August 25th – 27th, 2009 Leiden - City of Discoveries
Consequences for Science, Politics and Media
International conference
Towards KnowledgeDemocracy
An initiative of
International conference Tow
ard
s Kn
ow
ledg
e Dem
ocra
cy
August 25th – 27th, 2009 Leiden - City of Discoveries
Consequences for Science, Politics and Media
International conference
Towards KnowledgeDemocracy
An initiative of
International conference Tow
ard
s Kn
ow
ledg
e Dem
ocra
cy
1
info
rmat
ion
Wel
com
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
August 25 – 27, 2009Welcome to Leiden
Dear participants, dear guests,
The programme booklet you have just opened is your membership ticket to
the knowledge democracy community. This community will hopefully be an
active one: you are now co-creator of what will be produced between August
25 and 27. This means that you are invited to be both participant and critic.
The conference is designed as a learning environment: the physical
boundaries have been expanded by opening the RMNO Twitter experiment,
the LinkedIn group “Knowledge Democracy” and the Youtube channel
“Knowledgedemocracy” for everyone who is interested. In addition a series of
side-events is organised to enhance your learning experience.
The general formula of the conference reveals scientific experiences and
dialogues during the first day, intensive exchange of ideas between scientists
en practitioners during the second day, and accumulation and recommenda-
tions on the third day. Each participant contributes with his or her own
wisdom, insights and experiences. We hope that we have succeeded in
creating an environment which rewards each individual contribution.
Knowledge democracy is an emerging concept that has not yet solidified into
deeply-rooted paradigms of theories. The fluid nature of the focal notions
leaves a lot of space for intense dialogues. We hope and expect that these will
enrich us all. Enjoy the conference!
www.knowledgedemocracy.nl
Roeland J. in ’t Veld
Chair of the Advisory Council for Research on Spatial Planning, Nature and
the Environment (RMNO), the Netherlands
2in
form
atio
nin
tern
atio
nal c
onfe
renc
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
ContactThe RMNO Conference Team
Roeland J. in ’t Veld
Chair RMNO
Email: [email protected]
Telephone number: +31(0)70 315 52 19
Ana Lidia Aneas Moyano
Conference Manager
Email: [email protected]
Telephone number: +31 (0)70 315 52 26
Mobile: +31 (0)6 20451131
Louis Meuleman
Secretary General RMNO
Email: [email protected]
Telephone number: +31 (0)70 315 52 22
Mobile: +31 (0)6 21827020
Madelon Eelderink
Conference Organiser
Email: [email protected]
Telephone number: +31 (0)70 315 52 28
Mobile: +31 (0)6 34192559
Sophie Jongeneel
Conference Organiser
Email: [email protected]
Telephone number: +31 (0)70 315 52 27
3
info
rmat
ion
Con
fere
nce
Team
To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Bert de Wit
Programme Manager
Email: [email protected]
Telephone number: +31 (0)70 315 52 15
Jeroen Bordewijk
Master of Ceremony
Council Member RMNO
Anneke Heinecke
Communication Advisor
Email: [email protected]
Telephone number: +31 (0)70 315 52 17
Mobile: +31 (0)6 24235261
Bart Jan Krouwel
Master of Learning
Council Member RMNO
4in
form
atio
nin
tern
atio
nal c
onfe
renc
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Towards Knowledge DemocracyConference Programme
Day 1 August 25th, 2009 Advanced Theory Finding a Common Base
08.30 REGISTRATION IN ACADEMY BUILDING
PLENARY SESSION IN ACADEMY BUILDING
09.30 Welcome by prof. Rietje van Dam, Vice Rector Magnificus, Leiden University, the
Netherlands
09.40 Opening by the chair of the first conference day, prof. ir. Rudy Rabbinge, Advisor
Executive Board, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
09.50 Introduction by the conference chair, prof. Roeland J. in ’t Veld, Chair, RMNO, the
Netherlands
10.10 COFFEE BREAK
10.30 Theme 1: Knowledge & Future Research
Keynote speaker: prof. Julie Thompson Klein, Wayne State University, Detroit, USA
Co-referent: prof. Marjolein van Asselt, Maastricht University and Council Member,
Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
11.10 Theme 2: State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research
Keynote speaker: prof. Roland Scholz, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH
Zürich), Switzerland
Co-referent: prof. Joske Bunders, VU University Amsterdam and Council Member RMNO,
the Netherlands
11.50 Theme 3: Practical Approaches to Boundary Work
Keynote speaker: dr. Christian Pohl, Co-director of transdisciplinarity-net, Swiss
Academy of Arts and Sciences, Switzerland
Co-referent: prof. John Grin, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
12.30 LUNCH BREAK
13.30 Theme 4: Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow
Keynote speaker: prof. John Ryan, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA
Co-referent: David Clements MPA, Vice President, Canadian Health Services Research
Foundation, Canada
14.10 Theme 5: Defining Knowledge Democracy
Keynote speaker: dr. Silvio Funtowicz, Scientific Officer, Institute for the Protection and
Security of the Citizen (IPSC), Joint Research Center of the European Commission, Italy
Co-referent: prof. Roeland J. in ’t Veld, Chair RMNO, the Netherlands
14.50 First impressions by the chair of the first conference day, prof. ir. Rudy Rabbinge,
Advisor Executive Board, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
5
info
rmat
ion
Con
fere
nce
Prog
ram
me
Tow
ard
s K
no
wle
dg
e D
emo
cra
cy
14.55 COFFEE BREAK AND WALK TO KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
15.15 - 17.15 PARALLEL SESSIONS IN KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Theme 1 Knowledge & Future Research
1.1 Problems & Opportunities
Chaired by: prof. Herman Eijsackers, Chair, Scientific Advisory Board, Wageningen
University and Research Centre and Chief Scientific Officer, Ministry of Agriculture,
Nature and Food Quality (LNV), the Netherlands
Theme 2 State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research
2.1 Transdisciplinary Research: Its Possibilities and Limitations
Chaired by: dr. Jacqueline Broerse, Head of Science Communication, Athena Institute,
VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Theme 3 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work
3.1 Boundary Work and Transition Management
Chaired by: prof. Robert Hoppe, University of Twente, the Netherlands
Theme 4 Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow
4.1 Old and New Media Living Apart Together?
Chaired by: prof. Franciska de Jong, University of Twente and Board Member,
Organisation of Scientific Research (NWO), the Netherlands
4.2 Knowledge Sharing: Who is the Facilitator?
Chaired by: drs. Anja van der Aa, Entrepreneur, Platform Chains and Networks, the
Netherlands
Theme 5 Defining Knowledge Democracy
5.1 Policy Experimentation & Academic Accountability
Chaired by: prof. Wim van de Donk, Chair, Scientific Council for Government Policy
(WRR), the Netherlands
5.2 Researching Publics
Chaired by: dr. Floor Basten, Owner and Researcher, OrléoN, the Netherlands
PLENARY SESSION IN ACADEMY BUILDING
17.30 Speech by dr. Jacqueline Cramer, Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment (VROM), the Netherlands
17.50 Reception at the Former University Library
19.00 DINNER AT THE FORMER UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
6in
form
atio
nin
tern
atio
nal c
onfe
renc
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Day 2 August 26th, 2009Tensions & Synergies Facing the Challenges
08.30 REGISTRATION FOR NEW PARTICIPANTS
PLENARY SESSION IN KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
09.15 Wrap-up of the first conference day by the conference chair, prof. Roeland J. in ‘t Veld,
Chair RMNO, the Netherlands
09.25 Introduction by the chair of the second conference day, drs. Koos van der Steenhoven,
Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW), the
Netherlands
09.50 Transdisciplinary Scholarship, by prof. Chris Peterson, Michigan State University
Product Centre for Agriculture and Natural Resources, USA
10.20 Evaluating Evidence, by dr. David Stanners, Head of International Cooperation,
European Environment Agency, Denmark
10.45 COFFEE BREAK
11.15 - 13.00 PARALLEL SESSIONS IN KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Theme 1 Knowledge & Future Research
1.2 Scanning the Horizon
Chaired by: ir. Hans van der Veen, Director, Study Centre for Technology Trends (STT),
the Netherlands
Theme 2 State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research
2.2 Creating the Landscape: Scientific Knowledge in Regional Case Studies
Chaired by: prof. Paul Opdam, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the
Netherlands
2.3 Transdisciplinary Research: Its Contribution to Problem Solving and the
Consequences for Higher Education
Chaired by: prof. Joske Bunders, VU University Amsterdam and Council Member RMNO,
the Netherlands
Theme 3 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work
3.2 Mainstreaming Citizen Participation
Chaired by: dr. Lars Klüver, Director, Danish Board of Technology, Denmark
Theme 4 Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow
4.3 Lost in Translation
Chaired by: prof. ir. Klaas van Egmond, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
4.4 Network Knowledge Society – Effects for Science & Politics
Chaired by: drs. Marinka Voorhout, Director Academy and Principal Consultant KBenP,
the Netherlands
Theme 5 Defining Knowledge Democracy
5.3 Production and Use of Knowledge in the Political Realm
Chaired by: mr. Guido Enthoven, Founder and Director, Institute for Social Innovation (IMI),
the Netherlands
7
info
rmat
ion
Con
fere
nce
Prog
ram
me
Tow
ard
s K
no
wle
dg
e D
emo
cra
cy
5.4 Scientists as Citizens: Citizens as Scientists
Chaired by: dr. David Laws, Senior Lecturer, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
5.5 Policy Experimentation, Social Learning, and Political Accountability
Chaired by: prof. Anton Hemerijck, Director, Scientific Council for Government Policy
(WRR), the Netherlands
13.00 LUNCH BREAK
14.15 - 16.00 PARALLEL SESSIONS IN KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Theme 1 Knowledge & Future Research
1.3 The Future in Policy-making
Chaired by: prof. ir. Rudy Rabbinge, Advisor Executive Board, Wageningen University
and Research Centre, the Netherlands
Theme 2 State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research
2.4 Stimulating Informed Debate on Sustainable Development
Chaired by: prof. Frans Berkhout, VU University Amsterdam and Council Member
RMNO, the Netherlands
2.5 Transdisciplinary Research as Social Learning
Chaired by: prof. Josee van Eijndhoven, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Member of
the Academy of Technology and Innovation (AcTI), the Netherlands
Theme 3 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work
3.3 Collaborative Knowledge Production
Chaired by: prof. Jurian Edelenbos, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
and drs. Nienke van Schie, PhD Researcher, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the
Netherlands
3.4 A New Methodology for Policy Research?
Chaired by: prof. Peter van Hoesel, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Director of
Panteia, the Netherlands
Theme 4 Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow
4.5 Science-based Reports, Media and the Political Hype
Chaired by: mr. drs. Jan Staman, Director, Rathenau Institute, the Netherlands
4.6 Citizens in Charge (1): Participation in Inspection and Monitoring : Introduction
and Experiences in the Netherlands
Chaired by: prof. Valerie Frissen, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Senior Strategistat
TNO Information and Communication Technology, the Netherlands
Theme 5 Defining Knowledge Democracy
5.6 Inconvenient Knowledge and Policy-making
Chaired by: prof. Henk Dekker, Leiden University, the Netherlands
5.7 Organising Politics in a Knowledge Democracy – Reinventing Political Parties
Chaired by: dr. Krijn van Beek, Advisor, Council for Societal Development (RMO) and
Founding Director of the Think Tank 2100, the Netherlands
8in
form
atio
nin
tern
atio
nal c
onfe
renc
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Open Sessions Part 1
14.15 -
14.30
An Introduction to the “Meaning of Knowledge”
by ir. Arnold Fellendans, Networker, Network for Future Research (NTV) and Network for
Sustainable Higher Education (DHO), the Netherlands
14.30 -
14.45
Knowledge, Power & Identity: Struggles Over Unstructured Laptop Use in American
University Classrooms
by dr. Jill Harrison, Post-doctoral Fellow, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, USA
14.45 -
15.00
An Inter- and Transdisciplinary Analysis of the Climate Discussion of Transport
by dr. Petri Tapio, Senior Researcher, Turku School of Economics, Finland
15.00 -
15.15
Democratic Decision-making and Innovative Knowledge: Two Cases
by drs. Paul Jansen Schoonhoven, Senior Training Manager and Consultant, ROI/HEC
Institute for Public Administration, the Netherlands
drs. Laura Sprengers ma, Advisor, ROI Institute for Public Administration, the
Netherlands
15.15 -
15.30
Boundary Spanning in Hybrid Dutch Organisations
by Philip Marcel Karré MPhil, Senior Researcher and Lecturer, Netherlands School for
Public Administration (NSOB), the Netherlands
15.30 -
15.45
The Knowledge Broker, Matching Supply and Demand of Expert Knowledge
by drs. Michel Leenders, Head of Spatial Development and Management, City of Gouda,
the Netherlands
16.00 COFFEE BREAK
16.15 - 18.00 PARALLEL SESSIONS IN KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Theme 1 Knowledge & Future Research
