Towards an empirical analysis of justice in ecosystem governance

The 2010 Nagoya Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity and recent changes in the policies of major international conservation organizations highlight current interest in revisiting the moral case for conservation. Concerns with equity and human rights challenge well-established notions of justice centered on human responsibility toward nature, the common good or the rights of future generations. This review introduces an empirical approach to the analysis of justice and shows how conservation scientists can apply it to ecosystem services-based governance (or in short, ecosystem governance). It identifies dominant notions of justice and points out their compatibility with utilitarian theories of justice. It then discusses the limited appropriateness of these notions in many contexts in which conservation takes place in the Global South and explores how technical components of ecosystem governance influence the realization of the notions in practice. The review highlights the need for conservation scientists and managers to analyze the justice of ecosystem governance in addition to their effectiveness and efficiency. Justice offers a more encompassing perspective than equity for the empirical analysis of conservation governance

Evaluation of an Australian Solar Community : Implications for Education and Training

1.1 Background What is renewable energy education and training? A cursory exploration of the International Solar Energy Society website (www.ises.org) reveals numerous references to education and training, referring collectively to concepts of the transfer and exchange of information and good practices, awareness raising and skills development. The purposes of such education and training relate to changing policy, stimulating industry, improving quality control and promoting the wider use of renewable energy sources. The primary objective appears to be to accelerate a transition to a better world for everyone (ISEE), as the greater use of renewable energy is seen as key to climate recovery; world poverty alleviation; advances in energy security, access and equality; improved human and environmental health; and a stabilized society. The Solar Cities project – Habitats of Tomorrow – aims at promoting the greater use of renewable energy within the context of long term planning for sustainable urban development. The focus is on cities or communities as complete systems; each one a unique laboratory allowing for the study of urban sustainability within the context of a low carbon lifestyle. The purpose of this paper is to report on an evaluation of a Solar Community in Australia, focusing specifically on the implications (i) for our understandings and practices in renewable energy education and training and (ii) for sustainability outcomes. 1.2 Methodology The physical context is a residential Ecovillage (a Solar Community) in sub-tropical Queensland, Australia (latitude 28o south). An extensive Architectural and Landscape Code (A&LC) ‘premised on the interconnectedness of all things’ and embracing ‘both local and global concerns’ governs the design and construction of housing in the estate: all houses are constructed off-ground (i.e. on stumps or stilts) and incorporate a hybrid approach to the building envelope (mixed use of thermal mass and light-weight materials). Passive solar design, gas boosted solar water heaters and a minimum 1kWp photovoltaic system (grid connected) are all mandatory, whilst high energy use appliances such as air conditioners and clothes driers are not permitted. Eight families participated in an extended case study that encompassed both quantitative and qualitative approaches to better understand sustainable housing (perceived as a single complex technology) through its phases of design, construction and occupation. 1.3 Results The results revealed that the level of sustainability (i.e. the performance outcomes in terms of a low-carbon lifestyle) was impacted on by numerous ‘players’ in the supply chain, such as architects, engineers and subcontractors, the housing market, the developer, product manufacturers / suppliers / installers and regulators. Three key factors were complicit in the level of success: (i) systems thinking; (ii) informed decision making; and (iii) environmental ethics and business practices. 1.4 Discussion The experiences of these families bring into question our understandings and practices with regard to education and training. Whilst increasing and transferring knowledge and skills is essential, the results appear to indicate that there is a strong need for expanding our education efforts to incorporate foundational skills in complex systems and decision making processes, combined with an understanding of how our individual and collective values and beliefs impact on these systems and processes

Design Gateway: Pedagogical Discussion of a Second-Year Industrial Design Studio

This presentation was part of the session : Pedagogy: Procedures, Scaffolds, Strategies, Tactics24th National Conference on the Beginning Design StudentMost industrial design programs focus the beginning design curriculum on the learning of core design principles. These core principles are seen as not specific to any one discipline (architecture, industrial design, interior design, etc.), but rather as fundamentals germane to all design fields. These core principles focus on the analysis of built artifact (structures, products, systems) to develop an understanding of geometry, structure and composition through looking and exploring. Students develop skills in representing, communicating and analyzing what they see and experience. These skills are nurtured in early studios. As students move into later studios, more discipline-specific knowledge and skills are integrated into their educational pedagogy. In the beginning years of design education, there is a transition from the learning of general 'core' design fundamentals to specialized principles that is inherent to their specific disciplines. As students move from abstract ideas to 'real-world' projects, they seem to have difficulty transitioning between the abstract concepts they previously learned and reality that requires application to new settings [1]. Students perceive learned concepts as specific to a particular studio project, rather than realize that design education is a continuum of practiced principles [1]. This presents a disconnect between knowledge transfer from one studio project to the next. The curriculum of the second-year industrial design studio at the Georgia Institute of Technology is designed to address this disconnect and help students successfully transition from the core design fundamentals to industrial design knowledge. Throughout the second year education, students engage in the making and communication of form and they do it through design exercises dealing with the fundamentals as well as knowledge base, both simultaneously and repeatedly, According to ----, a design education that offers a component of repetitive experience encourages students to be cognizant of the iterative nature of both the design process as well as design education [2]. This paper discusses the approach, designed by the authors, evident in the sophomore-year industrial design curriculum at Georgia Tech. While emphasis is placed on rigor, exploration and articulation of concepts throughout the studio period, this approach adopts a pedagogy based on a series of modules that scaffold the introduction of new concepts with the reinforcement of previously learned ones. Individual modules follow a path of concept introduction (lecture), analysis, practice, and finally refinement. Upon completion of several modules, students engage in a 'module project' which demonstrates synthesis and realization of the learned concepts. A final semester-end design project provides for aggregation and demonstration of all subject matter learned throughout the semester. This pedagogical approach bridges the gap of disconnect between previous studios and promotes a continuous layering and practice of beginning design fundamentals

Metamorphosis: Transforming Non-designers into Designers

In this paper we make the case that there is today a growing number of educational settings experiencing challenges when it comes to transforming non-designers into designers, and in particular, interaction designers. We see this development as a consequence of an increased awareness and recognition of what broadly could be labeled as a design perspective. We examine the transformational process, the metamorphosis, by which non-designer students become interaction designers. We identify and describe the barriers that make it difficult for the students to move through this transformational process. We also propose some pedagogical approaches that can reduce the barriers and improve the possibility for the transformation to occur. The approach that we have developed and describe consists of three parts. Based on a fundamental understanding of the nature of design, we have developed (i) a tentative transformational model of how non-designers become interaction designers; (ii) a special kind of conceptual framework used to support students in the transformational process; and (iii) design assignments based on real-world design problems. We end the paper with two conclusions. First we argue that there is a challenge in transforming non-designers into designers, but that it is possible if the educational effort is based on an understanding of design and on the transformational process with its barriers. Finally we argue that the experience of trying to turn non-designers into interaction designers is in itself a valuable research approach. Dealing with non-designer students reveals deep insights about the nature of the design process and makes it possible to better formulate what constitutes a designerly approach. Keywords Design, Design education, Pedagogy, HCI</p