SHS/91/WS/7 @HEAD C (10BC) = @HEAD C (10BC) = INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCE COUNCIL @HEAD C (10BC) = CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES SCIENCES SOCIALES @HEAD C (10BC) = @HEAD C (10BC) = @HEAD C (10BC) = @BOOK TITLE = HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF GLOBAL @BOOK TITLE = ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE @BOOK TITLE = @CHAP (14BC) = Occasional Papers 3 @HEAD B (12IC) = Reports on @HEAD C (10BC) = A Workshop on Concepts, Models and Data for the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change @HEAD C (10BC) = Moscow 2-4 March, 1990 @HEAD C (10BC) = @HEAD C (10BC) = A Workshop on Methodological Issues in Global Modelling: Micro-Global Links @HEAD C (10BC) = Mexico 5-8 November, 1990 @HEAD A (12BC) = Published with the support of @HEAD A (12BC) = UNESCO @CHAP (14BC) = PREFACE The International Social Science Council's interest in the human dimensions of global environmental change dates from the Sixteenth General Assembly in December 1986 for it had then become abundantly clear that human activities had become a significant force in global change. A resolution adopted at this Assembly created an ad hoc committee to explore the possibility of developing an international social science research programme that would parallel and complement the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) of the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) entitled A Study of Global Change. The ISSC joined the International Federation of Institutes for Advanced Study (IFIAS) and the United Nations University (UNU) in sponsoring a meeting held in Toronto, Canada in June 1987 on the human response to global change. This meeting decided to hold an International Symposium in Tokyo in September 1988 as an initial step towards the establishment of a human and social sciences programme on global environmental change. In December 1988, the XVIIIth General Assembly of the ISSC decided to create a Standing Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. The committee under the chairmanship of Professor H. Jacobson, was composed of representatives of social science disciplines from different regions of the world. Its main task was to prepare a Framework for Research on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change which was published in August 1990 and widely distributed. This Framework attempts to present a coherent programme of international and interdisciplinary research on the human dimensions of global environmental change, and to complement natural science research on changes in the Earth's physical, chemical and biological systems carried out by the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme of the International Council of Scientific Unions. A major objective of this Framework for Research is both to stimulate research contributing to the conceptual, theoretical and methodological development of the social sciences within disciplines and to expand existing interdisciplinary fields of enquiry and create new ones. A wide and increasing range of human activities across the globe contribute to change in the Earth's physical, chemical, and biological systems. While the natural sciences can provide information on a global scale concerning these systems, research on the same scale has not taken place in the social sciences. Most social science research methodologies have evolved for use at national or even smaller scales, and the nation state, rather than the globe provides their fundamental organizing framework. New observation techniques, such as those of remote sensing, have not yet been used extensively to study social processes such as flows of human beings and the production and movement of goods. Yet these processes are increasingly taking place on a global scale. Furthermore, communication between different social sciences - and even within individual social sciences - is often limited by a lack of shared concepts, terms, information, and comparable or compatible time and spatial scales. Only a few social scientists have experience of interdisciplinary research and this has seldom involved working with natural scientists. All of these factors mean that, although the processes of globalization are accelerating, the necessary evolution of the social sciences to study these processes adequately has not taken place. As a consequence, a high priority in research on the human dimensions of global environmental change must be placed on conceptual and methodological issues, for without appropriate concepts and methodologies research cannot be undertaken. New models, concepts, theories, methods of observation and data collection have to be developed to consider global issues from a global perspective, both within individual social sciences and in interdisciplinary frameworks. In some cases, such frameworks will also involve adapting appropriate insights and techniques from natural sciences. The necessity of adopting in social science research on the human dimensions of global environmental change, a global rather than a nation-state perspective may constitute the most fundamental challenge for the social sciences. Since the seventeenth century, the nation state has been the fundamental unit of social, economic, and political organization, and more frequently than not social scientists have taken the nation state as the basic framework for organizing their studies and developing their positive, empirical, and normative theories. Global environmental change, however, is global and the framework for the analysis of the human dimensions must be global. While a start has been made, few of the social sciences have begun to take up this challenge. A related issue concerns gaining competence in dealing with interactions between local and global, micro and macro phenomena. The fact that actions at the local level can cause global change, which in turn has unequal effects in differing locales provides the point of departure for exploration of this issue. For example, it is generally accepted that world-wide economic trends have serious and varied local consequences - consequences that contribute to behaviour such as the destruction of rain forests that contribute to global environmental change - but the connections between the world-wide trends and individual and group behaviour are seldom convincingly demonstrated. Social science is rich with local, national, and international and micro and macro studies, but the connections between the various levels have largely been unexplored. Research on the human dimensions of global environmental change will require that methodologies be developed for exploring these connections. In this context, it was decided in 1990 to hold successively two Workshops : - the first held in Moscow in March 1990, in cooperation with the United Nations University and with the USSR Academy of Sciences focussed on "Concepts, Models, and Data for the Human Dimensions of Global Change Programme"; - the second held in Mexico in November 1990, again in cooperation with the United Nations University and with the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico dealt with "Methodological Issues in Global Modelling : Micro Global Links". Occasional Paper No. 3 in the ISSC's series on Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change regroups the Reports of these two meetings. The two previous occasional papers are : No. 