1.4 Future Research and Strategic Policy making: How do the Two Relate?
Chaired by: prof. Maarten Hajer, Director, Netherlands Environmental Assessment
Agency (PBL), the Netherlands
Theme 2 State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research
2.6 Sustainable Value Development through New Knowledge Creation
Chaired by: ir. Jeroen Bordewijk, Council Member RMNO, Board Me ofmber TransForum
and former Senior Vice President at Unilever, the Netherlands
2.7 The Transition Approach and the Resilience Approach: What can we Learn?
Chaired by: prof. Josee van Eijndhoven, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Member of
the Academy of Technology and Innovation (AcTI), the Netherlands
Theme 3 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work
3.5 Boundary Institutions in Science Governance - Triangulating Knowledge and
Democratic Practice
Chaired by: dr. Peter Stegmaier, Assistant Professor, University of Twente, the
Netherlands
9
info
rmat
ion
Con
fere
nce
Prog
ram
me
Tow
ard
s K
no
wle
dg
e D
emo
cra
cy
Theme 4 Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow
4.7 Citizens in Charge (2): Participation in Inspection and Monitoring: International
Experiences and Conclusions
Chaired by: dr. Jeroen Kerseboom, Vice Chair, VIDE Association for Monitoring,
Assessment and Inspecting, the Netherlands
4.8 Investigative Journalism and the Battle for Access to Information
Chaired by: drs. Margo Smit, Director, Association of Research Journalists (VVOJ),
Belgium and the Netherlands
Theme 5 Defining Knowledge Democracy
5.8 Knowledge-Democracy or Jericho-Democracy? A Design Workshop
Chaired by: drs. Jan Schrijver, Senior Civil Servant, Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom
Relations (BZK), the Netherlands
5.9 Facing and Bridging the Gap: Organising Knowledge For Policy-making
Chaired by: dr. Arnold Jonk, Director of Knowledge, Ministry of Education, Culture and
Science (OCW), the Netherlands (invited)
Open Sessions Part 2
16.15 -
16.30
We’re Only in It for the Knowledge. Does Democracy Pay?
by drs. Hans Keune, Political Scientist, University of Antwerp, Belgium
16.30 -
16.45
People Empower Each Other, Information Technology Helps Only in Facilitating
Them
by drs. Marga Jacobs, Lecturer, Avans University of Applied Sciences and President,
Human Environment Foundation (Vereniging Leefmilieu), the Netherlands
16.45 -
17.00
Dissemination and Implementation of Knowledge within the Public Health Sector
by dr. Lenneke Vaandrager, Associate Professor, Wageningen University and Research
Centre, the Netherlands
17.00 -
17.15
Globalisation and Governance Reforms in India
by dr. Vasant Moharir, Retired Academic and former President of the Foundation for
Critical Choices for India, the Netherlands
18.00 WALK TO THE FORMER UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
18.30 Reception and speech by drs. Henri Lenferink, Mayor, City of Leiden, the Netherlands
19.30 DINNER
10in
form
atio
nin
tern
atio
nal c
onfe
renc
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Day 3 August 27th, 2009 Bridging Theory and Practice Taking Responsibility
08.30 REGISTRATION IN KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
09.00 – 11.00 PARALLEL SESSIONS IN KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Theme 1 Knowledge & Future Research
1.5 Towards a Better Governance of Long-term Decision-making
Chaired by: prof. Roeland J. in ‘t Veld, Chair, RMNO, the Netherlands and Chair of
Working Group Governance, European Environment and Sustainable Development
Advisory Councils (EEAC), Belgium
Theme 2 State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research
2.8 Roles, Competence and Action Perspectives of Actors in Transdisciplinary
Research
Chaired by: dr. ir. Huib Silvis, Head of Public Issues Division, Agricultural Economics
Research Institute (LEI), Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
2.9 Research and Knowledge Transfer in Water Management
Chaired by: ir. Bert Satijn, Director, Research Programme Living with Water, the
Netherlands
Theme 3 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work
3.6 Implications for the Science-policy Interface
Chaired by: prof. Robert Hoppe, University of Twente, the Netherlands
3.7 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work around Transformative Change
Chaired by: dr. René Kemp, Senior Researcher, Maastricht University, the Netherlands
Theme 4 Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow
4.9 Communication about Controversial Issues
Chaired by: drs. Pieter Hilhorst, Publicist and Journalist, Volkskrant newspaper (among
others), the Netherlands
4.10 From Response to Responsibility
Chaired by: drs. Willem Schoonen, Chief Editor, Trouw newspaper, the Netherlands
Theme 5 Defining Knowledge Democracy
5.10 Wanted: Competent Public Officials
Chaired by: drs. Kees Vijlbrief, Deputy Director General, Office for the Senior Civil Service
(ABD), Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (BZK), the Netherlands
5.11 Improvement of Knowledge Transfer: Co-operation or Competition in the
Research Field?
Chaired by: drs. Martin van der Gugten cmc, President, Association for Policy Research
(VBO), the Netherlands
11.00 COFFEE BREAK
11
info
rmat
ion
Con
fere
nce
Prog
ram
me
Tow
ard
s K
no
wle
dg
e D
emo
cra
cy
PARALLEL SESSIONS
11.20 Open Space Session: Planning for Action
11.20 Gathering and combining results. Preparing recommendations.
12.30 LUNCH BREAK AT KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
AND WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
13.30 PLENARY SESSION IN ACADEMY BUILDING
13.30 Opening by the chair of the third conference day, ir. Hans van der Vlist, Permanent
Secretary, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), the
Netherlands.
The recommendations of the participants of the conference, “the Leiden Agenda”, will be
presented to distinguished leaders in the Netherlands in the domains of Politics, Science,
Media and Industry.
Speakers
prof. Paul F. van der Heijden, Rector Magnificus Leiden University, the Netherlands
prof. Uri Rosenthal, Leiden University and Senator, the Netherlands
drs. Willem Schoonen, Chief Editor, newspaper Trouw, the Netherlands
dr. Herman Tjeenk Willink, Vice President of the Council of State, the Netherlands
mrs. Gerdi Verbeet, President of the House of Representatives of the States General, the
Netherlands
dr. Hans Wijers, Chair of the Board of Management, AkzoNobel, the Netherlands
15.30 Final remarks by the conference chair, prof. Roeland J. in ‘t Veld, Chair, RMNO, the
Netherlands
15.30 HIGH TEA AT ACADEMY BUILDING
Leiden CentralStation
Hotel Tulip Inn
Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Academy Building The Former University Library“Oude UB”
Rapenburg Canal
Stationsweg
RapenburgPrinsessekade
Steenstraat
Steenschuur
No
orderplantsoen
Schuttersveld
Rijnsburgersingel
12in
form
atio
nin
tern
atio
nal c
onfe
renc
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Contact & Locations
Organised by
RMNO
Advisory Council for Research on Spatial Planning,
Nature and the Environment
Emmapark 6
2595 AT The Hague
The Netherlands
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +31 (0)70 315 52 10
www.rmno.nl
Safety and SecurityThe emergency telephone number in
the Netherlands is: 112
When situated in one of the University buildings,
please see emergency numers per location and
make sure to inform the reception in the case of
an emergency.
Accommodation
Hotel Tulip Inn
Schipholweg 3
2316 XB Leiden
The Netherlands
Telephone number: +31 (0)71 522 66 75
13
info
rmat
ion
Con
tact
& L
ocat
ions
To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Locations Leiden University
Academy Building
Rapenburg 73
2311 GJ Leiden
Telephone number: +31 (0)71 527 32 90
In case of emergency:
Telephone number: +31 (0)71 527 33 00
Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Steenschuur 25
2311 ES Leiden
Telephone number: +31 (0)71 527 52 20
In case of emergency:
Telephone number: +31 (0)71 527 79 79
The Former University Library
“Oude UB”
Rapenburg 70
2311 BZ Leiden
Telephone number: +31 (0)71 527 32 90
14in
form
atio
nin
tern
atio
nal c
onfe
renc
e To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Conference Partners
Advisory Council for Research on Spatial Planning, Nature and the Environment (RMNO), the Netherlands www.rmno.nl
Council for Public Administration (ROB), the Netherlands www.rfv.nl
European Commision (EC), Belgium www.ec.europa.eu
European Environment Agency (EEA), Denmark www.eea.europa.eu
European Environment and Sustainable Development Advisory Councils (EEAC), Belgium http://www.eeac-net.org/
Leiden University, the Netherlands www.leiden.edu
An initiative of
15
info
rmat
ion
Con
fere
nce
Part
ners
To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality (LNV), the Netherlands www.minlnv.nl
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW), the Netherlands www.minocw.nl
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), the Netherlands www.vrom.nl
Office for the Senior Civil Service (ABD), the Netherlands www.algemenebestuursdienst.nl
Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (VenW), the Netherlands www.minvenw.nl
City of Leiden, the Netherlands www.leiden.nl
Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), the Netherlands www.nwo.nl
Rathenau Institute, the Netherlands www.rathenau.nl
ScienceGuide, the Netherlands www.scienceguide.nl
Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands www.wrr.nl
TransForum, the Netherlands www.transforum.nl
16
17
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
thxx
x
The Academy Building, located at Rapenburg, is
the oldest building and the heart of the University
of Leiden.
The building was built in 1516 as a nunnery and
since 1581 it is used by the (then) newly
established university.
Today it is a national monument that is mainly
used for ceremonial events, such as graduation
ceremonies and promotions, although some
lectures still take place in the Academy Building.
The Academic Museum is located in the building
and is the gateway to the Hortus Botanicus.
August 25th 08.30 - 09.30 Academy Building
Registration
Reg
istr
atio
n To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
18Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Wel
com
e |
Plen
ary
sess
ion Rietje van Dam is Vice Rector Magnificus at Leiden
University. At Leiden University she also holds the
Chair for Sustainable Development and Innovation
of Education in the Faculty of Mathematics and
Sciences.
She has been and still is a member of several
advisory and supervisory committees: the
Programme Committee Science and Technology
of the European Association of Distance Teaching
Universities (EADTU), the Scientific Advisory
Board of the Deutsches Institut für Fernstudien
Forschung an der Universität Tübingen (DIFF),the
Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR),
the Netherlands, the Advisory Board of AXIS, the
national platform for science and technology in
education and labour market, the Scientific
Advisory Board of Delft Cluster, the Supervisory
Board of AkzoNobel Netherlands, the Supervisory
Board of the Organisation for Applied Scientific
Research (TNO), the Netherlands, the Stiftungsrat
of Lüneburg University, the Dutch/Flemish
Association of Science Centres, the Supervisory
Board of Unilever Netherlands and the Advisory
Board of Deltares.
