author = {Mario Giampietro and Sandra G. F. Bukkens},
url = {http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=72662},
doi = {10.1504/IJSD.2015.072662},
issn = {0960-1406},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
journal = {International Journal of Sustainable Development},
volume = {18},
number = {4},
pages = {282},
abstract = {The main problem of quality assurance on knowledge claims lies in the entanglement of normative (value-driven moral stands) and descriptive (narratives about causality) dimensions at different organisational levels of decision-making. Individuals must choose among contrasting legitimate narratives about "the right thing to do" while facing uncertainty about the outcome of their choice. The scientific community faces exactly the same predicament, but without being able to legitimately choose among contrasting value-driven moral stands. At the societal level, existing institutional settings are incapable of guaranteeing the quality of collective choices. Three types of quality control are needed for the proper production and use of knowledge claims for governance: on the usefulness of the chosen problem structuring (relevance); on the pertinence of the scientific representation (plausibility); on the effectiveness of the validation process (fairness). These quality checks are required to legitimise the decision-making process, thus transcending the traditional duality between passion and reason.},
keywords = {Complexity, Integrated assessment, Knowledge claims, Multi-criteria analysis, Quality control, Science for governance, Sustainable Development},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The main problem of quality assurance on knowledge claims lies in the entanglement of normative (value-driven moral stands) and descriptive (narratives about causality) dimensions at different organisational levels of decision-making. Individuals must choose among contrasting legitimate narratives about "the right thing to do" while facing uncertainty about the outcome of their choice. The scientific community faces exactly the same predicament, but without being able to legitimately choose among contrasting value-driven moral stands. At the societal level, existing institutional settings are incapable of guaranteeing the quality of collective choices. Three types of quality control are needed for the proper production and use of knowledge claims for governance: on the usefulness of the chosen problem structuring (relevance); on the pertinence of the scientific representation (plausibility); on the effectiveness of the validation process (fairness). These quality checks are required to legitimise the decision-making process, thus transcending the traditional duality between passion and reason.
Siciliano, Giuseppina
Università Ca' Foscari Venezia, 2010.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Multi-criteria analysis, Multi-scale analysis, Rural-urban migration strategies
@phdthesis{Siciliano2010,
title = {Integrated approaches for evaluating development strategies in rural areas: case studies from Italy and China},
author = {Giuseppina Siciliano},
url = {http://hdl.handle.net/10579/933 http://dspace.unive.it/handle/10579/933},
year = {2010},
date = {2010-03-01},
school = {Universit\`{a} Ca' Foscari Venezia},
abstract = {The objective of this thesis is twofold: (1) to investigate the synergies arising from the implementation of multi-scale and multi-criteria approaches in the evaluation of rural development policies (RDP); (2) to explore the impacts and trade-offs of RDP in two selected case studies located in Italy and China. The thesis argues that multi-criteria and multi-scale approaches can be combined to provide a useful framework with which to structure an integrated analysis of RDP in order to assess their effectiveness in achieving sustainability goals across scales. The analysis is performed by selecting and evaluating multidimensional criteria, which represent the main goals of development policies in the areas of study. Moreover, multi-scale analysis is performed to define boundary conditions and trade-offs for future local development. The use of the two methodologies appears to be very significant to capture both the multidimensional and multi-scale aspects of the Rural Development Policies analysed and to generate several sets of “view-dependent” representations of rural systems that are useful for trade-off assessments.},
keywords = {Multi-criteria analysis, Multi-scale analysis, Rural-urban migration strategies},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
The objective of this thesis is twofold: (1) to investigate the synergies arising from the implementation of multi-scale and multi-criteria approaches in the evaluation of rural development policies (RDP); (2) to explore the impacts and trade-offs of RDP in two selected case studies located in Italy and China. The thesis argues that multi-criteria and multi-scale approaches can be combined to provide a useful framework with which to structure an integrated analysis of RDP in order to assess their effectiveness in achieving sustainability goals across scales. The analysis is performed by selecting and evaluating multidimensional criteria, which represent the main goals of development policies in the areas of study. Moreover, multi-scale analysis is performed to define boundary conditions and trade-offs for future local development. The use of the two methodologies appears to be very significant to capture both the multidimensional and multi-scale aspects of the Rural Development Policies analysed and to generate several sets of “view-dependent” representations of rural systems that are useful for trade-off assessments.
AGAUR Grant ID 2017 SGR 230 / Copyright © 2023