1 - Report of the International Social Science Council's Scientific Symposium on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change No. 2 - ISSC Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change: Work Program, 1991-1992. @V 10 RJ = International Social Science Council @V 10 RJ = Paris, November 1991<$FFor additional copies or further information on ISSC's HDGEC Programme, please write to or contact: ISSC Secretariat, HDGEC Programme, c/o Pomaret 21, 08017 Barcelona, SPAIN> @HEAD C (10BC) = Report of an International Workshop @HEAD C (10BC) = on @CHAP (14BC) = CONCEPTS, MODELS, AND DATA @CHAP (14BC) = for the programme on @CHAP (14BC) = HUMAN ĘDIMENSIONS OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE @HEAD B (12IC) = sponsored by @HEAD C (10BC) = United Nations University @HEAD C (10BC) = International Social Science Council @HEAD C (10BC) = All-Union Scientific Research Institute for Systems Study, USSR Academy of Sciences @HEAD C (10BC) = Commission for Socio-Environmental Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences @HEAD C (10BC) = USSR National Committee for IGBP @HEAD C (10BC) = Soviet Association for the Club of Rome @HEAD B (12IC) = Rapporteurs @HEAD C (10BC) = John B. Robinson @HEAD C (10BC) = Marvin S. Soroos @HEAD C (10BC) = Moscow 2-4 March 1990 @HEAD C (10BC) = EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report<$FRapporteurs' Note: the main report on the workshop is an attempt to integrate wide ranging opinions and suggestions of scholars and researchers representing numerous disciplines, methodological orientations, and nationalities into an organized and readable text. To do so entailed the exercise of considerable editorial discretion. > summarizes the issues that were discussed and the projects recommended by 34 scholars and researchers from 14 countries who participated in the International Workshop on Concepts, Models, and Data that was held in conjunction with the Human Dimensions of Global Change Program (HDGCP) in Moscow, 2-4 March 1990. The report highlights four projects involving modeling and data gathering that would enable the social scientific community to mobilize its resources to address problems related to global environmental change in tandem with the International Geosphere/Biosphere Programme of the natural scientists. These are: (1) a research symposium on values and global modeling leading to publication of book of collected papers prior to the 1992 United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development; (2) a planning workshop on data needs for HDGCP to design projects for inventorying existing data bases and future data needs, addressing incongruities in data collections, establishing a social monitoring program, and setting up a repository or clearing house for data exchanges; (3) a research project on rapid change and social vulnerabilities that would seek to enhance the use of models in forecasting and in adapting to abrupt transformations resulting from global environmental changes; and 4) a symposium and research program on modeling and environmental policy making that would bring together modelers, policy specialists, and policy makers from all levels of government to discuss how modeling can be more useful in making decisions on environmental policy. In addition to explaining these proposals in further detail, the report includes sections that (a) provide background on how the workshop fit into HDGCP, (b) set forth the objectives that were established for the workshop, (c) explain the organization and format of the workshop, (d) summarize several of the overriding issues that were discussed, and (e) offer some general conclusions. The appendices contain the reports of the three working groups as well as lists of participants and papers that were written for the workshop. @HEAD C (10BC) = BACKGROUND The Human Dimensions of Global Change Programme (HDGCP) is an international research initiative sponsored by the United Nations University (UNU), the International Social Science Council (ISSC), and the International Federation of Institutes for Advanced Study (IFIAS) designed @QUOTE = to bring social scientists, natural scientists, and those involved in the management of human activities together in a set of research and related activities focussed on key areas of human interaction with the earth. Its purpose is to investigate both the human causes and consequences of global environmental change. HDGCP parallels, but is organizationally independent of, the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), which is sponsored by the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU). An international symposium on the Human Dimensions of Global Change Programme was hosted by the United Nations University in Tokyo in 19-22 September 1988. Follow-up workshops have been convened on the subjects of reducing carbon dioxide emissions (Budapest, Hungary, 14-15 April 1989) and restructuring industrial metabolism for sustainable development (Masstricht, the Netherlands, 12-13 October 1989). The topic of "models, data, and concepts for a global research program in the human sciences" is one of six general subjects for research proposed for HDGCP in the report of the Tokyo symposium. One of the working groups at the Tokyo meetings explored this subject and prepared a report that, in a preliminary way, assesses the utility of data and modeling in relation to the objectives of HDGCP, identifies requirements and issues that need to be addressed, and proposes that HDGCP establish a Permanent Working Group on Human Information Systems Information and Analysis. (The report of the working group in contained in the report of the Tokyo symposium). Two international workshops on concepts, models and data for HDGCP were scheduled for 1990. This report summarizes the outcomes of the first of these workshops, which was held in Moscow, 2-4 March 1990, with an emphasis on modeling. The second conference will be convened in Mexico City, 4-6 November 1990, with a focus on "conceptual and methodological issues involved in linking case studies with micro and macro models." The reports of these workshops will be presented to a scientific symposium on the human dimensions of global environmental change to be held in conjunction with ISSC's Eighteenth Annual General Assembly in the fall of 1990. @HEAD C (10BC) = OBJECTIVES The purpose of the Moscow workshop was to identify subjects of research for the next decade on the development of the modeling tools and information necessary to investigate the human dimensions of global change. The more specific stated objectives set forth for the workshop were the following: 1. to consider how the social sciences can contribute to a better understanding and management of global environmental change; 2. to review state-of-the-art techniques in human systems modeling and information collection as they relate to the interactions between environmental processes and human activities, and the decision processes associated therewith, including problems of reconciliation between natural and social science models; 3. to discuss the availability, consistency, adequacy, and validity of data needed for modeling global social environmental change and to identify a conceptual framework that could guide modeling and information systems research under the HDGCP; and 4. to recommend a HDGCP research agenda in the areas discussed, directions of HDGCP-IGBP