She studied chemistry at Utrecht University, the
Netherlands, graduated in 1973 and did her PhD
thesis at the same university in 1976. After that
period she worked at Maastricht University and
the Open University of the Netherlands where she
was appointed as Professor and Chair Natural
Sciences, especially biochemistry and biotech-
nology in1993. From 1996-1998 she was chair of
the Board of Professors (rector) at the same
university. She is a founding member of the
Regional Centre of Expertise (RCE) Rhine-Meuse
and actively involved in the RCE-initiative of
United Nations University as visiting professor for
RCEs at the United Nations Institute for Advanced
Studies (UNU-IAS) in Japan and as a member of
the Ubuntu Committee of Peers for RCEs.
August 25th 09.30 - 09.40 Academy Building
Welcome
Leiden University, the Netherlands
prof. Rietje van Dam, Vice Rector Magnificus, Leiden University, the Netherlands
Rietje van Dam: “To me, knowledge democracy stands for an effective and respectful
interaction between:
· the development of knowledge in a scientific manner
· sharing knowledge with a wide audience
· dealing with knowledge from a “public good” perspective.”
19
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
thO
peni
ng
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
nRudy Rabbinge is chair of several national and
international organisations. He is deputy
chairman of the Commission for Environmental
Assessment (MER), the Netherlands, chair of the
Science Council of the Consultative Group on
International Agricultural Research (CGIAR, Italy/
USA), he is chair of the Board Earth and Life
Sciences (ALW) of the Organization for Scientific
Research (NWO), the Netherlands, chair of the
Council of Earth and Life Sciences of the Royal
Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
(KNAW) and other organisations. He is also
Professor in Sustainable Development and Food
Security at Wageningen University and Research
Centre and Advisor to the Executive Board of this
university. Rudy Rabbinge is member of
numerous national and international organisa-
tions, such as the Executive Committee of the
Asia Rice Foundation, Thailand, the International
Advisory Board of TransForum Agro & Groen, the
Netherlands, the Executive Board of the Centre for
World Food Studies, the Scientific Programme
Indonesia-the Netherlands (SPIN) and the
Supervisory Committee of the National Institute
for Public Health and Environment (RIVM), the
Netherlands.
He has several distinctions to his name, among
which the Knight in the Order of the Netherlands
Lion, the Knight in the Order of Oranje-Nassau
and Honorary Professor of the Chinese Academy
of Agricultural Sciences. He is also Board Member
of the Directors Alliance for a Green Revolution in
Africa.
Rudy Rabbinge studied biology and crop
protection at the Wageningen University and
Research Centre. He conducted his PhD in
agricultural and environmental sciences at the
same university. He has written over 200
scientific publications (international A-refereed
journals), 5 text books, more than 250 other
publications, and reports.
August 25th 09.40 - 09.50 Academy Building
Opening by the chair of the first conference day
prof. ir. Rudy Rabbinge, Advisor Executive Board, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
Rudy Rabbinge: “Knowledge democracy means better access and understanding of knowledge
in different fields without full background information. Every interested layman should be in a
position to participate in discussions on dilemma ‘s and ethical choices.”
20Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Intr
oduc
tion
|
Plen
ary
sess
ion
0.0
Roeland in ’t Veld is Chair of the Advisory Council
for Research on Spatial Planning, Nature and the
Environment (RMNO). He is professor at the Open
University of the Netherlands, Professor of Good
Governance at the University of the Netherlands
Antilles. Furthermore, he is a member of the
Supervisory Board of Netherlands Knowledge
Country and Commissioner for IBM The
Netherlands, HSK Group and President
Commissioner of Prorail. Roeland in ’t Veld has
editorial responsibility for a wide range of
publications, including works on process
management and the Handbook on ‘Corporate
Governance’.
In the past Roeland in ’t Veld has held positions
such as Director General for Higher Education and
Scientific Research at the Ministry of Education,
Culture and Science, Secretary of State for
Education and Science and Chair of the
Supervisory Board of the IB Group. He was also
Dean of the Netherlands School for Public
Administration (NSOB), Rector of SIOO, the
Interuniversity Centre for Development in the field
of Organisation and Change Management.
August 25th 09.50 - 10.10 Academy Building
Introduction by the conference chair
RMNO
prof. Roeland J. in ‘t Veld, Chair of the RMNO, the Netherlands
Roeland in ‘t Veld: “Speaking truth to power is complicated considerably by the tensions
between politics, science and media. Does it take three to tango in this problematique?”
10.10 - 10.30 COFFEE BREAK
21
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
th1.
0
Theme 1 asks all participants in this international
conference to consider the role of research in
realising a “knowledge democracy“ at the
interfaces of science, politics, society, and media.
The root meaning of “democracy” frames our
collective task. The strength of knowledge and
decision-making depends partly on leveraging the
lessons of two major developments: transdiscipli-
nary research (TDR) and new digital technologies.
The two topics – TDR and digital technologies
– have not been linked closely in the past, but
they share common values for a knowledge
democracy, including:
· creating an open space for all forms of knowledge;
· fostering the participation of all stakeholders;
· providing equal access to power and
representation;
· facilitating new modes of social learning;
· and crossing the boundaries that divide
knowledge domains and sectors of society.
These common values reflect significant changes
in how we think about producing and dissemi-
nating knowledge. A growing literature base on
TDR documents the theory and practice of crossing
boundaries between academic and other forms of
knowledge in a new agora of collaborative research
and problem solving. Yet, despite successes and
the widening credence of TDR, the dominant
structure of research and education continues to
prioritise academic modes and hierarchies.
Another growing literature base documents the
possibilities of new technologies in building a
digital commons. Yet, the Internet is rife with
tensions between open access and privatisation,
uneven cyber infrastructure across nations and
communities, stereotyping and dubious authority.
Both developments underscore the heightened
importance of new forms of research, learning, and
critical literacies in both the public and private
arenas. This need is all the more pressing at a time
when older taxonomies of knowledge are slow to
change while information comes increasingly from
new media sources, and when web-based
networking, 20 million hits on YouTube, and
orchestrated tweets on Twitter are more persua-
sive in the demos than older media of the
classroom, television and radio, and print
publications. The answer is not to design a new
virtual world, but to inform future research and
decision-making with a reflexive understanding of
the changing nature of knowledge and the role of
new intermediated forms of communicative action.
August 25th 10.30 - 11.10 Academy Building
1.0 Knowledge & Future Research: an introduction
Keynote Speaker prof. Julie Thompson Klein, Wayne State University, USA
Co-referent prof. Marjolein van Asselt, Maastricht University and Council Member of the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
Julie Thompson Klein: “The roots of the term democracy derive from the Greek demos,
meaning the ‘people’, and krátos, meaning ‘rule or strength’. The strength of problem-solving
and decision-making in the contemporary world depends in no small part on drawing lessons
from inter- and transdisciplinary research that crosses the boundaries of both academic fields and
other sectors of society in the demos. The building stones of knowledge democracy today also require
leveraging the affordances of information technology, necessitating new forms of digital literacy,
participatory learning, and communicative action.”
Them
e 1:
Kno
wle
dge
& F
utur
e R
esea
rch
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
n
22Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Plen
ary
sess
ion
2.0
The importance of transdisciplinary research as a
link between knowledge and policy is increasing.
In the Netherlands however, until now this link has
barely been established. When does one choose a
transdisciplinary approach of research? What are
the possibilities and limitations of transdiscipli-
nary research and how can this be mutually
combined with social learning? What recommen-
dations can be made concerning knowledge
development, the role of stakeholders, the use of
knowledge and competencies?
This plenary session will introduce the theme of
‘State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research’ in
an international context. The parallel sessions of
this theme will go in-depth on the current use of
transdisciplinary research, trends and expecta-
tions, important stakeholders and their role in
transdisciplinary research.
August 25th 11.10 - 11.50 Academy Building
2.0 State of the Art in Transdisciplinary Research: an introduction
Keynote Speaker prof. Roland Scholz, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zürich), Switzerland
Co-referent prof. Joske Bunders, Director, Athena Institute at VU University Amsterdam and Council Member of the RMNO, the Netherlands
Roland Scholz: “A knowledge democracy asks for the support and the efficient utilisation
of different types of epistemics/knowledge, values/norms and discourses in society.
Transdisciplinarity which organises mutual learning between science and society for getting
socially robust solutions and the dismantling of barriers between different knowledge systems (among
others between sciences), which is an important methodology for supporting knowledge democracy.
Finding appropriate ways of integrating or relating knowledge from different disciplines in relation to
different systems, from different modes of thought, (e.g. analytic and intuitive thinking) interests and
cultures can be a challenge.”
23
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
th3.
0
Research that crosses disciplinary boundaries and
boundaries between science and society to
address real world problems can be found in a
number of thematic fields, such as global
environmental change, migration, public health,
new technologies or area development. It goes by
names like transdisciplinary research, knowledge
production 2.0, boundary work and transition or
hybrid management. Such knowledge production
often takes place as a self-organised temporary
collaboration of disciplinary researchers and
actors from civil society, the government and the
private sector. The question however remains,
how the practical experiences gained in one
project can be depersonalised and handed over to
the next project to disburden project teams form
“re-inventing the wheel”. For that purpose, the
practical experiences have to be sampled and
systematised and the core challenges as well as
successful ways to address them have to be
identified. But what are the specific challenges
that have to be addressed in boundary work?
What are suitable approaches to address these?
How can these approaches be conceptualised and
formulated as challenges from the perspective of
those involved in the knowledge production
process? Is there a need for experienced boundary
workers who organise such collective knowledge
production? And if so, what are the specific
competencies of such boundary workers?
August 25th 11.50 - 12.30 Academy Building
3.0 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work: an introduction
Keynote Speaker dr. Christian Pohl, Co-Director of transdisciplinarity-net, Swiss Academy of Arts and Sciences, Switzerland
Co-referent prof. John Grin, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Christian Pohl: “In a knowledge democracy science is not the only provider, interpreter and
reviewer of knowledge. That does – as the term democracy may imply –not mean, that the
majority votes for what is true and false. Rather, knowledge production becomes a collective
process, normatively oriented to sustainable development, and bringing together those from civil society,
the private sector, the government and science, who have a say in the matter. The challenge we face is
finding those who have a say in the matter, certifying their contribution is reliable and integrating the
contributions in relation to the problem on the ground.”
12.30 - 13.30 LUNCH BREAK
Them
e 3:
Pra
ctic
al A
ppro
ache
s to
Bou
ndar
y W
ork
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
n
24Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Plen
ary
sess
ion
Regarding the role of the media as messenger and
translator between science, other knowledge
producers and politics, two different worlds have
emerged: the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ media. How are
their roles changing and what about the
interaction between them? Especially the
Internet-based ‘new’ media are characterised by
speed, high velocity in subjects and opinions and
an intense variety in sources and supply. This
allows little time to reflect.
The change in one area automatically implicates
changes in another. How are these developments
in the media affecting politics, which choices
should be made, why and by whom? In what way
are the media responsible for the knowledge and
information on which citizens and politicians base
their opinions? And when does selection of
information turn into manipulation?
Moreover, democratisation of knowledge has
increased the amount of available data and facts
enormously. What role does investigative
journalism fulfill? Dealing with knowledge has
been subject of discussion among parliamentar-
ians in recent years. The quality of knowledge is
susceptible to ‘wicked’, contested, emotional and
value-laden opinions. Still, policy makers must
prepare responsible action. What is in that case
the most effective way of providing them with the
knowledge they need, and how can they
distinguish hypes?
This plenary session will introduce the theme
‘Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow’ in an
international context. The parallel sessions of this
theme will go in-depth within these issues.
August 25th 13.30 - 14.10 Academy Building
4.0 Media, Politics and Knowledge Flow: an introduction
Keynote Speaker prof. John Ryan, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA
Co-referent David Clements MPA, Vice President, Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, Canada
John Ryan: “Knowledge democracy is about approximating the free flow of information. It
refers both to the production and consumption of information. Both are increasingly mediated
by widely available, relatively inexpensive technologies, rather than by technologies embedded
in traditional institutions. Thus democratic knowledge is often outside institutional filtering processes.
This is both its strength and its weakness.”
4.0
25
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
th5.
