olivia bina and simone tulumello with sandra mateus, lavinia pereira, annalisa caffa – ics-ulisboa...
DESCRIPTION
Questions What are the main concerns/hopes in futures fiction? Can they enrich our capacity to envision the future? Can they enrich today’s framing of GSCs? o What differences & what implications?TRANSCRIPT
Olivia Bina and Simone TulumelloWith Sandra Mateus, Lavinia Pereira, Annalisa Caffa
– ICS-Ulisboa
Brussels – 16/12/15FLAGSHIP Final event
The Future Imagined: Insights from the arts
(filmic and literary representations)
FLAGSHIP is Funded by the 7th Framework Programmeof the European Union
Thinking ahead sustainably: Policies, Scenarios and Models to address
Grand Societal Challenges
Questions What are the main concerns/hopes in
futures fiction? • Can they enrich our capacity to envision
the future?• Can they enrich today’s framing of GSCs?
o What differences & what implications?
4
Fiction & FLA
CREATIVE INPUTBalance methods based on
evidence/expertiseWith creative inputs
DETAILCounters tendency
towards abstraction: Simple/poetic;
Detailed/daily symbolic factual vs macro systemic
perspectives
WARNINGAnticipatory knowledgePredict & explore risks
Identify possible warning signals
Popper: Science Fictioning
REFLECTIONOn cultural codes, values,
ideologies;Explore alternatives to
socio-political status quo
CRITIQUESocio-historical critique of
social structure, power, politics and agency;
Help DMs think of ethical implications/dilemmas of
alternative futures
INVOLVEMENTReach wide audience –
thus amplify participation in debate/reflection;Identify themes that
resonate widely with the public
ApproachGSCs &
FLAGSHIPChoice of
“texts”
Analytical matrix:
themes & dimension
s
Template for each
record/text
Content analysisNetwork analysis
RESULTSCore
ChallengesMajor
patterns
GSCsKnowledge to “shape
the future”
InnovationTechnology
DemographySocial
Change
Society
EnergyEnvironment
Governance
FinanceEconomics
Development
Science to shape the future:the making of GSCs
Lead by MCRIThttp://flagship-project.eu/flagship-visions/
Futures Fiction
Films
Novels
64
150 yrs
9
The Machine Stops
The Tomorrow File
Paris in the Twentieth Century (1863)
The Time Machine
We
Brave New World
The Space Merchants
The Lathe of Heaven
Stand on Zanzibar
A Clockwork Orange
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
1984
The Handmaid’s Tale
Ender's Game
Z for Zachariah
The Stand
Fahrenheit 451
Alphaville
La Jetée
On the Beach
Solaris
Logan's Run
The Terminator
Dawn of the Dead
Mad Max
RoboCop
Blade Runner
Brazil
Total Recall
Twelve Monkeys
The Fifth Element
Waterworld
Matrix
Gattaca
NeuromancerThe Diamond Age, or A Young Lady's Illustrated PrimerThe GiverInfinite JestCloud AtlasThe PassageThe Windup GirlUgliesThe RoadFeedThe SwarmLa police en l'an 2000Soylent GreenVerdens Undergang aka The End of the WorldLe tunnel sous La MancheMetropolisThings to come
Escape from L.A.Code 46V for VendettaDistrict 9Hunger GamesChildren of MenAvatarMinority ReportElysium (2013)Vexille28 days LaterAppleseedThe Day after Tomorrow
“significant and lasting impact on the public imagination”
Results1) Archetypal futures
http://europeanmovies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/italian-movizes.jpg
FLA
GSCs
Archetypal visions ofthe future: Clardy 2011
Archetypal visions of the
futureExplanation n %
Collapse The natural or non-natural motivations behind the civilizational decadence or ruin 26 40,6
Anti-utopia As the portrait of authoritarian projects resulting in the contrary of utopia 25 39,1
Dystopia The complex, chaotic scenarios and borderline societies 24 37,5
Apocalypse The more prophetical or religious approaches related to the end of times 14 21,9
Conflict & Revolution Description of a society in constant warfare 10 15,6
UtopiaThe benefits of a rational/ equalitarian
systems and the rebirth of new forms of utopia
8 12,5
Network Analysis of Archetypes(categories after Clardy 2011)
Utopia
ConflictApocalypse
Dystopia
CollapseAnti-Utopia
praise of the technological/ scientific/ rational model present in utopian texts; nihilistic and critical tendencies in dystopian texts (Booker, 1994).