interactions, and near-term follow-up activities. @HEAD C (10BC) = ORGANIZATION OF THE WORKSHOP The three-day workshop was sponsored by the United Nations University, the International Social Science Council, the All-Union Scientific Research Institute for Systems Studies (USSR Academy of Sciences), the Commission for Socio-Environmental Studies (USSR Academy of Sciences), the USSR National Committee for IGBP, and the Soviet Association for the Club of Rome. Thirty-four scholars and researchers from 13 countries (including 14 from the host country) took part in the workshop. The participants represented a wide range of disciplines and expertise related to modeling and data collection (see pages 10-12 for a list of participants). Several of the participants submitted papers to the workshop (see page 9 for a list of paper titles). The conference commenced with a plenary session at which John B. Robinson (University of Waterloo) presented a keynote paper entitled "A Model Relationship: Modelling the Interactions between Human and Natural Systems." To facilitate discussion during the remainder of the workshop, participants were divided into two groups for intensive consideration of the topics of data and modeling. The modeling group subsequently divided itself into sections concentrating on (a) human/natural system modeling and (b) the use of models and data in environmental decision making. @HEAD C (10BC) = GENERAL THEMES AND ISSUES DISCUSSED IN THE SESSIONS 1. The Applicability of a Conceptual Framework. The keynote paper proposed adopting the conceptual framework set forth by the Tokyo conference, which would divide direct modeling and data activities according to three general topics: (a) interactions between human and natural systems, (b) human activities defined in terms of physical flows (e.g., demographic, consumption, and production), and (c) human activities described in terms of information flows (e.g., decision-making, international organizations, and culture and values). While this framework was not formally adopted at the workshop, there was general agreement on the importance of addressing questions related to the use of models and data in decision-making and to the interactions between human and natural systems. 2. Typology of Basic Issues to Be Addressed by HDGCP. Modeling and data endeavors can be organized alternatively on the basis of three general issues related to HDGCP: (a) the impacts of human activities on natural systems, (b) the consequences of changes in natural systems for human communities, and (c) strategies human communities can adopt to minimize changes in natural systems or adapt to them. 3. Challenges Posed by Information/Data Incongruities. Several types of incongruities were noted that will complicate efforts of HDGCP. Specifically, incongruities exist between (a) sets of data collected for different spatial units ranging from local to national to global, (b) data that is spatially organized and that which is not, (c) data collected for different time frames, and (d) qualitative information and quantitative data. These incongruities pose difficult data and model integration problems that must be resolved if we are to make use of the rich array of relevant experience and information from the various social sciences. These incongruities also pose general methodological issues for the social sciences that go beyond the mandate of HDGCP but to which the modeling and data work of HDGCP might contribute. 4. The Role of Case Studies. Case studies can be a useful component of HDGCP for several reasons. They allow for an intensive investigation of the complex relationships between a large number of variables. They can be used as pilot projects for refining theories, methods, or models that will later be applied more generally. Furthermore, well chosen case studies can also be a cost-effective way of investigating questions that are too large to study in their entirety. 5. The Relationship of HDGCP to IGBP. HDGCP modeling and data work should be designed to make the best use possible of the findings of research being conducted in conjunction with IGBP. However, most participants believed that HDGCP should, in principle, proceed independently of IGBP in establishing its research agenda, which must be tied closely to the question of the policy relevance and usefulness of the research. 6. The Relationship of Data and Modeling to Policy- Making. The ultimate impact of HDGCP and its data and modeling efforts depends upon whether the information and findings that are generated actually provide useful knowledge for policy makers and others as they address concrete problems, such as land use and energy production. Here it is important to recognize that the choice of models and modeling approaches can itself be strongly influenced by the policy context and can thus significantly affect the conclusion reached. Thus, the criterion of policy relevance, and an awareness of the complex interaction between analysis and policy, should guide projects undertaken in conjunction with HDGCP. 7. Values that Guide Data Gathering and Modeling. The participants repeatedly observed that models and data are not value neutral. Thus, value question should be openly discussed in regard to both the general direction of HDGCP and the specific data and modeling projects. Conventional models of economic development should be reevaluated from the perspective of ecological sustainability, taking into account third world conditions and priorities. @HEAD C (10BC) = PLAN OF ACTION What follows is a composite set of proposals for further action that is drawn from the recommendations of the three working groups. @HEAD D (10BL) = Proposal #1: Research Symposium on Values and Global Modeling The symposium would address value questions pertinent to modeling and data gathering activities undertaken in conjunction with HDGCP. Among the principal issues to be addressed are: a. Value assumptions underlying existing socioeconomic models, including models of development, b. Values from the perspective of different cultures including those of the third world, c. Alternative conceptual models of development for achieving environmental sustainability, and <%-5>d. Types of formal models required to address alternative approaches to development and environmental sustainability.<%0> Papers would be commissioned from leading scholars from the field of philosophy (including those specializing on ecological and international economic issues), as well as from researchers with extensive expertise in socioeconomic modeling. A symposium would be convened for presentation and discussion of papers leading to the publication of a book of the collection of papers within two years. @HEAD D (10BL) = Proposal #2: Planning Workshop on Data Needs for HDGCP A planning workshop among data experts from all social scientific disciplines is needed to address of broad range of issues related to the data requirements for HDGCP. Strategies should be designed to accomplish the following: a. An inventory of existing social scientific data bases pertinent to HDGCP, b. An inventory of additional data bases that would be needed for HDGCP, c. Techniques for linking data bases organized under different spatial and temporal categories, d. Programs for monitoring social changes that have a potential bearing on global environmental change, e. Methods for integrating scientific data on subjects such as climate with social