0
How is knowledge being organised? How is it
applied when it comes to policy making? Timing
and verification of knowledge as input is crucial.
As a knowledge economy aimed at an increasing
intensity of knowledge in production, the concept
of knowledge democracy concerns issues that
relate to the intensification of knowledge in
politics. How can scientific knowledge and
citizens’ science both be utilised in processes
within politics? How can conflicts between both
types of knowledge be solved? How is knowledge
translated into policy-making? The gap between
knowledge and policy-making processes seems to
be widening. Moreover, scientists who prepare
knowledge for policy-making are sometimes
influenced or even threatened to ‘adjust’ their
conclusions if they are not in line with what policy
makers expect. How independent is knowledge?
When it comes to knowledge producers, where do
civil organisations come in? Do they require
involvement in knowledge production, in order to
ensure that it suits their needs and can make a
contribution to a better living of certain groups or
society as a whole?
The existence of a gap between knowledge and
politics does not seem to be the only one, the gap
between politicians and public seems to be
widening too. Political parties fulfil important
roles when it comes down to agenda setting and
programming societal opportunities; a clear
responsibility towards implementing solutions for
societal problems. What will their role be in the
future? How will these gaps develop?
August 25th 14.10 - 14.50 Academy Building
5.0 Defining Knowledge Democracy: an introduction
Keynote Speaker dr. Silvio Funtowicz, Scientific Officer, Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen (IPSC) of the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, Italy
Co-referent prof. Roeland J. in ‘t Veld, Chair of the RMNO, the Netherlands
Silvio Funtowicz*: “Science now has to cope with irreducible uncertainties in knowledge and
ethics, and complexity, implying the legitimacy of a plurality of perspectives and ways of
knowing. In this way its practice is becoming more akin to the workings of a democratic society,
characterised by extensive participation and tolerance of diversity.There are now many initiatives for
involving wider circles of people in knowledge production and decision-making. In these processes, the
maintenance of scientific quality (a core commitment of post-normal science) depends on an open
dialogue between all those involved. This dialogue takes place in an extended peer community, consisting
not merely of persons with some form or other of institutional accreditation, but rather of all those with a
desire to participate in the resolution of the relevant issues. Since this context of science is one involving
policy and action, we might see this extension of peer communities as analogous to earlier extensions of
the franchise in other fields, such as women’s suffrage and trade union rights.”
*The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent necessarily those of the European Commission
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
n
26Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Firs
t Im
pres
sion
s |
Plen
ary
sess
ion
0.0
Rudy Rabbinge is chair of several national and
international organisations. He is deputy
chairman of the Commission for Environmental
Assessment (MER), the Netherlands, chair of the
Science Council of the Consultative Group on
International Agricultural Research (CGIAR, Italy/
USA), he is chair of the Board Earth and Life
Sciences (ALW) of the Organization for Scientific
Research (NWO), the Netherlands, chair of the
Council of Earth and Life Sciences of the Royal
Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
(KNAW) and other organisations. He is also
Professor in Sustainable Development and Food
Security at Wageningen University and Research
Centre and Advisor to the Executive Board of this
university. Rudy Rabbinge is member of
numerous national and international organisa-
tions, such as the Executive Committee of the
Asia Rice Foundation, Thailand, the International
Advisory Board of TransForum Agro & Groen, the
Netherlands, the Executive Board of the Centre for
World Food Studies, the Scientific Programme
Indonesia-the Netherlands (SPIN) and the
Supervisory Committee of the National Institute
for Public Health and Environment (RIVM), the
Netherlands.
He has several distinctions to his name, among
which the Knight in the Order of the Netherlands
Lion, the Knight in the Order of Oranje-Nassau
and Honorary Professor of the Chinese Academy
of Agricultural Sciences. He is also Board Member
of the Directors Alliance for a Green Revolution in
Africa.
Rudy Rabbinge studied biology and crop
protection at the Wageningen University and
Research Centre. He conducted his PhD in
agricultural and environmental sciences at the
same university. He has written over 200
scientific publications (international A-refereed
journals), 5 text books, more than 250 other
publications, and reports.
August 25th 14.50 - 14.55 Academy Building
First impressions by the chair of the first conference day
prof. ir. Rudy Rabbinge, Advisor Executive Board of Wageningen University and Research
Centre, the Netherlands
14.55 - 15.15 COFFEE BREAK AND WALK TO KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Rudy Rabbinge: “Knowledge democracy means better access and understanding of knowledge
in different fields without full background innformation. Every interested layman should be in a
position to participate in discussions on dilemma ‘s and ethical choices.”
27
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
th
17.15 - 17.30 WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
1.1
How is future research being (ab)used currently,
and what trends can we forecast? What are the
strengths and major win-win scenarios of future
research? What are the threats and to which
extent do the weaknesses of future research
dominate its use? How does this affect govern-
ment and the public domain? Where do we see
opportunities and how can these be addressed?
In this session the keynote speaker and
co-referent of the plenary meeting will answer
questions about their introductions, and discuss
experiences with other panel speakers.
In addition panel speakers will give their views,
based on the wide range of their experiences.
August 25th 15.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
1.1 Problems and Opportunities
Chair prof. Herman Eijsackers, Chair of the Scientific Advisory Board, Wageningen University and Research Centre and Chief Scientific Officer at the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality (LNV), the Netherlands
Panel prof. Marjolein van Asselt, Maastricht University and Council Member of the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
dr. Ewald Breunesse, Manager Energy Transitions, Shell Netherlands, the Netherlands
dr. Patrick van der Duin, Assistant Professor, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
prof. Julie Thompson Klein, Wayne State University, USA
Herman Eijsackers: “It is not so much the problem ‘that everybody knows everything’, yet too
many people thínk to know everything. Therefore, “knowledge assessment” i.e. the valuation of
information, is going to be a fundamental activity in the following years, regardless for which
scientific, political or social group this is intended.”
Them
e 1:
Kno
wle
dge
& F
utur
e R
esea
rch
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
28Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on2.
1
This session deals with a broad range of topics,
setting the stage for more in-depth discussion in
subsequent sessions. How and why did transdis-
ciplinary research emerge? How did it develop
over the past decades? And where are we now with
respect to the epistemological, methodological
and organisational challenges it raises? Do we
have proof of concept with respect to transdisci-
plinary research? What are issues for future
research?
In this session the keynote speaker and
co-referent of the plenary meeting will answer
questions about their introductions, and discuss
experiences with other panel speakers.
In addition panel speakers will give their views,
from the wide range of their experience, on the
issues of the morning.
August 25th 15.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.1 Transdisciplinary Research: Its Possibilities and Limitations
Chair dr. Jacqueline Broerse, Head of Science Communication, Athena Institute at VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Panel prof. Joske Bunders, Director, Athena Institute at VU University Amsterdam and Council Member of the RMNO, the Netherlands
dr. Thomas Jahn, Senior Scientist, Co-founder and Executive Director, Institute for Social Ecological Research (ISOE), Germany
prof. Chris Peterson, Michigan State University Product Center for Agriculture and Natural Resources, USA
prof. Roland Scholz, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zürich), Switzerland
17.15 - 17.30 WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
Chris Peterson: “As the knowledge needed to enhance performance moves from explicit to
tacit to new, the supply chain governance structure must move from exchange governance to
learning governance to transformational governance.”
29
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
th3.
1
In this session the keynote speaker and
co-referent of the plenary meeting will answer
questions about their introductions, and discuss
experiences with the audience.
Transdisciplinary knowledge development is
useful when the nature of a problem is such, that
it may only be adequately dealt with through a)
crossing disciplinary boundaries and b) inte-
grating formal and “real life” knowledge. In many
cases, this reflects a discrepancy between
contemporary problems and formal disciplinary
knowledge as this has historically co-evolved with
previous types of problems. Understanding the
rationale for transdisciplinary research in this
particular way sheds additional light on the issue.
August 25th 15.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
3.1 Boundary Work and Transition Management
Chair prof. Robert Hoppe, University of Twente, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Christian Pohl, Co-Director of transdisciplinarity-net and Lecturer and Senior Researcher at the Swiss Academy of Arts and Sciences, Switzerland
prof. John Grin, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Robert Hoppe: “We only imperfectly understand the world’s complexity, yet want to shape
it to our ideals. This condemns us to permanent trial-and-error learning. The competition of
experiments creates myriads of problems that need to be made governable somehow, in order
for the trials not to result in self-destructive errors. Good governance of problems entails democracy,
which is, like almost everything else we do, a form of cooperation between laymen and experts. Therefore,
at first sight, ‘knowledge democracy’ looks like an oxymoron. But, on some reflection, it is not! The notion
expresses the never-ending challenge to maximise the intelligence of democracy by fostering mutually
creative links between the wisdom of the crowds and innovative expert knowledge in intelligent, fast, and
sustainable trial-and-error learning.”
Them
e 3:
Pra
ctic
al A
ppro
ache
s to
Bou
ndar
y W
ork
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
17.15 - 17.30 WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
30Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
4.1
What do we know about the roles of ‘old’ and
‘new’ media, and about the interaction between
them? What are the challenges of the changes in
the media landscape for knowledge producers and
users: for scientists and for policy makers? Will
the new media in itself provide a new instrument
for processes of democratic decision making?
In this session the keynote speaker and
co-referent of the plenary meeting will answer
questions about their introductions, and discuss
experiences with panel speakers.
In addition panel speakers will give their views,
from the wide range of their experience, on the
issues of the morning.
August 25th 15.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.1 Old and New Media living apart Together?
Co-hosted by the Virtual Knowledge Studio
Chair prof. Franciska de Jong, University of Twente, Managing Director, Virtual Knowledge Studio at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and Member of the Governing Board of the Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), the Netherlands
Panel David Clements MPA, Vice President, Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, Canada
dr. Jill Harrison, Post-doctoral Fellow, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA
dr. Caroline Nevejan, Independent Researcher & Designer and Visiting Fellow at VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
prof. John Ryan, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA
17.15 - 17.30 WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
David Clements: “Knowledge Democracy embodies the hope of progress on the problem of
uncertainty of medical care. While healthcare professionals will always be the primary holders
of the specialised information needed to deliver high-quality care, “democratising knowledge”
requires acceptance of the important knowledge and expertise held by policymakers and the public as well.”
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on
31
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
thTh
eme
4: M
edia
, Pol
itic
s an
d K
now
ledg
e Fl
ow
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
17.15 - 17.30 WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
4.2
On the Internet, there is an explosion of knowl-
edge networks and web communities around
social, health or environmental issues. In these
networks individuals share practical knowledge,
ideas, tools and/or social contacts that are
important for the quality of their work or personal
life. Initiatives are mostly started by professionals
or civilians and sometimes by scientists. More
cooperation between these actors is needed to
ensure long term succes for these networks and
communities. This a real challenge because
different values, visions, interests and languages
are involved. What makes a knowledge network
successful?
In this session, new and best practices will be
presented. Forms and roles to share and organise
knowledge will be discussed. The main question
is: who is or what is the role of the facilitator?
For every participant there will be a simple Self
Test which helps to reflect on how to organise and
share knowledge in networks and communities.
August 25th 15.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.2 Knowledge Sharing: Who is the Facilitator?
Chair drs. Anja van der Aa, Entrepreneur, Platform Chains and Networks, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Arina Angerman, Director, Network Social Initiatives (NSI) Province South-Holland, the Netherlands
Heleen Bouwmans, Member of the Steering Group Chain Alliance and Manager at Education Advisory Group The ABC, the Netherlands
drs. Jos de Groen, Senior Advisor Knowledge Directorate, Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW), the Netherlands
drs. Gert de Haan, Facilitator, Knowledge Network The Black Hole, the Netherlands
dr. Henk Nies, Chief Executive Officer, Vilans, the Netherlands
Anja van der Aa: “Knowledge democracy is access to knowledge for every individual and
organising a open forum for knowledge sharing. Knowledge democracy supports personal and
professional problem-solving and decision making with IT facilities. The IT facilities are owned or
controlled by a Third Trusted Party.”
32Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
5.1
As a knowledge economy aimed at an increasing
intensity of knowledge in production, the concept
of knowledge democracy concerns issues that
relate to the intensification of knowledge in
politics. Bottlenecks that threaten optimal
trajectories between the realm of politics and
policy-making are: the political agenda may not
correspond with the existing policy theories that
are embraced by the top civil servants within the
ministries, the translation of policy questions into
knowledge demand may prove to be extremely
difficult, inconvenient newly produced knowledge
will probably not be applied in policy-making,
research will produce knowledge in the future but
the need is urgent now, so there is a general
problem of timeliness. How to align?
How do supervisors and regulators deal with
citizens’ science? A number of questions concern
the functioning of the democratic institutions
themselves as far as the application of knowledge
is involved. How do parliaments not only use
knowledge but also produce knowledge? How do
parliaments deal with their dependence on
information from ministries?
In this session the keynote speaker and
co-referent of the plenary meeting will answer
questions about their introductions, and discuss
experiences with panel speakers.
In addition panel speakers will give their views,
from the wide range of their experience, on the
issues of the morning.
August 25th 15.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.1 Policy Experimentation & Academic Accountability
Co-hosted by Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
Chair prof. Wim van de Donk, Chair, Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
Panel dr. Arwin van Buuren, Assistant Professor, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
dr. Silvio Funtowicz, Scientific Officer, Institute for the Protection and Security of Citizen (IPSC) at the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, Italy
Stella van Rijn MBA, PhD Researcher, Nyenrode Business University, The Netherlands
prof. Katrien Termeer, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
prof. Roeland J. in ’t Veld, Chair, RMNO, the Netherlands
prof. Dirk J. Wolfson, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Wim van de Donk: “Democracy, essentially, is about learning. Learning demands variety.
Variety breeds sustainable wisdom.”
17.15 - 17.30 WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
33
Tues
da
y, A
ug
ust
25
th5.
2
From the moment sociology took itself seriously,
its practitioners have, roughly speaking, travelled
two different roads. The first started out of
pessimism about the possibility of an unmediated
representation. The second began with optimism
about the possibility of finding universal laws.
They led to respectively micro and macrosociolo-
gies. Some critics however claim that both led to
nothing. Be as it may, a crisis in sociology is felt
repetitively. Nowadays the problem of representa-
tion is still alive, not only in sociology but in
democracy as well.
There is an analogy between social sciences and
democracy. Both have a habit of using closed
questionnaires on which either citizen or
respondent can chose only one alternative. But in
sociology, the difference between quantitative
and qualitative methods is decreasing, offering
possibilities to engage large amounts of
participants in research with the same depth
earlier reserved for small scale analysis. Does this
offer new perspectives for democracy as well?
In this session, we discuss the outlines of a
mesosociology. The ‘public’, as an in-between unit
of analysis, is a key concept. Methods discussed
are based on narrative research and transdiscipli-
nary production of meaning. Can they make the
research process democratic and do their
outcomes offer opportunities for social and
political change?
August 25th 15.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.2 Researching Publics
Chair dr. Floor Basten, Owner and Researcher, OrléoN, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Lex de Boer, Director of the Steering Committee for Experiments in Public Housing (SEV), the Netherlands
drs. Albert Cath, Owner, Narratio Knowledge and Advice and PhD Researcher at the University for Humanistic, the Netherlands
dr. Jurgen van der Heijden, Senior Consultant Sustainability, AT Osborne Consultants and Managers, the Netherlands
drs. Maurits Kreijveld, Project Manager, Study Centre for Technology Trends (STT), the Netherlands
dr. Noortje Marres, Research Fellow, University of Oxford, UK
drs. Anne-Marie Poorthuis, Director, Contemporary Connections Foundation for Network Development (Stichting Eigentijdse Verbindingen), the Netherlands
drs. Erik Schrijvers, Scientific Officer, Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
Floor Basten: “Dutch society is highly educated and the Dutch government aims at creating a
knowledge society. Multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary research are becoming increasingly
popular and more and more – also fundamental – research takes place outside the context of
universities. Outcomes of these types of research sometimes find their way to the policy arena, but exit
easily under the government monopoly in policy relevance. In a knowledge democracy, a government
does not focus solely on knowledge outcomes of universities and other state-financed institutes, but also
pays attention to broader knowledge producing publics.”
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
34Tu
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
5th
Spee
ch
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
n Jacqueline Cramer went on after her secondary
education to the University of Arkansas (USA),
where she studied philosophy from 1969 to 1970.
She subsequently studied biology at the
University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
graduating in 1976. In 1987 she obtained her
doctorate in social sciences at the same
university with a thesis on Missio-orientation in
ecology: the case of Dutch freshwater ecology.
Jacqueline Cramer was a lecturer at the University
of Amsterdam from 1976 to 1989, first in the
Biology and Society Department and then in the
Dynamics of Science teaching and research unit.
From 1989 to 1995 she was senior researcher at
the Centre for Technology and Policy Studies of
the Netherlands Organisation for Applied
Scientific Research (STB-TNO). From 1990 to
1996 she was also professor of Environmental
Science at the University of Amsterdam, followed
by three years as professor of environmental
management at the University of Tilburg, the
Netherlands.
In 1999 she started working as a freelance
environmental consultant. She was also professor
of Environmental Management in organisations
at the Erasmus University Rotterdam, the
Netherlands from 1999 to 2005, and until 2007,
professor of Sustainable Enterprise at Copernicus
Institute of the University of Utrecht, the
Netherlands.
Jacqueline Cramer was a crown-appointed
member of the Social and Economic Council (SER),
the Netherlands. She has also been a member of
the Supervisory Board of the World Wide Fund for
Nature (WWF), the University of Maastricht and
Arnhem-Nijmegen University, the Council for
Transport, Public Works and Water Management,
council member of the RMNO and the supervisory
Committee of the National Institute of Public
Health and the Environment (RIVM) and chair of
the Residents and Sustainable Construction
Forum, the Netherlands. She has been a member
of the Supervisory Boards of a number of
organisations, including Shell Netherlands, ASN
Bank, the Netherlands and the Development
Finance Company (FMO), the Netherlands.
On 22 February 2007 Jacqueline Cramer was
appointed Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning
and the Environment (VROM) in the fourth
government of the Prime Minister Balkenende.
August 25th 17.30 - 17.50 Academy Building
Speech
Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM)
dr. Jacqueline Cramer, Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, the Netherlands
17.50 - 19.00 RECEPTION @ THE FORMER UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
19.00 - 22.00 DINNER @ THE FORMER UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
35
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th
In 1882, Heike Kamerlingh Onnes (then 29 years
old) was appointed in Leiden as professor of
experimental physics. He was not only a brilliant
scientist, but also a thorough research manager.
On his initiative, the dusty laboratory on the
canal was transformed into one of the most
advanced research laboratories in the world. He
created a new laboratory-style in which research
and education were intertwined.
Kamerlingh Onnes was in 1908 the first to
succeed in liquifying helium gas on the lowest
critical temperature, for which he received the
Nobel Prize in 1913.
August 26th 08.30 - 09.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Registration
Reg
istr
atio
n To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
36W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
Wra
p-up
of t
he fi
rst
conf
eren
ce d
ay
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
n
Roeland in ’t Veld is Chair of the Advisory Council
for Research on Spatial Planning, Nature and the
Environment (RMNO). He is professor at the Open
University of the Netherlands, professor of Good
Governance at the University of the Netherlands
Antilles. Furthermore, he is a member of the
Supervisory Board of Netherlands Knowledge
Country and Commissioner for IBM The
Netherlands, HSK Group and President
Commissioner of Prorail. Roeland in ’t Veld has
editorial responsibility for a wide range of
publications, including works on process
management and the Handbook on ‘Corporate
Governance’.
In the past Roeland in ’t Veld has held positions
such as Director General for Higher Education and
Scientific Research at the Ministry of Education,
Culture and Science, Secretary of State for
Education and Science and Chair of the
Supervisory Board of the IB Group. He was also
Dean of the Netherlands School for Public
Administration (NSOB) and Rector of SIOO, the
Interuniversity Centre for Development in the field
of Organisation and Change Management.
August 26th 09.15 - 09.25 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Wrap-up of the first conference day
prof. Roeland J. in ‘t Veld, Chair, RMNO, the Netherlands
Roeland in ‘t Veld: “Speaking truth to power is complicated considerably by the tensions
between politics, science and media. Does it take three to tango in this problematique?”
37
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th
Koos van der Steenhoven became Permanent
Secretary of the Ministry of Education, Culture
and Science in 2003. While he was still studying
political science at the VU University in
Amsterdam, he already began his career in
education. After two years of teaching civics to
pre-university pupils in The Hague, he gave in to
the attraction of politics and became personal
assistant to several Members of Parliament for
the Christian-Democratic Party. In 1981 he
became political assistant to Culture and Welfare
State Secretary, later Minister, De Boer as well as
political assistant to Culture, Welfare and Health
Minister Brinkman.
In 1985 he became Director for Radio, Television
and Press at the then Ministry of Culture, Welfare
and Health. In 1987 he became Deputy
Permanent Secretary of the same Ministry and he
remained at this post till 1992. Before being
appointed, in 2003, to his current post as
Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Education,
Culture and Science, he worked outside of politics
and government for a period of 10 years. During
this period he was Director for Harbour Innovation
at the Municipal Port Company of Rotterdam and
Director of the expert centre “Het Expertise
Centrum” (HEC) in The Hague.
August 26th 09.25 - 09.45 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Introduction by the chair of the second conference day
drs. Koos van der Steenhoven, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW), the Netherlands
Intr
oduc
tion
by
the
chai
r of
the
sec
ond
conf
eren
ce d
ay
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
n
38W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
Tran
sdis
cipl
inar
y Sc
hola
rshi
p |
Plen
ary
sess
ion
Governments, businesses, and societal organisa-
tions are faced with a dizzying array of “wicked
problems,” characterised by: no definitive problem
formulation; no true or false solution, but only
better or worse outcomes; stakeholders with
radically different frames of reference.
Sustainability, terrorism, and global warming are
but a few of the most critical and most pressing.
Knowledge institutions are expected by these
other partners to assist in the creation and
application of knowledge to manage these wicked
problems. Yet traditional disciplinary scholarship
has neither the scope nor active engagement with
the world of practice to be effective with such
problems. Progress in managing wicked problems
demands both having impact on the diverse
elements and system components of the problem,
and engaging the critical stakeholders deeply
involved with the problem (who can block as well
as enable action). The co-creation of new
knowledge among the stakeholders thus becomes
essential to progress. New knowledge (from new
paradigms) holds the potential to convert
seemingly unyielding tradeoffs into breakthrough
innovations where the tradeoffs can become
complements. The keys to the process include (1)
knowledge democracy—the engagement of the
explicit and tacit knowledge of all stakeholders
(scholars, practitioners and citizens) with their
willingness to create new knowledge together, and
(2) transdisciplinary scholarship that brings the
best knowledge and methods from all the
disciplines relevant to the problem, and generates
new knowledge and methods through the
democratic process. Transdisciplinary scholarship
can thus play a critical role in creating new
knowledge and transforming it into engaged
action.
August 26th 09.45 - 10.20 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Transdisciplinary Scholarship
prof. Chris Peterson, Michigan State University Product Center for Agriculture and Natural Resources, USA
Chris Peterson: “As the knowledge needed to enhance performance moves from explicit to
tacit to new, the supply chain governance structure must move from exchange governance to
learning governance to transformational governance.”
39
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th
David Stanners will introduce a “Framework for
Evaluating Complex Scientific Evidence”, developed
by the European Environment Agency (EEA). The
framework is based upon a simplified list of
“criteria” for moving from association to
causation. It takes into account the main
limitations of the criteria-based approach to
evidence evaluation, and uses a simplified “levels
of proof “ continuum, based on the IPCC approach
to climate change evidence. The framework may
help different stakeholders to arrive at some
provisional and “negotiated” or “shared truths”
regarding complex policy issues.”
