Home Random Page



Envisaged activities and anticipated outputs in the Dialogue Phase

The dialogue will be a science based policy dialogue; each debate will be developed with input and presentations by participants themselves. The participants will have had time to prepare input for the meeting and will not just be responding to the ideas of others. Participants will arrive at each meeting having prepared a background note outlining their perspective on and answers to the research questions. The scientists will adopt a response mode, starting with addressing questions tabled in the preparatory interviews/consultations. In response to the questions raised, the scientists will prepare dedicated input for subsequent meetings. The debates will be prepared by interviewing participants in advance of and after each dialogue session. An independent person competent in organising such a dialogue process and also conversant with the international negotiation process and the relevant scientific findings will chair the dialogue. The chair will be supported by the project team in preparing and chairing the sessions, and in drafting reports. The envisaged dialogue set up will be based on a series of linked two day workshops organised with 3-4 months intervals, supported by short scientific briefings and presentations, the writing of position papers, reporting of outcomes (based on Chatham house rules) and a web site. The design of the dialogue phase is, however, subject to the outcomes of the regional consultations in the preparatory phase (see below). The detailed design of the dialogue phase will be developed in Phase 1 of the project.

The anticipated outputs of the dialogue process will focus on, inter alia:

- useful indicators for defining acceptable and unacceptable climate change impacts;

- acceptable and unacceptable levels of climate change and related arguments and preconditions;

- useful indicators for defining long-term climate policy goals;

- costs and preconditions of various levels of adaptation and mitigation;

- costs and acceptability of long-term climate policy goals;

- implications of long-term climate policy goals for medium term (post 2012) levels of GHG emission control and international climate change strategies.

We expect that these items will be covered in the following deliverables:

· Reports of individual dialogue sessions as approved by stakeholder participants (not connecting specific names to views expressed in order to maintain the strict informal nature of the dialogue process)

· A summary report of the whole dialogue series highlighting important findings of participants and indicating notions that may be useful for the UNFCCC process (as approved by stakeholder participants, without making recommendations on what exactly constitutes dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system)

· Communications of stakeholder participants to national and international audiences of their personal experiences during the dialogue process

· Presentations by the project team to various national and international audiences on the main findings of the dialogue series (on the basis of the dialogue session and summary reports as approved by stakeholder participants)

· Web based communication of the dialogue session reports and all relevant scientific inputs in the dialogue process

Figure 1. Overview of the HOT project

Preparatory phase

A key element of the preparatory phase will be the organisation of regional meetings in Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Annex-I (developed countries) to consult on the design of the dialogue and the development of regional position papers on Article 2.

These meetings should allow for including specific regional perspectives on the issue of operationalisation of Art. 2 and also enhance the commitment of envisaged participants to participate in the dialogue phase of the project. They will be organised by consortium partners in the various regions on the basis of a common format for set up and reporting. All participants in these consultations will be asked to prepare a background note outlining their perspective on and answers to the research questions. This will allow the dialogue to proceed smoothly, and enable researchers to compare early and late positions to explore the learning process. The results of the regional consultation and position papers will be used by the project team to design the dialogue and organise the scientific input for the dialogue phase, that will be laid down in a project proposal for the dialogue phase.

The following activities are envisaged in the preparatory phase:

1. Organisation of the Consortium/Project Management:The successful conclusion of this project will require coordination amongst the partners to arrange the logistical details of the project.

2. Establishing rules of procedure and a research protocol including selection of participants, deepening contact to gain information regarding conditions for commitment, and securing commitment : In the writing of this project proposal, contact has already been established with the partners in the consortium and some common understanding has been established. Once the project is approved, the initial task will be to deepen this contact, ensure that we are not only in agreement about the subject but also about the methodology to be used in this project and to develop a common research protocol that helps each partner undertake his or her tasks effectively. For the regional and international workshops, it is important that we select stakeholders to ensure regional balance and representation (see Table 2), that the participants are constructive and are positive towards this project, that we have a good understanding of the conditions under which the stakeholders will be willing to participate in the process, and that the project team is able and willing to meet these conditions. In this stage, we will define criteria for selection of participants, consult with potential participants, prepare a short list of preferred participants for each region/ group, contact participants to check their interest and secure written commitments from the participants to be engaged in this project. Each participant will be asked to prepare for the regional meeting by creating a background note outlining their perspective on and answers to the research questions.

Table 2. Proposed matrix for distribution of participants.

  Government NGO Industry representative Scientists
Asia 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4) 2 (+ 4)
Africa 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4)
Latin America 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4)
OECD/EIT 4 ( +8) 4 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4) 2 ( + 4)

N.B. The numbers outside parenthesis indicate the participants selected for the international dialogue. The numbers inside the parenthesis indicate the participants that also participate in the regional dialogues.