scientific data, f. A repository or clearinghouse to facilitate the exchange of data, and g. Mechanisms for communication among social scientists on matters pertaining to HDGCP The workshop should be convened within 12 months. Task forces would then be established to implement strategies agreed upon at the workshop. Each task force would set a timetable based upon the time needed to carry out its mission. @HEAD D (10BL) = Proposal #3: Research Project on Rapid Change and Social Vulnerabilities An interdisciplinary task force should be established that would draw together social and natural scientists having relevant expertise in forecasting methodologies. Its mission would be to stimulate and coordinate research employing a variety of methodologies, including case studies, that would investigate: a. Social vulnerabilities that may arise from accelerating rates of environmental change, <%-2>b. Relationships between technology, society, and nature as they pertain to environmentally sound development,<%0> c. Types of time-series data, monitoring activities, and models needed to forecast social vulnerabilities, d. Societal adaptations to rapid change and crises, and e. Modeling activities that would guide policy responses to vulnerabilities. Such a task force should be convened within 18 months to plan long-term projects. @HEAD D (10BL) = Proposal #4: Symposium and Research Program on Modeling and Environmental Policy Making A coordinated series of activities are proposed for exploring the use of modeling in policy making at all levels, from local to global. These activities should be connected to those in Proposal #1, since the ethical questions raised there are closely connected to questions of the use of models. An international symposium would be held within the next 18 months that would draw together modelers, policy specialists, and policy makers to address the following issues: a. the relevance of existing data bases and models to environmental policy decisions (drawing in part on work undertaken in Proposal #1); b. types of information and models that will be needed for policy making to address global change problems; and c. the development of interactive approaches to modeling and decision-making which provide useful knowledge for decision makers and the public at large and encourage policy learning on the part of the modeling and policy communities and the interested public. This symposium may suggest directions for further research. Two possibilities that were envisioned at the Moscow workshop are: <%-2>a. a study of the impact of models on decision making based on a selected group of historical case studies, and<%0> b. an ongoing study of the impact of the International Geosphere/Biosphere Programme on policy making. @HEAD C (10BC) = CONCLUSIONS 1. The discussions that took place in Moscow reaffirmed the premise upon which the workshop was convened: that data acquisition and modeling must be an integral part of the of HDGCP if it is to effectively marshall the resources of the social scientific community to an understanding of how human activities are altering the global natural environment and what can be done to minimize or adapt to these changes. 2. The data and modeling work of social scientists cannot be divorced from several of the larger issues that must addressed by HDGCP, such as values and cultural diversity, the use of modeling information, and the need to redefine economic development to incorporate the criterion of sustainability. It is necessary to proceed simultaneously on these larger issues and the considerable technical and methodological difficulties posed by attempts to integrate existing modeling approaches and information systems and the development of new ones. 3. The workshop participants formulated several proposals for projects that could be the next steps in carrying forth the data and modeling dimensions of HDGCP. In offering these recommendations, the workshop laid the groundwork for more focused collaborative projects that should now be commenced to carry out the mission of HDGCP. 4. These projects would be a modest effort to both guide and facilitate data and modeling efforts that might be undertaken within the general framework of HDGCP by scholars and researchers working in many countries. Some of this work may carried out under the auspices and with the support of the institutions sponsoring HDGCP. However, the greater part of the effort must come from individuals and organizations working independently of the sponsors of HDGCP. 5. Before HDGCP proceeds much further, it should establish its identity and mission in relation to IGBP. To what extent should HDGCP be structured to link up with the specific research initiatives (including models and data) of IGBP? Alternatively, would HDGCP be more productive and influential if it follows an independent course? 6. Finally, if HDGCP is to be more than simply an academic enterprise, consideration must be given to the policy relevance of the products of the program. Thus it is important to consult with policy makers and the interested public to understand better the types of information and policy recommendations that will assist them in addressing global environmental changes. @HEAD C (10BC) = PAPERS SUBMITTED<$FPapers marked with an asterisk have been revised and published in the International Social Science Journal, No. 130, November 1991.> Vladimir Annenkov, "Modelling Spatial Organization of Social Reproduction" Vladimir Britkov, "Information Modelling for Studies of Global Environmental Change" Thomas Dietz, "Some Taxonomic and Conceptual Issues in Global Change Models" Earl Epstein, "Access to Information for Global Science: Legal Issues" Gilberto Gallopin, "Conceptualization of Socioecological Ecological Systems and Local/Global Causal Links" Yoshifusa Kitabatake, "An Environment-Economic Accounting System" Jaswant Krishnayya, "HDGEC: Concepts and Model--An Indian View" Duane F. Marble, Ezra B.W. Zubrow, Kathleen M. Allen, "Problems of Data Availability and Suitability for Studies of the Human Dimensions of Global Change" Ilja Novik, "Axiology Presumptions of Social Ecological Modelling" <%-2>John B. Robinson, "A Model Relationship: Modelling the Interactions between Human and Natural Systems"<%0>* Arturo Serra, "The Human Dimensions of Global Change Program: A Framework of Designing a Global Human Change" Marvin S. Soroos, "The Human Dimensions of Global Change Programme: A Proposed Agenda for the International Studies Association" Barbara B. Torrey, "The Noosphere: Quantifying the Human Impact on Global Change" Brian Wynne, "Horses and Carts = the Relationships Between Natural and Social Scientific Knowledge in GEC" @HEAD C (10BC) = WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS <%-6>Vladimir V. Annenkov, National Committee of Soviet Geographers, Institute of Geography, USSR Academy of Sciences,<%0> Staromonetny 29, Moscow 109017, Soviet Union Vladimir Britkov, All Union Research Institute for Systems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union Chen Changu, Laboratory of the Ecology Environmental Science Center, Beijing University, Beijing 100871, Peoples Republic of China Thomas Dietz, Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030 U.S.A. C.V. Dubovsky, All Union Research Institute for Systems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union O. Eismont, All Union Research Institute for Systems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union