August 26th 10.20 - 10.45 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Evaluating Evidence
dr. David Stanners, Head of International Cooperation at the European Environment Agency, Denmark
10.45 - 11.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Eval
uati
ng E
vide
nce
| Pl
enar
y se
ssio
n
40W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
1.2
Them
e 1:
Kno
wle
dge
& F
utur
e R
esea
rch
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
Horizon Scanning is a method for getting an
overview of possible future developments that are
relevant for strategic policy-making.For the
Horizon Scanning project in the Netherlands,
information was gathered about possible future
developments in leading domains, a number of
essays highlight the views on future develop-
ments. The main question is, to what extent does
horizon scanning provide useful information for
scientists, policy-makers and society at large?
What are the experiences with horizon scanning
or similar methods in other countries? How is this
methodology being linked to future users and to
what point are they actually able to use the
results in their work? In other words, to which
extent is horizon scanning useful for public and
private policy makers? Does a horizon scan that is
not interactive or deliberative in the process,
make sense?
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
1.2 Scanning the Horizon
Co-hosted by Study Centre for Technology Trends (STT), the Netherlands
Chair ir. Hans van der Veen, Director, Study Centre for Technology Trends (STT), the Netherlands
Panel Anders Jacobi, Project Manager, Danish Board of Technology, Denmark
prof. Paul Rademaker, Founder and Chair, Network for Future Research (NTV), the Netherlands
Alun Rhydderch, Project Manager, Foresight Horizon Scanning Centre, Government Office for Science, UK
prof. Wim de Ridder, Chair, Faculty Management of Governance, University of Twente, the Netherlands
drs. Victor van Rij, Senior Advisor, Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW), the Netherlands
Hans van der Veen: “Knowledge democracy can lead to an open space for discussions
between governement and people.”
13.00 - 14.15 LUNCH @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
41
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th2.
2
When landscapes, seen as socio-ecological
systems, are the outcome of the interplay
between natural and human processes. Human
interventions alter the physical landscape. These
interventions are influenced by value perceptions
about the ecological, social and economical
returns. Regional projects are also driven and
sometimes altered by knowledge of global
systems, for example global warming or the
financial crisis. The processes that shape regional
projects inevitably involve multiple actors and in
democracies they can therefore best be described
as collaborative planning and design processes.
This is sometimes in stark contrast to the abstract
technical knowledge that forms input for these
processes.
This symposium explores the role of knowledge in
the processes that shape regional landscapes. To
attain this goal the following questions will be
answered:
· how does scientific knowledge facilitate the
collaborative decision process and assist in
answering the why, how and where to change
questions?
· what makes knowledge acceptable, credible
and relevant to local actors?
· how does the knowledge structure affect the
course of the collaborative process? For
example, with respect to water systems, how is
knowledge about the relationship between the
physical structure of the water system and its
functioning used in decisions about adapting
the water system to climate change
· how are knowledge of economic, social and
environmental systems integrated?
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.2 Creating the Landscape: Scientific Knowledge in Regional Case Studies
Co-hosted by Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
Chair prof. Paul Opdam, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Gerhard Dekker, Head of Research & Statistics Department, City Almere, the Netherlands
drs. Shantala Morlans, Antropologist, College of Agronomy of Clermont Ferrand (Enitac) and Member of Research Unit UMR Métafort, France
dr. Eveline Steingröver, Senior Researcher, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
drs. Lambert Verheijen, Dikereef, Aa and Maas Water Board, the Netherlands
Paul Opdam: “Knowledge democracy describes the principle that generic scientific knowledge
is made available to decision makers and stakeholders involved in change processes, and
combined with case-specific and local knowledge provided by the actors involved. This results in
knowledge creation during which the scientific knowledge gains in credibility, saliency and legitimacy to
its users.”
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on
13.00 - 14.15 LUNCH @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
42W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
2.3
Transdisciplinary research is said to democratise
knowledge production as it tries to (re-)build
relations between science and society by means
of stakeholder involvement. Typically one can
distinguish two epistemological paths: one to
gain transformation strategies for the societal
problem at hand and the other to cope with the
methodological challenges of integrating different
disciplinary approaches. In this session two
propositions are for development strategies. A
model in which the societal process of production
of knowledge for sustainable development is
described as a transdisciplinary research process
will be presented. On this basis a concretisation of
the model is discussed which shows how an
explicit and reflexive understanding of transdisci-
plinarity can help cope with issues such as the
integration of knowledge and people, the
formulation of expectations and the establish-
ment of quality criteria. Next a ‘methodology of
the evidential’ will be presented. Based on the
epistemological starting points of different
scientific methodologies, a methodology to
research, but moreover to support organisational
development is presented.
What implications do these development
strategies and new ways of knowledge production
and problem solving have for higher education?
How do we train our future leaders? What kind of
education do we need to provide for students to
become competent in knowledge integration and
boundary work? How can they learn to contribute
to organisational and societal development for
sustainable development?
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.3 Transdisciplinary Research: Its Contribution to Problem Solving and the Consequences for Higher Education
Chair prof. Joske Bunders, Director, Athena Institute, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands and Council Member of the RMNO, the Netherlands
Panel dr. ir. Marcel van Gogh, Education Developer and Lecturer, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
mr. Ben Verleg, Top Advisor, City of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
dr. Florian Keil, Senior Scientist and Project Coordinator, Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE), Germany
drs. Barbara Regeer, Assistant Professor, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
dr. Coyan Tromp,Curriculum Developer and Lecturer, Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies of the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Ben Verleg: “We need dialogue and reflection for using knowledge effectively. It just doesn’t
make sense to keep your knowledge for yourself. Knowledge democracy is sensemaking in
democratic organisations.”
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on
43
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
thTh
eme
3: P
ract
ical
App
roac
hes
to B
ound
ary
Wor
k |
Para
llel s
essi
on3.
2
Citizen participation methodology has proven
itself in terms of its ability to carry different kinds
of knowledge, values, interests, and policy
assessments into decision-making. Although this
methodology is free from built-in dilemmas, need
for pragmatism and problems to be solved, there
is a general consensus that the bottom line is
positive. At the national level numerous citizen
consultations have been executed and at the
trans-national level, an increasing number of
experiments are being carried out. However, it is
striking that even with a two-decade record of
relative success, citizen participation based policy
advice must be characterised as a discipline of
one-off events.
Why is that? What would we gain from having
citizen participation mainstreamed? What risks
would it involve? What would be the restrictions
on mainstreaming citizen participation – geog-
raphy, economy, political will and courage,
ideological resistance…?
This session embraces three presentations,
followed by a triangle talk, an open discussion
and a wall of points: everybody can make a point
or question and put it on the wall – the wall will be
transcribed and reported in the workshop paper.
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
3.2 Mainstreaming Citizen Participation
Co-hosted by the Danish Board of Technology, Denmark
Chair dr. Lars Klüver, Director, Danish Board of Technology, Denmark
Panel dr. Elie Faroult, Scientific Officer, European Commission, Belgium
prof. Robert Hoppe, University of Twente, the Netherlands
dr. Tore Tennøe, Director, Norwegian Board of Technology, Norway
Lars Klüver: “Knowledge democracy is about constructive inclusion of diversity; it must
include procedures for participation that go far beyond voting. The methods for a knowledge
democracy are in place – it is the intention we need.”
13.00 - 14.15 LUNCH @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
44W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
4.3
How are politics, business and media dealing with
all the different knowledge flows? This session
focuses on the interpretation of policy-relevant
knowledge by the media. Who has the lead? Who
controls selection and when does selection
become manipulation? What can go wrong when
translating scientific knowledge into articles,
quotes, and (sound)bites for the general public,
and how does this influence democratic decision
making?
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.3 Lost in Translation
Cohosted by the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality (LNV), the Netherlands
Chair prof. ir. Klaas van Egmond, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
Panel Hans van Brussel, Head of Communications, CBS Statistics, the Netherlands
dr. Janneke Hoekstra, Director Knowledge Department, Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality (LNV), the Netherlands
Hanns-J. Neubert, President, European Science Journalists Organisation (EUSJA), France
Hans Wansink, Commentator of newspaper De Volkskrant, the Netherlands
Janneke Hoekstra: “Knowledge democracy: everybody has access to abundant information
and adds to it. The media present facts and figures in strong colours. The political and social
debate follow.”
Hanns-J. Neubert: “In times of information overflow it is most important that all people are
put into the position to gain and acquire knowledge in learning how to handle and integrate
informational bits and pieces. However, knowledge is not necessarily a ticket for the ability to
contribute to democratic processes, it can even foster authoritarian developments. Knowledge has to
exceed its own borders and lead to literacy – an improper translation of the German term “Bildung” – of
all people, which effectuates passion, sympathy, tolerance and interest, which are prerequisites of real
democracy.”
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on
13.00 - 14.15 LUNCH @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
45
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th
Scott Douglas: “Knowledge democracy can easily deteriorate into a soap opera transmitting
nothing but gossip. It will require effective institutions to put the information to work without
stifling the knowledge flow.”
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on4.
4
The Internet undoubtedly changed the world.
Never before has it been so easy to obtain, share
and use a vast amount of knowledge. Rapidly
producing information overloads and clear
knowledge underloads. Furthermore the Internet
created the knowledge- and network society in
which we now live. In this society new rules for
knowledge apply. The youngest generation
(‘screenagers’) play a big part in this changing
world of knowledge.
What is the impact of all of these changes for
science and politics, both knowledge sensitive
areas? Is it already impossible to secure the use of
valid and valuable knowledge? How does
networking – by means of the Internet – affect
knowledge sharing? What are the risks for the
– lack of – quality of knowledge? How does
knowledge sharing affect science? Are there
tensions between generations in the way they use
knowledge?
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.4 Network Knowledge Society - Effects for Science & Politics
Chair drs. Marinka Voorhout, Director Academy and Principal Consultant, KBenP, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Chris Aalberts, Lecturer, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
dr. Aart Bontekoning, cmc, Organisational Psychologist, MAGMA, the Netherlands
Scott Douglas MPhil, Consultant, Berenschot, the Netherlands and PhD Student at the University of Oxford, UK
prof. Felix Janszen, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
drs. Maurits Kreijveld, Project Manager, Study Centre for Technology Trends (STT), the Netherlands
drs. ir. Nic Moens, Manager and Lead Facilitator, International Institute for Communication and Development, the Netherlands
13.00 - 14.15 LUNCH @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
46W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
5.3
To what extent is scientific knowledge used in the
parliament when it comes to political formation of
judgements? Does political decision-making take
place on the basis of new scientific insights? Or
are they two separate worlds? Do Members of
Parliament have the time to consult studies and
articles? Do Members of Parliament speak with
Scientists and -if so- who takes the initiative? Or
do we speak of a distant relation in which
Members of Parliament are tempted to fall into
the habit of ‘selective shopping’ in scientific
reports?
In addition, the participants reflect on the
similarities and differences between processes of
scientific truth finding and political truth finding.
What exactly are the differences between
researches of the House of Representatives and
researches of Academic Project Groups when
consulting on the same topic?
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.3 Production and Use of Knowledge in the Political Realm
Co-hosted by the Institute for Social Innovation (IMI), the Netherlands
Chair mr. Guido Enthoven, Director, Institute for Social Innovation, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Paul Kalma, Member of Parliament, House of Representatives, the Netherlands
Hans Licht cmc, Director and Senior Management Consultant, Org-Link and Scholar on the Swedish Parliamentary System, Sweden
prof. Uri Rosenthal, Leiden University and Senator, the Netherlands
drs. Roos Vermeij, Member of Parliament, House of Representatives, the Netherlands
dr. Mei Li Vos, Member of Parliament, House of Representatives, the Netherlands
13.00 - 14.15 LUNCH @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Guido Enthoven: “The power of democracy is to learn; to move with more and better ideas
slowly but surely towards ‘the best of all possible worlds.”
