Yesterday in University of Nottingham, Dr. Sarah Whatmore from the University of Oxford gave a talk with the topic "Environmental Knowledge Controversies -- Science, democracy and the redistribution of expertise".
In her speech, Dr. Whatmore mainly addressed the trends in knowledge generation and distribution. As the information technology develops, today scientific knowledge is no longer only distributed among academic people, any invention or discovery can be known by the public and very possibly invite controversy. Besides, the public is changing their position in the flow of innovation. Before they are only the receiver of the results of innovation. Today, they will play a major part in the evaluation of the innovation, even become the cause and driver of innovation.
Such trends calls for the change of public involvement. It has been recognised that past form of involvement, characterised by given options or 'debate points' and late participation of the public, must be substituted by early and more profound forms of participation, the public should be able to participate from the very beginning throughout to the end (I am glad that I addressed this in my exam).
A new form of interdisciplinarity can be produced in such participation. Functional interdisciplinarity is common today, that knowledge from different disciplines are integrated to form the anwser to a certain complex question. But Dr. Whatmore says as the controversy and early participation increases, the interaction between social and natural scientists, and that between scientists and the public, will increase. Not only the formed knowledge, but also their approaches in different disciplines will be integrated with and changed by each other.
Thus a new unit of participation, a 'Competency Group' will emerge. Competency here means skill. In such a group, different skills (the way we examine the world) are combined. And this group provide spaces for debate, thus science become a stakeholder that can be challenged. The controversies will be acknowledged from the beginning, instead of being useless post-issue talk.
This idea seems to be very inspiring and appealing, but cannot justify it as a practical approach instead of another concept of interdisciplinarity. Some kind of experiment using this idea is underway. So far, the concept still fails to address some key questions in public participation: who should participate and who should not? Who define the 'relevant' members of the group? Will the stakeholders (or more precisely participants) identify themselves? Will there be a dominant voice in the group and hijaak the policy? How to facilitate communication in and between such groups? All these questions need to be answered. Maybe in 3 or more years the experiments can give us some of the answer. I will try to keep tracking its development.
2006年1月27日星期五
2006年1月21日星期六
Think systematically
This morning I received Ritsuko's letter asking me about Data Handling Assignment. Ritsuko is my classmate in Nottingham. She has already got a PhD degree in Japan.
I was caught by her questions. I must say it is my luck that I was not asked in a conversation but through e-mail. Or I will not know how to organise my words. Her questions are very fundamental but require a lot of theory knowledge about statistics. Besides, I used the methods required in the description of the assignment but thought too little about why I use them. Trying to answer her questions made me think more about the underlying assumptions and implications of statistics.
My way of thinking, compared to hers, seems to lack system features. When have a problem, she would first find the model, then the method and limitations. My approach would be trying a best possible solution and see what happens. My approach should be faster and more adaptive in most cases. However, it is why my solutions are rarely the perfect one. I think it would be better if I can use a more systematic thinking before I begin to tackle the problem.
I was caught by her questions. I must say it is my luck that I was not asked in a conversation but through e-mail. Or I will not know how to organise my words. Her questions are very fundamental but require a lot of theory knowledge about statistics. Besides, I used the methods required in the description of the assignment but thought too little about why I use them. Trying to answer her questions made me think more about the underlying assumptions and implications of statistics.
My way of thinking, compared to hers, seems to lack system features. When have a problem, she would first find the model, then the method and limitations. My approach would be trying a best possible solution and see what happens. My approach should be faster and more adaptive in most cases. However, it is why my solutions are rarely the perfect one. I think it would be better if I can use a more systematic thinking before I begin to tackle the problem.
2006年1月19日星期四
A weird idea about stopping global warming
According to last week's Nature Podcast, planting trees to stop global warming is not a good idea. First it is too slow. Second and more important, carbon will finally be released as these tree die, and global warming will accelarate this. Third, plants release methane, which has more Global Warming Potential.