Earl Epstein, School of Natural Resources, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 USA Roland J. Fuchs, Vice-Rector, United Nations University, Toho Seimei Building, 15-1, Shibuya 2-chome, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 150, Japan Gilberto C. Gallopin, Fundacion Bariloche, Grupo de Analisis de Sistemas Ecologicos, C.C. 138, S.C. Bariloche, Rio Negro, Argentina Klaus Jacklein, Department of Anthropology McMaster University, P.O. Box 370, Milton, Ontario L9T 4Y9, Canada Harold K. Jacobson, Director, Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan, P.O. Box 1248, Ann Arbor, MI 48106, U.S.A. Y. Kitabatake, Institute of Socio-Economic Planning, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan Vladimir Koslov, Institute of Geography, USSR Academy of Sciences, Staromonetny per29, 109017 Moscow, Soviet Union Jaswant Krishnayya, Director, Systems Research Institute 17 A Gullekdi, Pune 411037, India <%-2> Veniamin N. Livshits, Head, All Union Research Institute for Systems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences,<%0> 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union Urs Luterbacher, Graduate Institute of International Studies, 11A, Avenue de la Paix, CH-1202 Geneva, Switzerland Pavel Malinovsky, Centre of Social-Strategic Research, Suercheov Str. 8, S.2, Moscow 101000, Soviet Union Duane F. Marble, Department of Geography, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 U.S.A. Ilja Novik, Head, Philosophical Problems Laboratory, All Union Research Institute forĘSystems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union Sergei Pegov, All Union Research Institute forĘSystems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union Renat Perelet, Scientific Secretary, USSR National Committee for IGBP, Commission for Socio-Environmental Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, Moscow 117312, Soviet Union Robert H. Pry, Director, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria John Robinson, Department of Environment and Resource Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo N2L 3G1, Canada <%-5> V.M. Rousalov, Institute of Psychology, All Union Research Institute forĘSystems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences,<%0> 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 17312 Moscow, Soviet Union Arturo Serra, c/o Angel Jordan, Office of the Provost, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburg, PA 15213-3890 USA or Departmento de Antropologia Cultural, Facultad de Geografia e Historia, Universidad de Barcelona, Baldiri i Reixac S/N, 08007 Barcelona, Spain Marvin Soroos, Head, Department of PoliticalĘScience and Public Administration, Box 8102, North Carolina State University,, Raleigh, NC 27695-8102 U.S.A. Yuri Starikov, Scientific Council on Biosphere Problems, All Union Research Institute forĘSystems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union Uno Svedin, Natural Resources Committee, Swedish Council for Planning and Coordination of Research, Box 6710, S-11385 Stockholm, Sweden Martti Takala, Vice President, International Union of Psychological Science, University of Jyvaskyla, SF-40100 Jyvaskyla, Finland Vladimir Takincets, All Union Research Institute forĘSystems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union Barbara Boyle Torrey, Chief, Center for International Research, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Room 709, Scuderi Building, Washington, DC 20233 U.S.A. Ferenc L. Toth, Biosphere Project, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria Michael M. Verstraete, Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences, University, of Michigan, Space Research Building, 2455 Hayward Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2143, USA Brian Wynne, Director, Centre for Science Policy, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster LA1 4YN, United Kingdom I.N. Zimin, All Union Research Institute forĘSystems Studies, USSR Academy of Sciences, 9 Prospect 60-let Octyabria, 117312 Moscow, Soviet Union @HEAD C (10BC) = Report of an International Workshop @HEAD C (10BC) = on @HEAD C (10BC) = @CHAP (14BC) = METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES IN GLOBAL MODELLING: @CHAP (14BC) = MICRO GLOBAL LINKS @HEAD B (12IC) = sponsored by @HEAD C (10BC) = United Nations University, @HEAD C (10BC) = International Social Science Council @HEAD C (10BC) = and @HEAD C (10BC) = Coordinaci˘n de Humanidades, Centro Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias @HEAD C (10BC) = Coordinaci˘n de la Investigaci˘n Cientˇfica, Centro de Ecologˇa, @HEAD C (10BC) = of the @HEAD C (10BC) = Universidad Nacional Aut˘noma de M‚xico @HEAD B (12IC) = Rapporteur @HEAD C (10BC) = Ronald B. Nigh @HEAD C (10BC) = Mexico City, 5-8 November 1990 @HEAD C (10BC) = OBJECTIVE AND STRATEGY The objective of the workshop was to address several methodological issues for the social scientific study of global environmental change. As human activity is a major driving force behind global processes, and since the impact on human society of global change is a major concern, it is essential to give fundamental consideration to human dimensions and the human sciences in any research strategy on the subject. By suggesting solutions to these methodological problems, the workshop discussed the basis of a conceptual framework which would permit the integration of human and natural sciences in an integral research program of the study of global environmental change. This led to a most useful exchange between modelers, geographers, mathematicians, anthropologists historians and biologists. The Workshop was coordinated by Lourdes Arizpe, member of the ISSC Standing Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, and Ronald Nigh of the Centro de Ecologia; both are researchers at the National University, of Mexico. This workshop built on the previous one held in Moscow in March 2-5, 1990, entitled "Concepts, Models and Data". In keeping with one of the fundamental conclusions of that workshop, the participants considered several case studies of land use change, as examples of local activities which affect global change. These examples permitted the evaluation of the different methodological approaches discussed in the context of concrete situations of human-environment interaction. Further substance was given to the discussion by focussing on the problem of relating micro level studies and data to models of global processes. It was felt by most participants that substantial progress was made in Mexico City in the resolution of methodological problems in integrating the human and natural sciences in global change research. @HEAD C (10BC) = GENERAL THEMES OF THE WORKSHOP The general themes discussed fell into two broad areas plus one specific area, although during the workshop itself no such artificial division was followed: 1) Themes related directly to models and data 2) Themes related to applications in land use study. 