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
47
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th
David Laws: “Asking a question is an action, which can be reflected upon morally and ethically,
as well as practically. Knowledge democracy is the terrain where these forms of reflection
cannot be kept apart or done without. It generates an imperative for such reflection in the
practices through which we take action on the substantive problems, concerns, and aspirations that
constitute this terrain.”
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
5.4
Efforts to develop and implement policy in
science-intensive arenas regularly bring citizens
and scientists together in negotiations over
controversial questions about action. Familiar
moorings in role definitions like expert and
laymen or citizen are often destabilised by the
controversy and basic points of orientation, like
the definition of a stakeholder. Consultation in
such settings is unlikely to be a straightforward
process, in which turning to the facts resolves the
controversy, but instead a (potentially)
generative episode in which the grounding and
limits of knowledge claims, the manner in which
implications for action are drawn, and the
moral-political significance of features like risk
and uncertainty are challenged.
In the best of circumstances, such contestation
has prompted reflection by both scientists and
citizens on their respective roles and responsibili-
ties as stakeholders and provided hints about
what it would mean to democratise the boundary
between the practices of science and citizenship.
The goal of this session is to reflect on such
institutional arrangements as designs for relating
scientists and citizens in negotiations over policy
action. The speakers will present institutions as
designs and compare how these arrangements
shape the roles that are available to scientists
and citizens, the way these roles are related to
each other and to raise questions about what
action to take, and the opportunities they provide
to dispute and rework these critical features of
policy practice. The speakers will present case
studies of science-intensive policy practice from
Europe and the U.S. and, in discussion with one
another, analyse the dynamics that shape
experiments with new designs for relating
scientists and citizens as stakeholders in policy
action and frame an agenda for research into the
interaction between scientific and policy practice.
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.4 Scientists as Citizens: Citizens as Scientists
Co-hosted by the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Chair dr. David Laws, Senior Lecturer, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Olivier Barreteau, Senior Water Scientist, Cemagre, France and Scholar in Residence, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
drs. Mike Duijn, Senior Researcher, TNO Built Environment and GeoSciences, the Netherlands
dr. Herman Karl, Co-Director, MIT-USGS Science Impact Collaborative of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
dr. ir. Laurens Klerkx, Assistant Professor, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
48W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
5.5
It is often conjectured that the political domain
hardly meets the ideal conditions for a ‘learner
friendly environment’. The collective nature of
politics, short time horizons, institutional density
of policymaking, power asymmetries, and the
complexity and opacity of politics all present
serious problems for government and policy
learning. Power considerations and group interest
mobilisation, manipulating intelligence and
information in ways that lend them political
advantage, effectively drive out the dimension
“puzzling” in the policy process. In the workshop
on Policy Experimentation, Social Learning and
Political Accountability we take issue with the
“blinkered” mainstream view of politics of
information and ideas as merely resources to
bolster standing power and interest positions.
Elections are the mechanisms that enforce that
responsiveness. Democratic leaders have a strong
motive to solve societal problems before they
fester and grow. As politics embodies strife over
ideas and best courses of action, some form of
evaluation or learning is always present.
Moreover, policy actors engaged in profound
reform have to convince other political actors and
the public of the plausibility and legitimacy of the
ideas through argument and persuasion. What
could be a preferred line of inquiry is to analyse
the inherent connections between “powering” and
“puzzling” in the policy process, and to critically
recognize how problem-situations are occasioned
by the inability of established policy repertoires
to meet established expectations, under the new
social, political and economic conditions. This
minimally shows how policy actors update their
normative and cognitive orientations in the face
of new challenges. In this workshop we touch on
two institutional dimension which shape
processes of policy learning. These concern, on
the one hand, dilemmas of (horizontal) policy
experimentation in the shadow of (vertical)
political accountability. Can we think of
‘framework’ political rules for enabling effective
policy experimentation? The second dimension
concerns the wider institutional conditions for
fostering policy learning, such as societal changes
in prevailing normative and cognitive orienta-
tions. Examples are taken from the recent
experience of US and EU welfare policy and social
services.
August 26th 11.15 - 13.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.5 Policy Experimentation, Social Learning, and Political Accountability
Co-hosted by the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
prof. Anton Hemerijck, Director of the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
prof. Charles Sabel, Columbia University, USA
13.00 - 14.15 LUNCH @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
49
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
thTh
eme
1: K
now
ledg
e &
Fut
ure
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on1.
3
(Re)new(ed) insight in the future is apparent from
the increase in future studies. This trend raises
questions about the significance of future studies
for robust government policy. How are foresight
endeavours useful for policy, and how are the
dilemmas surrounding the use of these studies
addressed in practice?
Learn about the experiences within countries and
the perspectives of the people involved in
policy-oriented foresight practices.
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
1.3 The Future in Policy-making
Co-hosted by the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
Chair prof. ir. Rudy Rabbinge, Advisor to the Executive Board, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
Panel prof. Marjolein van Asselt, Maastricht University and Council Member at the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), the Netherlands
dr. ir Hedi Poot, Senior Advisor, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (VenW), the Netherlands
dr. Jenny Andersson, Associate Professor, Institute for Futures Studies, Sweden
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Rudy Rabbinge: “Knowledge democracy means better access and understanding of knowledge
in different fields without full background innformation. Every interested lay man should be in a
position to participate in discussions on dilemma ‘s and ethical choices.”
50W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
2.4
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on
Sustainable development (SD) can be seen as a
societal learning process. In this process,
Sustainable Development Councils help to frame
topics from an sustainability perspective, while
being at the same time “down to earth” and
“telling”. Sustainable Development Councils may
play an important role in awareness-raising and
in stimulating informed policy and societal
debate. They help governments to articulate
sustainable development into society and back
into government. About half of the EU member
states have established national Sustainable
Development Councils.
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.4 Stimulating Informed Debate on Sustainable Development
Co-hosted by the network of European Environment and Sustainable Development Advisory Councils (EEAC), Belgium
Chair prof. Frans Berkhout, Director of the Institute for Environmental Sciences, VU University Amsterdam and Council Member of the RMNO, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Günther Bachmann, Secretary General, German Council for Suistainable Development (RNE), Germany and Former Chair of the EEAC Working Group Sustainable Development, Belgium
dr. Ingeborg Niestroy, Secretary General of the EEAC Network, Belgium and Author of ‘Sustaining Sustainability’, Belgium
ir. Annemieke Nijhof MBA, Director General Water, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (VenW) and Former Advisor to the Prime Minister, the Netherlands
prof. Tim O’Riordan, Emeritus Professor, University of East Anglia, UK and Chair of the EEAC Working Group Sustainable Development, Belgium
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Frans Berkhout: “Knowledge confers power and the capacity to act. Knowledge, openly and
widely available and known, is therefore a prerequisite for a strong democracy. But the more
we know, the more we realise we do not know. Some of the greatest challenges in contemporary
global societies relate to the need for democracies to deal with uncertainty, risk and ignorance. For me,
a knowledge democracy therefore has at least two elements: open access of knowledges to capable
citizens; and good institutions for making explicit and handling risk and uncertainty.”
In this session, experiences with stimulating
informed debate on sustainable development will
be shared and the challenges of creating more
and better involvement of civil society, business
and citizens will be discussed.
51
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
thTh
eme
2: S
tate
of t
he A
rt in
Tra
nsdi
scip
linar
y R
esea
rch
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
2.5
Social learning may be an important product of
transdisciplinary research. Transdisciplinary
research is being conducted in the expectation
that it can help to bring about solutions for
societal problems. But the experience of
transdisciplinary research can also help to learn
about ways in which various societal actors can
cooperate effectively. The relationship of
researchers and other actors is an important
issue to discuss in order to enhance learning how
to deal with differing goals and perspectives in a
knowledge society.
In this session the relationship between
transdisciplinary research and social learning will
be addressed with a view on learning for
sustainable development. The issue will be
addressed from three perspectives:
1. the perspective of industry seeking to
cooperate with research institutions to support
a transition to more sustainable products and
production processes
2. the perspective of a knowledge institute
adressing the specifics of the role of science in
informing the governance of sustainability
decisions
3. from the perspective of the possible role of the
consumer.
Additionally, a presentation will be given of a new
cross-cutting program on Knowledge, Learning
and Societal Change (KLSC) that is being
developed under the aegis of the International
Human Dimensions Program of Global
Environmental Change of the UN.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.5 Transdisciplinary Research as Social Learning
Co-hosted by the Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Chair prof. Josee van Eijndhoven, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Member of the
Academy of Technology and Innovation (AcTI), the Netherlands
Panel John Barzilay BAppSc BSc, Director, Innovation Management & Research Consulting (IMRCons) and Former Research Guidance Manager at Unilever R&D, the Netherlands
ir. Jeroen Borderwijk, Council Member, RMNO and Former Senior Vice President of Unilever, the Netherlands
dr. Daniel Lang, Senior Scientist, Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), Switzerland
prof. Miranda Schreurs, Director, Environmental Policy Research Centre, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany
Josee van Eijndhoven: “In the 21st century knowledge is no longer the exclusive domain of
experts and other elites. Knowledge of all people should be brought into deliberations on the
way forward to a more sustainable world.”
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
52W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
3.3
Them
e 3:
Pra
ctic
al A
ppro
ache
s to
Bou
ndar
y W
ork
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
Policy-making is a process of social construction,
in which the worlds of experts, bureaucrats and
stakeholders are combined and interconnected.
These different parties provide different sources of
knowledge that need adjustment and intercon-
nection. The way in which this connection is
organised explains the legitimacy of the
knowledge used in making policy-decisions. The
proper organisation of this connection in which
both the value of expert knowledge, as well as the
legitimacy of stakeholder knowledge is recog-
nised, is stressed in for example literature on joint
fact-finding, participatory policy analysis,
collaborative dialogues, collaborative analysis,
interactive social science, interactive knowledge,
cogeneration of knowledge, and civic science.
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
3.3 Collaborative Knowledge Production
Chair prof. Jurian Edelenbos, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands and drs. Nienke van Schie, PhD Student, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Panel prof. Chris Caswill, University of Exeter and University of Oxford, UK
drs. Mike Duijn, Senior Researcher, TNO Built Environment and GeoSciences, the Netherlands
dr. ir. Erik van Slobbe, Senior Consultant Water Management , Arcadis and Lecturer at Wageningen University Research Centre, the Netherlands
drs. Wouter Stolwijk, Director, PIANOo, the Netherlands
drs. ir. Kees Tazelaar, Manager, PIANOo-desk, the Netherlands
dr. Anna Wesselink, Marie Curie Research Fellow, University of Leeds, UK
dr. Alison Ziller, Director, Australia Street Company and Chair of the Social Planning Chapter, Planning Institute, Australia
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Jurian Edelenbos: “In a knowledge democracy everyone, i.e. professional, scientific expert,
and citizen, has an equal opportunity to express his or her thoughts, emotions and rationalities
in complex policy processes. Accepted, feasible and legitimate knowledge is produced only in
interaction among professionals, experts, and citizens.”
53
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th3.
4
Policy makers gradually begin to discover the
merits of interactive policy making for bridging
the gap between government and citizens.
However, interactive policy making is far from
easy, certainly when policy makers sincerely try
to involve citizens and entrepreneurs in the policy
process. Policy research can help policy makers
with research designs that enable fertile
interactions with citizens and entrepreneurs.
What are adequate research designs for the
analysis of a policy problem in cooperation with
(representatives from) target groups, for an ex
ante evaluation of policy proposals with all
involved parties, or for the preparation of the
implementation of a policy measure with the
involved public servants? In many cases classic
methods like a survey, a statistical analysis or
expert interviews will not be sufficient. Policy
researchers already have developed a lot of new
research strategies that starts to influence the
minds of policy makers.
Meanwhile policy researchers are also busy with
the development of new methods for data
gathering, yielding research results with a higher
validity level together with a higher impact level,
which of course supports the quality of interactive
policy making.
In this session we will give four examples of the
application of research methods aimed at
interactive policy making and/or the gathering of
high quality data.