I come up with an idea when I was reading a book printed on recycled paper. Why not just plant trees and cut down them and make paper? They will absorb CO2 anyway, and carbon in the form of paper is seldom released. If making paper is polluting, well, we can still use wood to make furniture and structures.... Sounds like we are going back to Medieval Ages.
Laugh as you wish, I know it is absurd. But I am sure someone else much more famous than me will raise this proposal when there are no other ways to reverse climate change.
I come up with an idea when I was reading a book printed on recycled paper. Why not just plant trees and cut down them and make paper? They will absorb CO2 anyway, and carbon in the form of paper is seldom released. If making paper is polluting, well, we can still use wood to make furniture and structures.... Sounds like we are going back to Medieval Ages.
Laugh as you wish, I know it is absurd. But I am sure someone else much more famous than me will raise this proposal when there are no other ways to reverse climate change.
2006年1月18日星期三
重新开始玩 wikipedia
在中文维基上重新登录了一下，发现自己以前写的几个条目还都在，而且那个好久没动的“登山运动”也在。觉得有些愧对其他维基人。自己以前写的几个条目现在也都被更新过了，所以觉得这种汇聚知识的方式还是很有趣的。于是又修改了几个条目，写了一个“web 标准”的新条目。有空的时候再接着写“登山运动”。
今天看 the Independent，英国政府的首席科学顾问说现在全球变暖已经没救了，欧洲各政府应该赶快挖洞屯粮，准备应付最坏的局面。这两件事联系到一起，反差很是有趣：人类的知识已经发展到了如此程度，全球知识宝库的建立好像已经初具雏形，但是这时人类的生存却受到了威胁。也许，碇元渡和 SEELE 的老人们（不知道我在说啥的去找 Neon Genesis Evangelion 来补课）其实是对的？数字化，不依赖肉体的人类思想才有前途？
今天看 the Independent，英国政府的首席科学顾问说现在全球变暖已经没救了，欧洲各政府应该赶快挖洞屯粮，准备应付最坏的局面。这两件事联系到一起，反差很是有趣：人类的知识已经发展到了如此程度，全球知识宝库的建立好像已经初具雏形，但是这时人类的生存却受到了威胁。也许，碇元渡和 SEELE 的老人们（不知道我在说啥的去找 Neon Genesis Evangelion 来补课）其实是对的？数字化，不依赖肉体的人类思想才有前途？
2006年1月13日星期五
发现自己越发邪恶了⋯⋯
虽然一直都希望做个好人，不过还是处在不断的自我怀疑和否定当中。而且很怀疑自己的动机。
而且现在看见意见与自己不同或者看起来比较 naive 的就想批评，口气估计也很叫人受不了吧。
最要命的是现在跟同 flat 的人又变成了那种貌合神离的状态，难道真的不能原谅别人，不能容忍别人吗。
如何在坚持原则与友善待人之间取得一个平衡呢？
而且现在看见意见与自己不同或者看起来比较 naive 的就想批评，口气估计也很叫人受不了吧。
最要命的是现在跟同 flat 的人又变成了那种貌合神离的状态，难道真的不能原谅别人，不能容忍别人吗。
如何在坚持原则与友善待人之间取得一个平衡呢？
A masterpiece of paper
Today I read an article by Dan Bloomfield et al., titled "Deliberative and Inclusionary Processes: Their Contribution to Environmental Governance". I only have the draft version of this paper, however, the knowledge and skills shown in this paper made it one of the best papers I have read. I read it non-stop until I finished this 33-page long article.
Deliberative democracy and decision-making is a very complex field of research. Bloomfield et al. definitely have a thorough and deep understanding of such issue. The article discussed from various aspects of the problem. It raised many questions worth thinking, or never raised before. What makes this article more precious is the huge amount of information provided. The whole article has few words that are dispensable. To absorb this article better, four to five days may be appropriate.
Deliberative democracy and decision-making is a very complex field of research. Bloomfield et al. definitely have a thorough and deep understanding of such issue. The article discussed from various aspects of the problem. It raised many questions worth thinking, or never raised before. What makes this article more precious is the huge amount of information provided. The whole article has few words that are dispensable. To absorb this article better, four to five days may be appropriate.