3) One session was devoted to specific consideration of global climate change and climate modelling. @HEAD D (10BL) = Models and Data Several papers discussed general methodological issues related to modelling and/or data, including general definitions. Open-ended, flexible definitions were preferred. Global models were taken to be any models relevant to global processes, including models of local level case studies. Models could be thoroughly mathematized and computerized ones or simply mental schema, means of reasoning about global change. The term global change itself refers primarily to environmental change on a planetary scale, but several authors mentioned that the term had begun to take on several levels of meaning beyond this original concept. The complexity of the human dimension of global change was recognized by the participants. Relevant phenomena operate at different scales or levels, both spatially and temporally, as well as conceptually. Based on these general considerations, the papers and discussions focussed on five related issues: @TCSPACEITAL10 = 1) Focus on the relations among components of complex heterogeneous systems. It was noted that in studying the human dimensions of global environmental change, a distinction must be made between systemic change induced by human activity (such as industrial pollution causing global warming or ozone-layer destruction) and cumulative change, which involves a repetition through out the globe of many local scale changes (e.g. continual deforestation). One difficulty in explaining global change is defining the empirical link between the major macro-level driving forces, such as style of economic development, population, technology or social/political organization. It is necessary to recognize that it is the particular relation among the components of a system, not the characteristics of the individual components, which determine the system's behavior. @TCSPACEITAL10 = <%-2>2) Move away from the notion of predictive models to models as exploratory devices, heuristic or "insight" models.<%0> The difficulties for the social sciences in trying to construct predictive models have long been recognized. Therefore it was particularly interesting to the social scientists in the workshop that similar difficulties in providing predictive models exist in the natural sciences. In meteorology, for example, the dream of a long-term, global model for weather prediction has been abandoned as philosophically impossible, due, among other things, to the extreme sensitivity of such models to initial conditions and their capacity for chaotic behavior. In ecology, simulation models of complex processes achieve some predictive usefulness when applied to a specific region in which a great deal of on-the-ground monitoring of the variables is possible, usually involving considerable local participation in the models. Indeed, given the overall complexity of the human dimensions of global processes, the lack of reliable data and the varying possible interpretations of parameters, a model can be found, along with volumes of empirical data to back it up, to prove practically any prediction preferred. These observations raise questions, not only about the technical difficulty of predicting specific scenarios of global change, but ethical and value related questions concerning the role of scientists as advisors and the nature of their constituency. Indeed the purported "predictiveness" of a model may be nothing more than the exclusion of options which the model builder did not wish to consider, therefore obscuring the element of choice. But models can be used, rather than mechanically to predict the future, to gain insight and understanding into the functioning, resiliency and possible responses of a system. They can be used to explore collectively possible futures or to evaluate the effort required to achieve a given objective. @TCSPACEITAL10 = 3) Hierarchical Systems Models Basic properties of hierarchical systems were examined by several participants on the grounds that they provide sufficient elements for a conceptual framework for integrating data and models from the human and natural sciences and linking the micro and global scales. Such models recognize that variables operating on different levels interact. The multilevel character must be retained in the models, the levels cannot be "conflated" or collapsed because fundamental relations between levels which give the system its character would be lost. Higher levels specify the conditions for lower level processes, which in turn aggregate their effects to create processes at a higher level. Levels in hierarchical systems can be determined empirically, rather than theoretically; measurements of interaction between components permit sub-system models at different levels of the hierarchy. The models must be based on choice-making structures that explain how global processes are generated. These concepts were explored by the participants particularly for the case of land-use studies (see below)- and it was felt that they provided important elements for constructing a conceptual framework for the human dimension of global change program. Specific recommendations for creating such a framework were made and are outlined below. @TCSPACEITAL10 = 4) Questions about the use of models. Given the difficulties mentioned in theme # 1, considerable scrutiny should be given to the use to which global change models are put. One question raised by the participants is whether models should be made for "policy-makers", conceived of as central authorities responsible for "action" about global change. Alternatively, "decision-makers" can be seen to exist on many levels, representing many sectors of society. Models should provide information for people at these other levels as well. A related observation is that models are not value- free constructs. Models are simply the projection of the assumptions of the model-maker into the future. Facts are social constructs reflecting the prevailing value-judgements about the nature of reality. It was felt by many participants that the way hidden values influence supposedly objective scientific models of global change is an important theme for research. For example, many efforts in the earth sciences to build purely physical models must give consideration to the human dimension, the underlying causes and consequences of global change. @TCSPACEITAL10 = 5) Bottom-up research strategies By involving the relevant local social actors in the research for and a construction of models, greater insights can be achieved into the relations of human and natural systems. The users of models must be part of the models themselves, just as local social actors often initiate changes which become of global significance. A strategy of beginning with a local actor and successively considering his location in wider and wider systems was referred to as "progressive contextualization." Global models are data hungry; lack of data leads to excessive parameterization and consequent ill-founded projections. Parameterization is the direct expression of ignorance as to what is happening on the local level. The only way to increase significantly data quantity and quality is by decentralizing global change research, actively involving local research institutions and other local actors research activities. Global models should be the result of a truly international and truly interdisciplinary effort, with participation of the natural and the social sciences as equal partners in research, encouraging the formation of hybrid fields of investigation. @HEAD D (10BL) = Models and Data in Land Use Studies The subject of land use was chosen to give the workshop a common theme of analysis and example and to help bring the theoretical methodological discussion literally down to earth. This choice turned out to be a fortunate