Desastres naturais: convivência com o risco

Estudos sobre riscos de desastres naturais têm-se aprimorado de uma abordagem fisicalista para uma perspectiva socioambiental. No entanto, planejamento e gestão ainda seguem o paradigma antropocêntrico da superioridade humana e do poder ilimitado da ciência e tecnologia. Evidencia-se uma incapacidade cognitiva, cultural e de ação por parte de especialistas, científicos e tomadores de decisão (claimmakers) para identificar e atuar sobre as causas sociais da produção de risco. Frente a uma ciência cartesiana e positivista na resolução de problemas, baseada na segurança e controle sobre o mundo natural, propõe-se uma ciência pós-normal que considera os riscos e incertezas do conhecimento científico e das problemáticas ambientais. Essa nova proposta também incide sobre a participação e o diálogo entre stakeholders como referência para ampliar a qualidade do saber científico e o entendimento da complexidade das questões ambientais. Este artigo discute a necessidade de se promover um salto epistemológico sobre a forma de pensar e produzir conhecimentos, bem como implementar a gestão dos riscos de desastres, tendo como objeto de estudo processos de comunicação e educação para prevenção de desastres.Studies on the risks of natural disasters have improved from a physicalist approach to a social and environmental perspective. However, planning and management still follow the anthropocentric paradigm of human superiority and the unlimited power of science and technology, evincing a cognitive, cultural and action inability on the part of experts, scientists and decision makers (or, rather, claim makers) to identify and act upon the social causes of risk production. In view of the Cartesian and Positivist science used to solve problems, based on security and on control over the natural world, a post-normal science has been proposed that considers the risks and uncertainties of scientific knowledge and environmental issues. This new approach encompasses participation and dialogue among stakeholders as a means to increase the quality of scientific knowledge and acknowledge the complexity of environmental issues. This article discusses the need for an epistemological leap on how we think and produce knowledge, as well as for implementing the management of disaster risk. Its objects of study are communication processes and education for disaster prevention

Ethical principles in machine learning and artificial intelligence: cases from the field and possible ways forward

Decision-making on numerous aspects of our daily lives is being outsourced to machine-learning algorithms and artificial intelligence (AI), motivated by speed and efficiency in the decision process. Machine learning (ML) approaches - one of the typologies of algorithms underpinning artificial intelligence - are typically developed as black boxes. The implication is that ML code scripts are rarely scrutinised; interpretability is usually sacrificed in favour of usability and effectiveness. Room for improvement in practices associated with programme development have also been flagged along other dimensions, including inter alia fairness, accuracy, accountability, and transparency. In this contribution, the production of guidelines and dedicated documents around these themes is discussed. The following applications of AI-driven decision making are outlined: a) Risk assessment in the criminal justice system, and b) autonomous vehicles, highlighting points of friction across ethical principles. Possible ways forward towards the implementation of governance on AI are finally examined

“Excellence R Us”: university research and the fetishisation of excellence

The rhetoric of “excellence” is pervasive across the academy. It is used to refer to research outputs as well as researchers, theory and education, individuals and organisations, from art history to zoology. But does “excellence” actually mean anything? Does this pervasive narrative of “excellence” do any good? Drawing on a range of sources we interrogate “excellence” as a concept and find that it has no intrinsic meaning in academia. Rather it functions as a linguistic interchange mechanism. To investigate whether this linguistic function is useful we examine how the rhetoric of excellence combines with narratives of scarcity and competition to show that the hypercompetition that arises from the performance of “excellence” is completely at odds with the qualities of good research. We trace the roots of issues in reproducibility, fraud, and homophily to this rhetoric. But we also show that this rhetoric is an internal, and not primarily an external, imposition. We conclude by proposing an alternative rhetoric based on soundness and capacity-building. In the final analysis, it turns out that that “excellence” is not excellent. Used in its current unqualified form it is a pernicious and dangerous rhetoric that undermines the very foundations of good research and scholarship

Phosphorus Mitigation to Control River Eutrophication: Murky Waters, Inconvenient Truths, and “Postnormal” Science

This commentary examines an "inconvenient truth" that phosphorus (P)-based nutrient mitigation, long regarded as the key tool in eutrophication management, in many cases has not yet yielded the desired reductions in water quality and nuisance algal growth in rivers and their associated downstream ecosystems. We examine why the water quality and aquatic ecology have not recovered, in some case aft er two decades or more of reduced P inputs, including (i) legacies of past land-use management, (ii) decoupling of algal growth responses to river P loading in eutrophically impaired rivers; and (iii) recovery trajectories, which may be nonlinear and characterized by thresholds and alternative stable states. It is possible that baselines have shifted and that some disturbed river environments may never return to predisturbance conditions or may require P reductions below those that originally triggered ecological degradation. We discuss the practical implications of setting P-based nutrient criteria to protect and improve river water quality and ecology, drawing on a case study from the Red River Basin in the United States. We conclude that the challenges facing nutrient management and eutrophication control bear the hallmarks of "postnormal" science, where uncertainties are large, management intervention is urgently required, and decision stakes are high. We argue a case for a more holistic approach to eutrophication management that includes more sophisticated regime-based nutrient criteria and considers other nutrient and pollutant controls and river restoration (e.g., physical habitat and functional food web interactions) to promote more resilient water quality and ecosystem functioning along the land-freshwater continuum