- home
- Advanced Search
Filters
Year range
-chevron_right GOCountry
Organization
- Energy Research
- Energy Research
description Publicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article 2022Publisher:American Geophysical Union (AGU) Funded by:SSHRCSSHRCSeth Wynes; Jennifer Garard; Paola Fajardo; Midori Aoyagi; Melody Burkins; Kalpana Chaudhari; Terrence Forrester; Matthias Garschagen; Paul Hudson; Maria Ivanova; Edward Maibach; Anne‐Sophie Stevance; Sylvia Wood; Damon Matthews;doi: 10.1029/2022ef002857
AbstractDespite the increased salience of infectious disease risk due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, two recent surveys of the business and scientific communities have found a continued belief in the prominence of environmental risks. In particular, failure to take action on climate change was seen as a highly likely risk whose impacts would become locked‐in barring an immediate global response. These expert opinions are consistent with a growing body of evidence and give us insight into the priorities of global thought leaders who study and respond to risk. Given this alignment in priorities, we argue for the importance of integrating climate and environmental action into responses to emerging threats.
add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1029/2022ef002857&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.euAccess Routesgold 0 citations 0 popularity Average influence Average impulse Average Powered by BIP!
more_vert add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1029/2022ef002857&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.eudescription Publicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article , Journal 2017 GermanyPublisher:MDPI AG Authors: Garard, Jennifer; Kowarsch, Martin;doi: 10.3390/su9091571
Global environmental assessments (GEAs) are among the most large-scale, formalized processes for synthesizing knowledge at the science–policy–society interface. The successful engagement of diverse stakeholders in GEAs is often described as a crucial mechanism for increasing their legitimacy, salience and credibility. However, the diversity of perspectives on the more precise objectives for stakeholder engagement remains largely unclear. The aims of this study are to categorize and characterize the diversity of perspectives on objectives for stakeholder engagement in GEAs; to explore differences in perspectives within and between different stakeholder groups and categories; and to test whether the more practical prioritization and selection of objectives in GEAs can be linked to deliberative policy learning as a higher-level rationale for stakeholder engagement. For these purposes, we conduct a grounded theory analysis and a keyword analysis of interview material and official GEA documents relating to two GEAs: UN Environment’s Fifth Global Environment Outlook and the Working Group III contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report. Based on the analysis, we identify six categories of objectives and present as hypotheses promising ways forward for prioritizing and characterizing objectives for stakeholder engagement in GEAs, as well as potential reasons for the differences between perspectives on objectives. This study draws attention to the need for future GEA processes to have more explicit discussions on the objectives for stakeholder engagement, as well as the importance of moving towards increasingly deliberative and inclusive assessment processes more broadly.
add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.3390/su9091571&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.euAccess RoutesGreen gold 11 citations 11 popularity Top 10% influence Average impulse Top 10% Powered by BIP!
more_vert add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.3390/su9091571&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.eudescription Publicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article , Other literature type 2021 United KingdomPublisher:Cambridge University Press (CUP) Sylvia L. R. Wood; Amy Luers; Jennifer Garard; Ajay Gambhir; Kalpana Chaudhari; Maria Ivanova; Casey Cronin;doi: 10.1017/sus.2021.3
handle: 10044/1/87218
Non-technical summary Charting robust pathways towards more sustainable futures that ‘leave no one behind’ requires that diverse communities engage in collective foresight and intelligence exercises to better understand global systemic challenges, anticipate the emerging risks and opportunities that disruptions present, and share perspectives on how to respond and inform decision-making. We report on the recent use of an international rapid foresight survey to assess expected societal trends over the next 3 years following the COVID-19 crisis. The results illustrate the power of collective foresight approaches to provide timely, nuanced insights for decision-making across sectors and scales, particularly in times of uncertainty. Technical summary We present the findings of a rapid foresight survey launched in spring 2020 to draw on the collective intelligence of the global community on where the world is headed post-COVID-19. Respondents were asked to (i) assess five key societal trends in the coming 3 years, (ii) provide news headlines they both expect and hope to see, and (iii) assess the role of digital technologies during crises. Analysis of over 2000 responses from more than 90 countries revealed important regional differences in expected societal trends related to sustainability. More respondents in the Global South expected shifts towards less inequality while more respondents in the Global North expected shifts towards a smaller ecological footprint. Qualitative analysis of proposed news headlines revealed four broad themes of focus (environment, equity, health, and economy), and yielded insights into perspectives on critical drivers of change. Finally, the survey report found that the vast majority of respondents were not opposed to digital surveillance in crises. In presenting these results, we explore the value of collective foresight and intelligence exercises in providing pluralistic inputs to decision-making and in complementing more prevalent methods of forecasting. Social media summary Collective foresight exercises with diverse communities can help chart robust pathways to more sustainable futures.