one, since a direct application of the hierarchical systems model was found to be useful in linking case studies of land use change to global level processes. Examples were discussed of land use in tropical rain forest of Amazonia and Southern Mexico, urban Canada and coastal Mexico. A multilevel spatial organization model was proposed for integrating local land use and social organization and the larger scale process, from regional to global, which affect local actors making land use decisions. Geographical information systems were seen as offering a useful tool for implementing a multilevel spatial organization model of land use. GIS links objects in the cartography of a region with a geographically referenced data base. Thus land use changes, visible in air photography and satellite imagery, can be linked to socioeconomic and anthropological and other types of information, thus greatly enhancing the quality of interpretation and understanding of the causes of land use change. These data bases need to permit "intelligent" inference among variables operating at different scales of the multilevel organization. Specific recommendations were made to pursue this research strategy in the human dimensions of global change program (see below). @HEAD D (10BL) = Climate Models and Climate Change Three important points were repeatedly made with respect to the specific subjects of climate modelling and global climate change: 1.) Predictability: earlier dreams of being able to construct accurate predictive models of weather and climate have been abandoned. As first demonstrated by Lorenz in 1963, ultrasensitivity to initial conditions is sufficient to make such models practically impossible. Presence of non-linear variables, especially with time delay characteristics, makes even the most simple models prone to chaotic behavior. 2.) Uncertainty, with respect to climate models' ability to isolate determining factors--For example, one volcanic eruption every few years of the Chichonal type is enough to neutralize the effect of increasing greenhouse gases. 3.) Validation--Is the observed overall warming trend of recent decades really a long-term trend and are the high average global annual temperatures measured in the 1980s evidence of a trend or merely part of the normal variability of climate over decades? The most important human aspect of climate at present is the relative vulnerability of a given human society to climatic extremes, be they a trend or part of normal variations. As in the Sahel, where the worst drought effects were caused by a relatively non-severe drought, many communities are much more vulnerable now to the effects of climate extremes. Specific recommendations were made to make the study of such vulnerable communities a research priority (see below). @HEAD C (10BC) = THE MOSCOW RECOMMENDATIONS It was felt by most participants that genuine progress was made in Mexico City on the agenda set out by the previous workshop in Moscow. Although not all the issues identified in Moscow were dealt with, others were analyzed in much greater detail. In particular, it was felt that progress had been made in overcoming problems facing the integration of human and natural sciences in global change research. With respect to the seven general themes summarized in the report of the Moscow workshop, four of these were strongly endorsed as important themes and were further developed in Mexico City: @HEAD D (10BL) = Theme # 1: The Role of Case Studies In Moscow it was recognized that case studies are an indispensable component of global change research, allowing intensive investigation of relationships among many variables. In Mexico City, the usefulness of case studies was demonstrated and the workshop participants went further to suggest that case studies provide a crucial integrative framework by serving as a means of linking micro and global processes. @HEAD D (10BL) = Theme # 2: The relationship between HDGEC and IGBP Further problems of compatibility of data sets and methodologies between the social and natural sciences were discussed. Nonetheless, certain concepts, such as the hierarchical systems model discussed above, were seen as providing the elements of a framework for overcoming incompatibilities and designing a truly interdisciplinary research program. It was further recognized that HDGEC has a responsibility to IGBP to discover and input relevant social demands and needs with respect to global change issues so that a policy- relevant and useful research agenda is developed jointly. @HEAD D (10BL) = Theme # 3: Relationship of Data and Modelling to Policy Making The Mexico City workshop participants endorsed the Moscow recommendation that the criterion of policy relevance should guide projects undertaken by HDGEP. It was noted that the uses for research results ("models") exist at all levels of society, not just with central decision-makers. Research should be relevant to all sectors needs, involving local scientific, human and material resources, combining both "bottom-up" and "top- down" planning and action. @HEAD D (10BL) = Theme # 4: Values that Guide Data Gathering and Models At the Mexico City workshop it was further recognized that models and data are not value-neutral. Values underlying the assumptions incorporated into models should be made explicit so that other value sets can be considered. With respect to the set of proposals for further action, resulting from the Moscow workshop, the participants in Mexico city further specified several aspects: @TCSPACEITAL10 = Proposal # 1: Symposium on Values and Global Modelling This proposal was strongly supported as it reads in the Moscow workshop report. It was also suggested that a research program be developed for this topic. @TCSPACEITAL10 = Proposal # 2: Planning Workshop on Data Needs This was also endorsed with the suggestion that an inventory of relevant case studies be added. Further examples of data incompatibility were reported. Finally, some participants felt that a directory of self-nominated researchers doing social science work on the human dimensions of global change should be developed. @TCSPACEITAL10 = Proposal # 3: Research on Rapid Change and Vulnerability The importance of social vulnerability was given special emphasis in Mexico City. It was suggested that two themes not mentioned in Moscow be given a prominent place in the research agenda for this issue: 1. Research in human biology and nutrition. 3. Research on the poverty-environmental degradation cycle. @TCSPACEITAL10 = Proposal # 4: Symposium and Research on Models and Policy Making The general Moscow proposals were endorsed. However, a broader view of environmental policy making emerged. Recognition was given to the importance of local actors as initiators of global change and shapers of policy--as revealed in such cases as the Indians and rubber tappers of Amazonia. Models should be interactive and serve all sectors of society in the formulation of environmental policy. @HEAD C (10BC) = RECOMMENDATIONS FROM MEXICO Final recommendations took the form of suggested themes for symposia or research programs: 1. Committee to draft a conceptual framework for the study of the human dimensions of global environmental change. Many participants felt that the Mexico workshop revealed evidence of considerable progress in resolving the methodological obstacles to the integration of human and natural sciences in global change research. Concepts such as those provided by hierarchical systems theory are the necessary tools for organization of social science knowledge for global change research. A committee should be formed to draft proposal for a general framework for defining research priorities in the HDGEC. 