2006年1月10日星期二
无脑青年
希特勒家乡的球迷用举手礼庆祝球队胜利，还把照片放在网站上。
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4598812.stm
最过分的是他们没有为此举道歉的意思。
他们难道以为希特勒对奥地利人很好么？
更加可笑可悲的是中国人现在居然也管黑人叫“黑鬼”。在种族歧视方面算是“超英赶美”了。其实不过是在重复被白种人抛弃了几十年的野蛮和愚昧而已。
我不歧视任何人种，但我鄙视那样无脑的奥地利人和中国人。
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4598812.stm
最过分的是他们没有为此举道歉的意思。
他们难道以为希特勒对奥地利人很好么？
更加可笑可悲的是中国人现在居然也管黑人叫“黑鬼”。在种族歧视方面算是“超英赶美”了。其实不过是在重复被白种人抛弃了几十年的野蛮和愚昧而已。
我不歧视任何人种，但我鄙视那样无脑的奥地利人和中国人。
2006年1月7日星期六
Lang’s speech in Tsinghua
On 21 December 2005 Xianping Lang gave a speech in Tsinghua University. The topic is mainly about "socialisation of capitalism society". He argues that the reform in China has not achieved the original goal. In order to let all people in the society enjoy the outcome of economic growth, a more practical and complete law system should be established, as well as a stock market as a means of wealth distribution.
He argues that China's reform misunderstood Deng's idea "let a part of people become wealthy first". The wealth accumulation of this part of people should not be at the cost of other people's wealth. In other words, when some people are getting better, nobody should get any worse. Such Pareto Improvement, however, has not been realised in China. Then, Lang advocated that China should learn from the US, to use stock market to redistribute wealth.
However, Lang may evaded some difficulties in the stock market in China. Even if the legislation problem can be solved, how do stock market get everyone involved, considering the large portion of rural population in China? Even if everyone has shares in the market, can the economy support a high enough payback? Stock market along cannot solve problems in reform.
Lang talked a lot of problems in the reform, including health service and education system reform. Both are failures. Both can hardly be solved using stock market. Privatisation at present will only bring catastrophic results. Land did not give suggestions for these problems. But his speech did reveal the absurdity of such reform.
Lang mentioned socialisation. It is happening in the West. But it is not like socialisation after 1917 and 1949. It is more marketisation than planned socialisation in Communism states. Such notion make sense today in China. However, we must be aware that marketisation should be backed by sound law system and wise management of the government, to ensure equity and justice in this process.
The speech is marvellous in terms of language. Lang made his speech very stimulating and exciting. However, this also covered some ambiguous point. The most important thing is that Lang may never be welcomed by the government as by the students. His ideas cannot change the situation in China, either.
He argues that China's reform misunderstood Deng's idea "let a part of people become wealthy first". The wealth accumulation of this part of people should not be at the cost of other people's wealth. In other words, when some people are getting better, nobody should get any worse. Such Pareto Improvement, however, has not been realised in China. Then, Lang advocated that China should learn from the US, to use stock market to redistribute wealth.
However, Lang may evaded some difficulties in the stock market in China. Even if the legislation problem can be solved, how do stock market get everyone involved, considering the large portion of rural population in China? Even if everyone has shares in the market, can the economy support a high enough payback? Stock market along cannot solve problems in reform.
Lang talked a lot of problems in the reform, including health service and education system reform. Both are failures. Both can hardly be solved using stock market. Privatisation at present will only bring catastrophic results. Land did not give suggestions for these problems. But his speech did reveal the absurdity of such reform.
Lang mentioned socialisation. It is happening in the West. But it is not like socialisation after 1917 and 1949. It is more marketisation than planned socialisation in Communism states. Such notion make sense today in China. However, we must be aware that marketisation should be backed by sound law system and wise management of the government, to ensure equity and justice in this process.