Utopia
ConflictApocalypse
Dystopia
CollapseAnti-Utopia
Network Analysis of Archetypes(categories after Clardy 2011)
Alternatives to disruption paths
Non-human developments& human disruptive events
Resource Scarcity &
Environmental Crisis/Collapse
Gradual evolution towards disruption (building on
‘present’ trends)
Social cultural tensions leading to
crisis/Collapse
Acritical acceptance (utopian narratives)
of technological advances
Results2) Core challengesFrequent patterns
http://europeanmovies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/italian-movizes.jpg
FLA
GSCs
16
When fiction speaks “its Truth” to futures and science
Fiction has the power to illustrate what might happen:
when science blurs the boundaries between human and non-human;when the relationship between humans, technology and nature reaches the proverbial point of no return;
when the built environment promotes individuals’ alienation; when the structures of power, education and property all contribute to deepen social stratification and inequality.
17 Content analysis4 Core Challenges in fiction
Source: Bina et al forthcoming
1. Individuals, society and culture2. Science/Technology and society3. Environment -Technology vs Nature
4. Society and social changeControl & Manipulation
18 23 most frequent patterns1. Individuals, society and culture 2. Science/Technology and society
“Scarcity” - individual dignity, human values and wellbeing (50,0%)
Dehumanizing processes (39,1%) Disrespect of Human Rights (37,5%) Strong homogenization of identities (37,5%) Social control and subjective distress (26,6%)
Advanced technology (42,2%) Technology as a socio-political instrument of
control (39,1%) Technology use restricted to specific ends or
for/by elite groups (39,1%) Technology used for social domination and
manipulation (26,6%) Science as a tool for manipulation, control and
rationalization (26,6%)
3. Environment -Technology vs Nature 4. Society and social change (Near)impossibility to breathe in open air (39,1%) Technology used for control of nature (39,1%) Extreme urbanization and vertical density (34,4%) Interconnectedness and resulting fragility (34,4%) Species extinction and decline in biodiversity
(34,4%) Aesthetic/ Spiritual Value of Nature (31,3%) Food scarcity, replacement & lack of choice (28,1%)
Socioeconomic discrimination (based on propriety, education or other) (34,4%)
High stratification and unequal societies (32,8%) Existence of resistance and opposition
movements (31,3%) Women inequality (31,3%) Stratification of workers & occupations (28,1%) Absence of consumption (26,6%)
Source: Bina et al forthcoming
“future present”resulting patterns & warning signals: elements of such future
have already escaped the imaginary world to make part of today’s experience.
Beware of ‘gradual evolution towards disruption’
20
Other Futures(Levidow and Neubaue, 2012)
• Current H2020 priorities assume that • “all innovation is socially beneficial”
• “grand challenges have been generally framed • in ways favouring capital-intensive
technoscientific solutions, at the expense of other approaches”
• even when the possibility of promoting an alternative research agendas is perfectly viable.
Results3) Risk of scarcity - redefined?
http://europeanmovies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/italian-movizes.jpg
FLA
GSCs
22
Self-direction (1984, 1949; The Handmaid’s Tale, 1985; Logan's Run, 1976; Twelve Monkeys, 1995)
Reflexivity (Feed, 2002; Matrix, 1999)
Dignity (The Tomorrow File, 1975; A Clockwork Orange, 1962; Hunger Games, 2012)
Freedom (Escape from L.A., 1996)
Hope (Soylent Green, 1973; On the Beach, 1959; Blade Runner, 1982; Children of Men, 2006)
Security and protection (The Time Machine, 1895; Mad Max, 1979)
Sentiments and capacity to feel emotions(We, 1921; Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, 1968; The Giver, 1993)
Equality (Metropolis, 1926; Elysium, 2013)
Identity (We, 1921; Uglies, 2005; Twelve Monkeys, 1995)
Peace (Appleseed, 2004)
Privacy (Stand on Zanzibar, 1968; Minority Report, 2002)
Justice (Elysium, 2013)
Idealism and creativity (Paris in the Twentieth Century, 1863; Brazil, 1985)
Love (The Handmaid’s Tale, 1985)
Source: Bina et al forthcoming Trust (Ender's Game, 1973)
Drag picture to placeholder or click icon to add
What risks to become scarce inimagined futures?
