Beginning: 11:00h (16th of Sept.); End: 15:00h (18th of Sept.)
In the first session, we will discuss sociological and psychological insights on divergent values and other normative viewpoints (as well as their major determinants) relevant to sustainability governance. Based on this, the conference will explore the prospects and the limitations of more recent innovations and promising approaches to divergent normative viewpoints at the science-policy interface. A particular focus is on deliberative approaches to ethical issues.
“[T]he kinds of values that can survive authentic democratic deliberation are those oriented to the interests of the community as a whole, rather than selfish interests within the community (or outside it). Arguments based on public goods or shared interests are more persuasive than those based on self-interest” (J. Dryzek, “The Politics of the Earth”, OUP 2013, p. 237).
Under which conditions could this and similar hypotheses become true?
More specific questions include, inter alia:
- What are relevant practical experiences at the sustainability science-policy interface concerning normative viewpoints?
- What are the prospects and limitations of particular deliberation formats and learning processes regarding normative viewpoints of different actors, particularly in highly polarised cases? Under which conditions (co-production of knowledge, democratisation of science, etc.)?
- What is the role for philosophical ethics and critical thinking in integrated sustainability assessments? What can be learned from theory and empirical evidence (including case studies) in this regard?
- What is the potential of more interdisciplinary and “non-ideal” approaches to ethics and justice at the science-policy interface? What can be learned from experiences with ethical-interdisciplinary co-development and evaluation of (e.g. IAM) scenarios or pathways?
- How can representation and clarification of different (types of) normative viewpoints be improved in integrated sustainability assessments? A focus on particular cases is encouraged.
- What are innovative participatory procedures (on different governance levels) that may help facilitate a more constructive discourse about divergent values and ethics?
- What are preliminary experiences and lessons learned concerning the current IPBES assessment on values?
- What are recent advancements in: public acceptance research; social choice and welfare approaches; political economy; or behavioural studies?
- What do we learn from environmental and social psychology, including the idea of more diverse policy alignment with existing values?
- What are major research gaps?