Difference between revisions of "Main Page"
(→Why to use Opasnet in an assessment project?: text improved) |
(science-policy revolution added) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[op_fi:Etusivu]] | [[op_fi:Etusivu]] | ||
{| | {| | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | style="border: 1px solid rgb(180, 180, 181); margin: 0pt 0pt 0.7em; background-color: rgb(249, 249, 253); vertical-align: top; width: 50%;" colspan="2" | | ||
+ | <span style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">[[Image:Participate.gif|Image:participate.gif]]</span> | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Opasnet aims at science-policy revolution == | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''The failure of the [[COP-15|Copenhagen climate meeting]]''' showed that the current ways of policy-making do not work. Despite the work of thousands of researchers to collect and synthesise scientific information, and thousands of politicians working hard to develop policies about an urgent issue, the result was only a statement of good will and funding commitments. What went wrong? | ||
+ | |||
+ | I believe that there was a major gap between scientific information and its use in policy. In Copenhagen, the countries tried to make international policy as if it was a matter of mutual agreement. It is not. It is not even a matter of majority vote. If the mankind takes the +2 °C target seriously, there are huge numbers of policies that simply are insufficient to reach that target, including the one that was agreed on in Copenhagen. In contrast, there are dauntingly few policies that actually would lead to the target and would be implementable in the real world. | ||
+ | |||
+ | It is a scientific, not so much political, effort to find those policies. We should see potential policies as scientific hypotheses. As a joint effort, we should attack these hypotheses with scientific evidence and aim to show that they do not help us to reach the target. Only those that stand against attacks are worth further consideration. Those who fail should be abandoned immediately. This is how science works at its best. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Thus, we should bring this scientific approach to the policy arena. We should also bring politicians to the scientific arena, with their potential policies and questions. And thirdly, we should bring the citizens into this open discussion to tell, what our targets should actually be. Researchers should put less effort on the nuances of their own pet topics, and they should give their valuable time and capacity in the service of the policy analysis. Politicians should accept that there can be normative policy analysis, which is limiting their degrees of freedom in developing policies. And citizens should understand that their political pressure is needed to make things move forward faster. The climate challenge is so urgent that we have no time to rely on standard administrative rate of change. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This is the '''[[science-policy revolution]]'''. Combine the potential policies with the current scientific understanding, and apply the [[scientific method]] to separate poor and good policies based on [[value judgement]]s by politicians and the citizens. All this should be done by immediately sharing all relevant information to be used and evaluated by everyone. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''Anyone can solve common problems.''' [[Opasnet]] is the web workspace for solving them by you, and by us together. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[User:Jouni|Jouni Tuomisto]], founder of Opasnet | ||
|- | |- | ||
| style="border: 1px solid rgb(180, 180, 181); margin: 0pt 0pt 0.7em; background-color: rgb(237, 244, 255); width: 50%; height: 100%;" | | | style="border: 1px solid rgb(180, 180, 181); margin: 0pt 0pt 0.7em; background-color: rgb(237, 244, 255); width: 50%; height: 100%;" | | ||
Line 38: | Line 57: | ||
We can only help policy-making if a large group of people participate in the work. Find your own ways to contribute and act! | We can only help policy-making if a large group of people participate in the work. Find your own ways to contribute and act! | ||
− | * | + | * [[End user evaluation|Participate in our '''end user evaluation''']] |
* Get acquainted: read [[Welcome to Opasnet]] | * Get acquainted: read [[Welcome to Opasnet]] | ||
* Browse through the website and read about [[:category:Assessments|active assessments]]. | * Browse through the website and read about [[:category:Assessments|active assessments]]. |
Revision as of 12:54, 30 December 2009
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Opasnet aims at science-policy revolutionThe failure of the Copenhagen climate meeting showed that the current ways of policy-making do not work. Despite the work of thousands of researchers to collect and synthesise scientific information, and thousands of politicians working hard to develop policies about an urgent issue, the result was only a statement of good will and funding commitments. What went wrong? I believe that there was a major gap between scientific information and its use in policy. In Copenhagen, the countries tried to make international policy as if it was a matter of mutual agreement. It is not. It is not even a matter of majority vote. If the mankind takes the +2 °C target seriously, there are huge numbers of policies that simply are insufficient to reach that target, including the one that was agreed on in Copenhagen. In contrast, there are dauntingly few policies that actually would lead to the target and would be implementable in the real world. It is a scientific, not so much political, effort to find those policies. We should see potential policies as scientific hypotheses. As a joint effort, we should attack these hypotheses with scientific evidence and aim to show that they do not help us to reach the target. Only those that stand against attacks are worth further consideration. Those who fail should be abandoned immediately. This is how science works at its best. Thus, we should bring this scientific approach to the policy arena. We should also bring politicians to the scientific arena, with their potential policies and questions. And thirdly, we should bring the citizens into this open discussion to tell, what our targets should actually be. Researchers should put less effort on the nuances of their own pet topics, and they should give their valuable time and capacity in the service of the policy analysis. Politicians should accept that there can be normative policy analysis, which is limiting their degrees of freedom in developing policies. And citizens should understand that their political pressure is needed to make things move forward faster. The climate challenge is so urgent that we have no time to rely on standard administrative rate of change. This is the science-policy revolution. Combine the potential policies with the current scientific understanding, and apply the scientific method to separate poor and good policies based on value judgements by politicians and the citizens. All this should be done by immediately sharing all relevant information to be used and evaluated by everyone. Anyone can solve common problems. Opasnet is the web workspace for solving them by you, and by us together. Jouni Tuomisto, founder of Opasnet | |
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Information about OpasnetOpasnet is a wiki-based website for helping decisions about human health, and environmental factors affecting it. The website collects, synthesises, and distributes people's values and scientific information. We believe that all wise decision-making is based on expressing our values about what the really important things are, and understanding how the decision actually affects those things. This is why we need both values and science. Opasnet welcomes anyone who wants to promote science-based decision-making in any field. We are actively working on climate change, and participants are welcome. Originally, the developers of this workspace came from the environmental health, i.e. a research field that studies the impacts of environment on human health. Therefore, you can find assessments about e.g. health impacts of air pollution or persistent pollutants in fish.
|
Why to use Opasnet in an assessment project?
|
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination New to wiki editing? See Help. | |
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
How can you participate?We can only help policy-making if a large group of people participate in the work. Find your own ways to contribute and act!
|
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Active assessments
|
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Active discussionsExtension:DynamicPageList (DPL), version 3.1.1: Warning: Skipping bad option 'Talk|Variable_Talk|Opasnet_talk' for parameter 'namespace'.
|
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Miscellaneous links |