23
Fiction invites us to rethink “scarcity”
Scarcity
“Internal”“intangible
”External
24
A more balanced focus forFLA and research agenda
ExternalResources and Ecological Functions/Services
Focus Technoscience
Internal/IntangibleIndividual dignity, human values and wellbeing, what makes us human
Focus Emotional, self-knowledge,
spiritual (& implications of transhumanism)
Results4) H2020+Re-visiting research agendasCaution & Daring
http://europeanmovies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/italian-movizes.jpg
FLA
GSCs
26
H2020 Challengesa summary of the patterns identified in fiction and which are largely or fully absent in H2020 discourse
Source: Bina et al forthcoming Table 29
27
H2020 + CautionWarning signals: High frequency patterns
Technology used for social domination and manipulation use restricted to specific ends or for/by elite groups as socio-political instrument of control Science as a tool for manipulation, control and rationalizationScarcity: individual dignity, human values and wellbeing, what makes us human Dehumanization processes Strong homogenization
28
H2020 + Daring8 dimensions (& 31 patterns)
Happiness and wellbeing (psychological conditions & QoL)Connectedness (interaction, physical closeness)Progress and future (ideas of progress & time, ideas of risk in the future)Identity (belonging, collective memory/aspirations, homogenisation/subcultures)Systems of beliefs (values, ethics, spirituality, religion)Meaning of life and existence (Personal project and personal identity (who am I))Conceptions of the human (e. g. human nature, human condition, trans-humanism)Entertainment and art (self-expression, creativity, leisure, entertainment/control)Aesthetic/ Spiritual Value of Nature (redeeming role and to embody the notion of hope itself)
Concluding:21st C needs a new
Archetype of the Future
Utopia
ConflictApocalypse
Dystopia
CollapseAnti-Utopia
Know what we do NOT want
Envision what we MIGHT
desire
Invest in the KNOWLEDGE
we NEED
© T
he M
atrix
And now, over to our FLAGSHIP colleaguesThanks!
31 GSCsiKnow
1.Water security and vulnerability 2.Energy security and vulnerability 3.Health, illness and well-being 4.Sustainability and climate change 5.Ageing and demographic issues 6.Food security and culture 7.Globalisation and localisation 8.Social cohesion and diversity 9.Technological security, hazard and risk 10.Consumption and behavioural change 11.Innovation, knowledge and technology 12.Work-life balance and mental health 13.Science, technology and ethics 14.Crime, security and justice 15.Governance, democracy and citizenship 16.Coexistence and conflict 17.Social pathologies and ethics 18.Social exclusion, poverty and affluence 19.Economic prosperity and growth
dynamics 20.Urban and rural dynamics 21.Education and skills dynamics
JRC-IPTS (2008) Need to Change the Current Ways of Using
Essential Natural Resources Need to Anticipate and Adapt to Societal
Changes Need for Effective and Transparent
Governance for the EU and the World
ERA1. Realising a single labour market for researchers 2. Developing world-class research infrastructures 3. Strengthening research institutions4. Sharing knowledge5. Optimising research programmes and priorities6. Opening to the world: international
cooperation in S&T
H2020 7 Societal Challenges (Council Decision 2013)
32
Environment and Food (resource
efficiency)
Individuals, society and
culture
Innovation and technology,
resource efficiency
Demography, social change,
skills and empowerment
Scarcity
Economy (GDP)
Scarcity of human values
Dehumanization processes
Anthropocene
Control and manipulation
Social Inequality and stratification