Imperial College Lon... arrow_drop_down Imperial College London: SpiralArticle . 2021License: CC BYFull-Text: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/87218Data sources: Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE)add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1017/sus.2021.3&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.euAccess RoutesGreen gold 12 citations 12 popularity Top 10% influence Average impulse Top 10% Powered by BIP!
visibility 2visibility views 2 download downloads 10 Powered bymore_vert Imperial College Lon... arrow_drop_down Imperial College London: SpiralArticle . 2021License: CC BYFull-Text: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/87218Data sources: Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE)add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1017/sus.2021.3&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.eu
description Publicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article 2022Publisher:American Geophysical Union (AGU) Funded by:SSHRCSSHRCSeth Wynes; Jennifer Garard; Paola Fajardo; Midori Aoyagi; Melody Burkins; Kalpana Chaudhari; Terrence Forrester; Matthias Garschagen; Paul Hudson; Maria Ivanova; Edward Maibach; Anne‐Sophie Stevance; Sylvia Wood; Damon Matthews;doi: 10.1029/2022ef002857
AbstractDespite the increased salience of infectious disease risk due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, two recent surveys of the business and scientific communities have found a continued belief in the prominence of environmental risks. In particular, failure to take action on climate change was seen as a highly likely risk whose impacts would become locked‐in barring an immediate global response. These expert opinions are consistent with a growing body of evidence and give us insight into the priorities of global thought leaders who study and respond to risk. Given this alignment in priorities, we argue for the importance of integrating climate and environmental action into responses to emerging threats.
add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1029/2022ef002857&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.euAccess Routesgold 0 citations 0 popularity Average influence Average impulse Average Powered by BIP!
more_vert add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1029/2022ef002857&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.eudescription Publicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article , Journal 2017 GermanyPublisher:MDPI AG Authors: Garard, Jennifer; Kowarsch, Martin;doi: 10.3390/su9091571
Global environmental assessments (GEAs) are among the most large-scale, formalized processes for synthesizing knowledge at the science–policy–society interface. The successful engagement of diverse stakeholders in GEAs is often described as a crucial mechanism for increasing their legitimacy, salience and credibility. However, the diversity of perspectives on the more precise objectives for stakeholder engagement remains largely unclear. The aims of this study are to categorize and characterize the diversity of perspectives on objectives for stakeholder engagement in GEAs; to explore differences in perspectives within and between different stakeholder groups and categories; and to test whether the more practical prioritization and selection of objectives in GEAs can be linked to deliberative policy learning as a higher-level rationale for stakeholder engagement. For these purposes, we conduct a grounded theory analysis and a keyword analysis of interview material and official GEA documents relating to two GEAs: UN Environment’s Fifth Global Environment Outlook and the Working Group III contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report. Based on the analysis, we identify six categories of objectives and present as hypotheses promising ways forward for prioritizing and characterizing objectives for stakeholder engagement in GEAs, as well as potential reasons for the differences between perspectives on objectives. This study draws attention to the need for future GEA processes to have more explicit discussions on the objectives for stakeholder engagement, as well as the importance of moving towards increasingly deliberative and inclusive assessment processes more broadly.
add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.3390/su9091571&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.euAccess RoutesGreen gold 11 citations 11 popularity Top 10% influence Average impulse Top 10% Powered by BIP!
more_vert add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.3390/su9091571&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.eudescription Publicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article , Other literature type 2021 United KingdomPublisher:Cambridge University Press (CUP) Sylvia L. R. Wood; Amy Luers; Jennifer Garard; Ajay Gambhir; Kalpana Chaudhari; Maria Ivanova; Casey Cronin;doi: 10.1017/sus.2021.3
handle: 10044/1/87218
Non-technical summary Charting robust pathways towards more sustainable futures that ‘leave no one behind’ requires that diverse communities engage in collective foresight and intelligence exercises to better understand global systemic challenges, anticipate the emerging risks and opportunities that disruptions present, and share perspectives on how to respond and inform decision-making. We report on the recent use of an international rapid foresight survey to assess expected societal trends over the next 3 years following the COVID-19 crisis. The results illustrate the power of collective foresight approaches to provide timely, nuanced insights for decision-making across sectors and scales, particularly in times of uncertainty. Technical summary We present the findings of a rapid foresight survey launched in spring 2020 to draw on the collective intelligence of the global community on where the world is headed post-COVID-19. Respondents were asked to (i) assess five key societal trends in the coming 3 years, (ii) provide news headlines they both expect and hope to see, and (iii) assess the role of digital technologies during crises. Analysis of over 2000 responses from more than 90 countries revealed important regional differences in expected societal trends related to sustainability. More respondents in the Global South expected shifts towards less inequality while more respondents in the Global North expected shifts towards a smaller ecological footprint. Qualitative analysis of proposed news headlines revealed four broad themes of focus (environment, equity, health, and economy), and yielded insights into perspectives on critical drivers of change. Finally, the survey report found that the vast majority of respondents were not opposed to digital surveillance in crises. In presenting these results, we explore the value of collective foresight and intelligence exercises in providing pluralistic inputs to decision-making and in complementing more prevalent methods of forecasting. Social media summary Collective foresight exercises with diverse communities can help chart robust pathways to more sustainable futures.
Imperial College Lon... arrow_drop_down Imperial College London: SpiralArticle . 2021License: CC BYFull-Text: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/87218Data sources: Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE)add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1017/sus.2021.3&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.euAccess RoutesGreen gold 12 citations 12 popularity Top 10% influence Average impulse Top 10% Powered by BIP!
visibility 2visibility views 2 download downloads 10 Powered bymore_vert Imperial College Lon... arrow_drop_down Imperial College London: SpiralArticle . 2021License: CC BYFull-Text: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/87218Data sources: Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE)add ClaimPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.All Research productsarrow_drop_down <script type="text/javascript"> <!-- document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>'); document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=10.1017/sus.2021.3&type=result"></script>'); --> </script>
For further information contact us at helpdesk@openaire.eu