3. Regional consultations on the views of the regional participants about the objective, contents (agenda setting, information needs and envisaged outcomes) and design of the dialogue (structure, approach, process). The preparatory phase will include an inventory of the questions and views of the policy stakeholders related to the various aspects of the issues at hand. This will be accomplished by organising a workshop with potential participants and/or by interviewing. Other means of eliciting the key questions and views of stakeholders can be through an advance survey (questionnaire) conducted through email, and/or an electronic discussion forum. This will help reach out to an audience wider than the eventual participants in the regional consultations. In identifying participants for the preparatory phase, we should make use of existing research networks/groups, whose members are beginning to undertake research on post-Kyoto issues, e.g. the RING network, RNGOs (research and independent NGOs) group, the Climate Change Knowledge Network (CICERO, CSDA, SEI, WRI, IISD, etc.) and others. The information gathered will be used for elaborating the design of the dialogue, the policy agenda of the first workshop, and to select and guide scientists in preparing their input. In particular we will secure information about the point of departure, expectations and desired outcomes of stakeholders; their initial level of knowledge and information needs; potential points of conflict to be dealt with in the project design; conditions for participation in order to enhance the commitment of participants to the project; and feedback to the design of the dialogue. This inventory will then be presented in four regional papers.

4. Elaboration of the dialogue design and organisation of the process support:On the basis of available theoretical knowledge and lessons learnt from past experience (e.g. COOL), we will develop the rudimentary ideas for the design of the dialogue. This design will be discussed intensively with the consortium members and with the potential participants in the project. The final design will take into account rules for promoting inter-cultural dialogue and a communication process between the participants through a process manager.

5. Organisation of the scientific support (core-team formation, selection of roster of experts, etc.): Science will support the dialogue by providing credible information and by providing feedback on various options and preferences expressed. The Third Assessment Report of IPCC provides a good starting point for an informed debate about various aspects of preventing dangerous climate change and attaining a fair distribution of mitigation and adaptation costs. It can be supplemented by more dedicated expert input based on the latest insights and new analytical work. The scientific input should allow for diverging views within the science community, including those dissenting from the IPCC TAR, with a view to better understand the underlying issues. The scientific input to the policy dialogue will be co-ordinated by prominent, multidisciplinary research institutes in both the North and the South: The Tyndall Institute, UK and COPPE, Brazil (see under project partners). The group of scientists to inform the policy stakeholder debates will be composed in such a way that it represents a broad set of regions (i.e. it should include developing countries and countries with economies in transition) and disciplines. The group of scientists will form a core panel that will address the questions and information needs identified during the meetings and provide concise written input to the workshops as well as state of the art presentations on selected subjects. Their statements will include points of general consensus, points of disagreement, and points where science is indecisive and/or in need of further research. Depending on the information requests of the participants, additional experts will be invited for specific input.

6. Establishment of an Advisory Group: Given the complexity of the project and its policy-oriented character there is a clear need for organising external guidance for the project management. The setting-up of this board will be part of the preparatory phase. It is envisaged that the first meeting of the board will take place near the end of the preparatory phase of the project to give advice on the design of the project. The project team will select board members, invite members to participate in the project and organise an advisory board meeting.

7. Preparation of Phase 2 of the project proposal and fund raising:The activities in the preparatory phase are expected to be substantial and thorough. We hope that the inventory of regional ideas along with the advice of the advisory board will lead to the development of a comprehensive project proposal including a dialogue manual for Phase 2. We will also integrate activities in the first phase of the project to create adequate support among policy makers and the funding community so that the proposal is also successful in raising the resources needed to make it happen. One possibility is the call for pre-proposals by MISTRA (the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research), which focuses on the theme of “Moving international climate negotiations forward”. MISTRA invites proposals for large, integrated research programmes that are solution-oriented, and involve the establishment of a dialogue with decisionmakers. Projects are expected to start in January 2004, with a first phase of 3-4 years. The total funding level for the first phase is SEK 50 mn. Planning grants (SEK 200,000 – 250,000 each) will be provided during April-September 2003. The last date for applications is 1 March 2003. Having gone through the call for pre-proposals, we feel that this may be a good opportunity to send the proposal for the dialogue phase of the HOT project.

4.6 Planned activities, Deliverables/Outputs and Time-Line

The following table indicates the planning and deliverables for the preparatory phase of the project.

Table 3. Activities, Deliverables, Time-Line.

No. Activity Deliverables, if any Date
1. Organisation of Consortium   Throughout
2. Establishing rules of procedure and a research protocol including selection of participants, deepening contact to gain information regarding conditions for commitment, and securing commitment Research protocol including List of Participants December and January
3. Regional consultations on views of the regional participants about the objective, contents (Agenda setting, information needs and envisaged outcomes) and design of the dialogue (structure, approach, process) Inventory of views / 4 regional papers February and March
4. Elaboration of the dialogue design and organisation of the process support Dialogue Manual January to May
5. Organisation of the scientific support (core-team formation, selection of roster of experts, etc.) Science Manual January to May
Establishment of an Advisory Group   December, May and June
7. Preparation of Phase 2 of the project proposal and fund raising Project Proposal May and June

Date: 2015-12-11; view: 495

<== previous page | next page ==>
The research questions | Participation to enhance the quality of science
doclecture.net - lectures - 2014-2020 year. Copyright infringement or personal data (0.002 sec.)