2. Research program on Geographical information systems for the study of social organization and land use. Computerized geographical information systems are suggested as a useful tools for the study of land use and its socioeconomic and cultural determinants at the local level. They also provide a means of implementing the multilevel spatial organization model, linking socioeconomic and cultural data at different scales to cartography and remote sensing data on land use. Case studies can be located by "progressive contextualization" into models of deforestation and other global processes. This approach should facilitate the interdisciplinary cooperation between the human and earth sciences. 3. Research Program on Case studies of successful sustainable development. Research on cases of successful adaptations to natural resources, both traditional and new. Evaluation of factors, physical, biological and social, which determine success. Examine not only scientific experience but also knowledge and experience of organizations and individuals. Particular attention to cases of restoration of damaged ecosystems. 4. Research program on Historical view of cumulative change. Historical cases of human-environment interactions, taking into account global human driving forces: population, technological capacity, style of economic development, social and political organization plus environmental setting and land use. Special attention should be given to areas where current processes are being monitored. 5. Research program on Media and other effects on lay models of global change. To study how the presentation of information affects perception of global change by different publics, including scientists and environmentalists as well as different sectors of the lay public. For example, what are the effects of satellite imagery and other new forms of presentation of information on the perception of an environmental issue. @HEAD A (12BC) = PAPERS SUBMITTED<$FPapers marked with an asterisk have been revised and published in the International Social Science Journal, No. 130, November 1991.> Vladimir Annenkov, "Multilevel Spatial Organization of Human Survival" * Lourdes Arizpe, "The Global Cube" * Antonio Azuela, "Una Torre de Babel en el Ajusco" Eckart Boege, "Las costas tropicales en M‚xico: Los usos sociales de los ecosistemas costeros en conflicto" Julia Carabias, "A Socio-ecological Study of Five Regions" Magali Daltabuit, "Tourism Development in Quinta Roo, Mexico" Gilberto Gallopin, "Human Dimensions of Global Change: Linking the Global and the Local Processes" * Rene Gardu¤o, "La Modelaci˘n del Cambio Global del Clima: Avances y Deficiencias" Willet Kempton,"Lay Models of Environmental Change" Jacklein Klaus, ""Urbanization & Global Change" Linda Manzanilla, "El fen˘meno urbano en la historia de la humanidad: aciertos y desaciertos" Mihajlo Mesarovic, "Search for New Paradigm for Global Problematique" Ronald Nigh, "Methods for Contextualizing Local-Leval Data" Orjan Olsen, "Opinion Polls on Environmental Change" Jacquie Ott, "Remote Sensing Methodologies" John Robinson, "The Use and Abuse of Socio-Economic Modelling in Support of Decision Making" Marianne Schmink, "The Political Ecology of Resource Use : Linking Theory and Practice in Amazonia" Jorge Soberon, ""Biologia y Cambio Global" B.L. Turner, "The Earth Transformed Program" * Brian Wynne, "To Believe or not to Believe, is that the question?" Ezra Zubrow, "State University, of New York at Buffalo" @HEAD A (12BC) = WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS Vladimir Annenkov, Institute of Geography, USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow 10907, USSR Lourdes Arizpe, Centro Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias, Campestre 54, 01061 Mexico, D.F. Antonio Azuela, Instituto de Investicaciones Sociales- UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Mexico, D.F. Raul Bejar, Centro Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias, Av. Universidad S-N,62210- Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico Eckart Boege, Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropologia Social, Unidad Xalapa, Gonzalez Ortega 17, 91000-Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico Julia Carabias, Laboratorio de Ecologia, Facultad de Ciencias-UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Mexico, D.F. Magali Daltabuit, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropologicas-UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Mexico, D.F. Exequiel Ezcuerra, Centro de Ecologia-UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Mexico, D.F. Gilberto Gallopin, Grupo de Analisis de sistemas ecologicos, Casilla Correo 138, 8400 S.C. de Bariloche, Prov. Rio Negro, Argentina Rolando Garcia, Center for Research and Advanced Studies, Romulo O'Farril 1051, 01060 Mexico, D.F. Rene Gardu¤o, Centro de Ciencias de la Atmosfera-UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Mexico, D.F. Willet Kempton, Center for Energyand Environmental Studies, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 Jacklein Klaus, Department of Anthropology, MacMaster University,Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Enrique Leff, Programa de las Naciones Unidas Para el Medio Ambiente, Presidente Masaryk 29, 11580-Mexico, D.F. Linda Manzanilla, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropologicas-UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Mexico, D.F. Juan Manuel Mauricio, Secretaria de Desarrollo Urbano y Ecologia, Av. Central Ote. 1228, Tuxtla Gutierrez, Chiapas, Mexico Ignacio Mendez, Instituto de Investigaciones en Matematicas y en Sistemas-UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria,04510, Mexico, D.F. Mihajlo Mesarovic, Case Western Reserve University, 17461 Shelburne RJ, Cleveland Ohio 44118, USA Ronald Nigh, Apartato Postal 22-315, 14000 Mexico, D.F. Orjan Olsen, R. Visconde de Ouro Pretto 77, Sao Paulo, 01303 Brazil Jacquie Ott, Erim, PO Box 8618, Ann Arbor, MI48107, USA Martin Price, National Center for Atmospheric Research, PO Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-300, USA <%-2>John Robinson, Dept of Environment Resource Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo N2L 361 Canada<%0> Teresa Rojas, Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropologia Social, Victoria 75, Tlalpan 14000-Mexico D.F. Marianne Schmink, Center for Latin American Studies, University of Florida,Gainesville, FL 32611, USA Jorge Soberon, Centro de Ecologia-UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Mexico, D.F. Herlinda Suarez, Centro Regional de Investicacions Multidisciplinarias, Av. Universidad S-N 62210, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico B.L. Turner, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, 950 Mair Street, Worcester, MA 01610-1477, USA Thomas Whitmore, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, 950 Mair Street, Worcester, MA 01610-1477, USA Brian Wynne, University of Lancaster, Centre for Science Studies and Science Policy, Londsdale College,Bailrigg, Lancaster LA1 4YN, United Kingdom Ezra Zubrow, Dept of Anthropology, University at Buffalo,Buffalo, NY 14261, USA