The speech is marvellous in terms of language. Lang made his speech very stimulating and exciting. However, this also covered some ambiguous point. The most important thing is that Lang may never be welcomed by the government as by the students. His ideas cannot change the situation in China, either.
2006年1月3日星期二
过去一周
这几天值得一写的事好像挺多，但是一直没有时间写，现在居然有些不知道该写什么了。
网易搞了个年终专题，《幸福生活 2005》，看完后不禁为他们捏一把汗，《新京报》只是陈述事实就已经惹了一身麻烦，像他们这样反话正说，用漫画的方式勾勒某些人的丑恶嘴脸和某些事的荒唐可笑，难道不怕中宣部找上门？有人说这是因为传统媒体中遭到打压的那些记者编辑都跑到了网易，所以网易的愤青色彩越发浓厚。确实，这个专题更多的是一种出口恶气的快感，至于更多的思考，似乎都留给了网民，至于网民们思考成什么样，就不是他们要管的了。专题中不乏观点偏颇，断章取义之处，但也有入木三分，妙语连珠的亮点。不过我觉得最重要的，是这个专题起到了娱乐大众和警告某些人的双重作用――那些错事，坏事，我们都记得！
到 Sainsbury 买东西，发现把购物车往宿舍推又不去归还的，都是中国人。脸红……
同 flat 的 Andrew 和 George （都是同胞）似乎都没有节水节电的意识，毕竟每周50镑租金是包括水电费的，他们又比我大不好直接教育，只好寄希望于潜移默化改变他们的习惯了。
山野协会那边又在准备攀冰和雪山模拟了。现在看到去年5月到8月间的文字记录就会想起在协会的欢乐时光，然后不免感怀一番。Sigh，再怎么不舍，也终将离开的。文盲大概也和我有类似的感觉。
今天爱丁堡大学的教授发信过来，表示鼓励我申请并能帮助申请 ORS。这几天第一个关于申请的积极消息，庆祝一下。
网易搞了个年终专题，《幸福生活 2005》，看完后不禁为他们捏一把汗，《新京报》只是陈述事实就已经惹了一身麻烦，像他们这样反话正说，用漫画的方式勾勒某些人的丑恶嘴脸和某些事的荒唐可笑，难道不怕中宣部找上门？有人说这是因为传统媒体中遭到打压的那些记者编辑都跑到了网易，所以网易的愤青色彩越发浓厚。确实，这个专题更多的是一种出口恶气的快感，至于更多的思考，似乎都留给了网民，至于网民们思考成什么样，就不是他们要管的了。专题中不乏观点偏颇，断章取义之处，但也有入木三分，妙语连珠的亮点。不过我觉得最重要的，是这个专题起到了娱乐大众和警告某些人的双重作用――那些错事，坏事，我们都记得！
到 Sainsbury 买东西，发现把购物车往宿舍推又不去归还的，都是中国人。脸红……
同 flat 的 Andrew 和 George （都是同胞）似乎都没有节水节电的意识，毕竟每周50镑租金是包括水电费的，他们又比我大不好直接教育，只好寄希望于潜移默化改变他们的习惯了。
山野协会那边又在准备攀冰和雪山模拟了。现在看到去年5月到8月间的文字记录就会想起在协会的欢乐时光，然后不免感怀一番。Sigh，再怎么不舍，也终将离开的。文盲大概也和我有类似的感觉。
今天爱丁堡大学的教授发信过来，表示鼓励我申请并能帮助申请 ORS。这几天第一个关于申请的积极消息，庆祝一下。
Had an idea about my PhD project
Though I have not formally established contact with professors whose interest lie in urban ecology, I think it would be a ideal direction where I put my effort to.
It could be something about fragmentation and egde effect in urban areas. Also could be about phenotypes of plants. I am searching for more articles on this subject.
It could be something about fragmentation and egde effect in urban areas. Also could be about phenotypes of plants. I am searching for more articles on this subject.
订阅：
评论 (Atom)