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
3.4 A New Methodology for Policy Research?
Co-hosted by Panteia, the Netherlands
Chair prof. Peter van Hoesel, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Director of Panteia, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Hans Donkers, Director, Stratus Market Research, the Netherlands
dr. Joris Meijaard, Senior Manager and Manager of the Board, EIM Business & Policy Research, the Netherlands
drs. Frans Pleijster, Account Manager, EIM Business & Policy Research, the Netherlands
dr. Pieter van Teeffelen, Account Manager Research for Policy, Panteia, the Netherlands
Peter van Hoesel: “High level policy research will bridge the gap between citizens and the
government by showing ways to effective as well as attractive public policies.”
Them
e 3:
Pra
ctic
al A
ppro
ache
s to
Bou
ndar
y W
ork
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
54W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
4.5
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on Numerous scientific institutions send policy-
related scientific reports to the government and
parliament. They are sometimes considered as
belonging to the category of “regulatory
sciences”. Many reports go relatively unnoticed,
but some, on the other hand, have a big influence
on the political agenda and on policy. The
reputation of the institution and the media often
play a large role here, although this is not always
the case. Sometimes these scientific reports are
used by parties with a view to a specific political
interest. Other parties ignore the report in
question because of other interests or put forward
facts and circumstances that refute or down play
the conclusions and recommendations of the
report. It is seldom - if ever - because of their
scientific nature that reports come as a Deus ex
Machina, and certainly not in an area that is -in
any case- politically controversial.
The media play an important mediating role in
spotting a report and in its scientific, social and
political assessment and positioning. It is the
media that stimulate discussion of the report. In
this case the media is blamed for provoking a
political hype and researchers are not seldom
accused of cooperating knowingly. The objections
are that the topic is enjoying excessive attention
from the media, that self-reinforcing mechanisms
have been set in motion by them, that the debate
is unreasonable and that the result has been
‘manipulated’. This claim is often made - usually
by parties in the ongoing debate - and frequently
researchers get involved. But do we find support
for this reproach even after the debate has died
down? Don’t the media ensure that the rules of
the game still apply? Don’t we need the media to
get the interests behind the issue out into the
open? Aren’t democratic decision-making
processes, by definition, accompanied by
emotions, excitement, fighting and compromise
and doesn’t the aspect of exaggeration therefore
cling to every decision-making process in the
political domain? Has scientific reason allocated a
place in the democratic decision-making process
for the right reasons? And if so, how do we view
the increasing demand for evidence-based policy?
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.5 Science Based Reports, Media and the Political Hype
Co-hosted by the Rathenau Institute, the Netherlands
Chair mr. drs. Jan Staman, Director, Rathenau Institute, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Johan van de Berg RC, Head of the Parliamentary Bureau for Research and Public Expenditure, the Netherlands
dr. Miguel Goede, Associate Professor, University of the Netherlands Antilles
dr. Cisca Joldersma, Member of Parliament, House of Representatives, the Netherlands
dr. Lars Klüver, Director, Danish Board of Technology, Denmark
drs. Martin Sommer, Politics Editor, newspaper De Volkskrant, the Netherlands
Jan Staman: “Knowledge production is
urgently in need of inspiring metaphores.
Without that it will be transformed into
knowledge industry, far away from the knowledge
democracy.”
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
55
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
thTh
eme
4: M
edia
, Pol
itic
s an
d K
now
ledg
e Fl
ow
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
4.6
The Internet has created possibilities for citizens
and civil society organisations to contribute to
government activities concerning evaluation,
monitoring, inspecting and maintaining
government policies and regulation. Valerie
Frissen will introduce the issue by presenting
examples of initiatives by citizens and by public
authorities, pointing at some important
challenges.
Panel speakers will present examples like aviation
(real time noise measurement by citizens), the
Amber Alert procedure for finding missing
children, and a website on which parents and
pupils can evaluate teachers.
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.6 Citizens in Charge (1) – Participation in Inspection and Monitoring: Introduction and Experiences in the Netherlands
Co-hosted by VIDE, the Association for Monitoring, Assessment and Inspecting, the Netherlands
prof. Valerie Frissen, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Senior Strategist at TNO Information and
Communication Technology, the Netherlands
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Valerie Frissen: “Knowledge democracy to me is knowledge that increases the transparency of
the democratic state; equal acces to knowledge; knowledge that increases our understanding of
others and makes us enjoy living together.”
56W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
5.6
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
Michiel de Vries: “As long as much disinformation - based primarily on strategic positions of
the researcher and the vested interests of the commissioner of that research - is distributed
under the guise of knowledge and hardly anyone debunks that disinformation, the ideal of a
knowledge society remains a fairy tale.”
Scientists who prepare knowledge for policy are
sometimes influenced or even threatened to
‘adjust’ their conclusions if they are not in line
with what policy makers expect. This is relatively
common practice in a range of disciplines, from
environmental science to history. How serious is
this phenomenon?
During this session we will address questions
such as: What is at stake for scientists to follow
the ‘guidelines’ of policy makers? Will a knowl-
edge democracy deal differently with independent
knowledge? What is the rationality of policy-
makers when using knowledge and what makes
them want to influence knowledge producers?
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.6 Inconvenient Knowledge and Policy-making
Co-hosted by Leiden University, the Netherlands
Chair prof. Henk Dekker, Leiden University, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Henk Tromp, Staff Member at the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Leiden University, the Netherlands
prof. Michiel de Vries, Chair of the Public Administration Department, Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands
dr. Ellen Wayenberg, Assistant Professor, Ghent University, Belgium
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
57
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
thTh
eme
5: D
efini
ng K
now
ledg
e D
emoc
racy
|
Para
llel s
essi
on5.
7
In most (Western) countries, the gap between
politicians and the public seems to be widening,
and there are no signs that this trend will end.
Political parties fulfil important roles when it
comes down to agenda setting and programming
and carry a clear responsibility towards
implementing solutions for societal problems.
How can political parties reinvent themselves (in
time) and what strategic course should be set?
Strict adherence to their original principles and
character can imply the risk of further loss. Too
much adaptiveness to social developments
however, can lead to irrelevance.
August 26th 14.15 - 16.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.7 Organising Politics in a Knowledge Democracy – Reinventing Political Parties
Co-hosted by the Council for Public Administration (Rob), the Netherlands
Chair dr. Krijn van Beek, Advisor, Council for Societal Development (RMO) and Founding Director of the Think Tank 2100, the Netherlands
Panel prof. Ron Meyer, University of Tilburg, the Netherlands
drs. Monica Sie Dhian Ho, General Director, Wiardi Beckman Foundation, the Netherlands
prof. ir. Jaap van Till, HAN University of Applied Sciences, the Netherlands
Ron Meyer: “Information + structure = knowledge. Knowledge + judgment = wisdom. Living in
the information age offers the electorate the opportunity for more knowledgeable choices. But
without structure we might drown in a sea of information and without judgment make morally
disputable choices, all while thinking we are blessed by mountains of data.”
16.00 - 16.15 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
58W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
14.15 - 14.30 An Introduction to the “Meaning of Knowledge”
by ir. Arnold Fellendans, Networker at the Network for Future Research (NTV)
and Network for Sustainable Higher Education (DHO), the Netherlands
14.30 - 14.45 Knowledge, Power & Identity: Struggles Over Unstructured Laptop Use in American University Classrooms
by dr. Jill Harrison, Post-doctoral Fellow at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University, USA
14.45 - 15.00 An Inter- and Transdisciplinary Analysis of the Climate Discussion of Transport
by dr. Petri Tapio, Senior Researcher at the Turku School of Economics,
Finland
August 26th 14.15 - 15.45 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Open Sessions Part 1
Ope
n Se
ssio
ns P
art
1 |
Para
llel s
essi
on
59
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
thO
pen
Sess
ions
Par
t 1
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
15.00 - 15.15 Democratic Decision-making and Innovative Knowledge: Two Cases
by drs. Paul Jansen Schoonhoven, Senior Training Manager and Consultant at the ROI/HEC
Institute for Public Administration, the Netherlands and
drs. Laura Sprengers ma, Advisor, ROI Institute for Public Administration, the Netherlands
15.15 - 15.30 Boundary Spanning in Hybrid Dutch Organisations
by Philip Marcel Karré MPhil, Senior Researcher and Lecturer at the Netherlands School for
Public Administration (NSOB), the Netherlands
15.30 - 15.45 The Knowledge Broker, Matching Supply and Demand of Expert Knowledge
by drs. Michel Leenders, Head of Spatial Development and Management at the City of Gouda,
the Netherlands
60W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
1.4
Them
e 1:
Kno
wle
dge
& F
utur
e R
esea
rch
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion Strategic policy deals with the future, with the
question of what kind of future we desire and how
we can best anticipate future developments to
steer in the direction of this desired future. Future
research tries to sketch possible futures (be it
desired or dystopian ones). But the intriguing
aspect of ‘the future’ is that it does not actually
exist. Future research therefore has particular
challenges regarding notions of empirics and
objectivity. Necessarily, future research, as does
strategic policy, has to engage with idealisations
and abstractions as well as with societal norms
and values. So there are a lot of similarities
between the two activities and in principle, future
research seems to be the right tool to develop
strategic policies and to inform those responsible
for these policies. The question is how the two
relate in practice.
This panel will deal with three related questions.
1. How (if at all) is future research used in
strategic policy processes?
2. What are the prospects for the future use of
future research in strategic policy processes?
3. What are the implications for the current and/
or future relation between future research and
strategic policy for the notion of knowledge
democracy?
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
1.4 Future Research and Strategic Policy making: How do the Two Relate?
Co-hosted by the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), the Netherlands
Chair prof. Maarten Hajer, Director, Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL), the Netherlands
Panel dr. Martijn van der Steen, Associate Dean and Deputy Director, School for Public Management (NSOB), the Netherlands
dr. Esther Turnhout, Lecturer, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
prof. mr. Stavros Zouridis, Director Strategy, Ministry of Justice, the Netherlands
Maarten Hajer: “The real challenge for knowledge democracy is to develop new ways to
involve scientific ‘facts’ in democratic deliberation. How can science–policy communication be
enhanced by stakeholder participation? First of all, we must not consider ‘fact-regardingness’ as
the opposite of stakeholder participation but find a way to marry the two.”
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
61
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th2.
6
Given that sustainability has no definitive
formulation yet, it is hard to imagine how existing
knowledge, either explicit or tacit, can be properly
used to obtain sustainability. It would seem that
only new knowledge, which is co-created by
stakeholders, may result in a responsive and
efficient set of products and services. Such new
knowledge arises from cooperation between
scientists, entrepreneurs, government and
societal organisations. The co-creation of
knowledge is a prerequisite for innovation and
may thus lead to sustainable development.
TransForum is an innovation programme
designed to assist Dutch agriculture toward
sustainability. Its method is based on co-creation
of new knowledge. In this session, both the
organisation of knowledge and practical
experiences of sustainable value development will
be central topics in an Open Space work session
with the aim to show participants how this
democratisation of knowledge works.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.6 Sustainable Value Development through New Knowledge Creation
Co-hosted by TransForum, the Netherlands
Chair ir. Jeroen Bordewijk, Board Member, TransForum, Council Member of the RMNO and former Senior Vice President of Unilever, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Henk van Latesteijn, General Manager, TransForum, the Netherlands
prof. Chris Peterson, Michigan State University Product Center for Agriculture and Natural Resources, USA
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on
Jeroen Bordewijk: “The knowledge and experience of everyone needs to be shared and used
to solve the many complex problems and create innovative solutions in an every day more
complex world.”
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
62W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
2.7
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on
The objective of this panel is to derive key-
insights with regards to continuous learning in
management processes as a way to deal with
uncertainty and change.
In this panel session we attempt to find the
common ground between Adaptive Management
and Transition Management. Both stress the
limits of our knowledge and understanding of
complex adaptive systems and therefore
emphasise the importance of continuous
processes of learning and adjusting.
The first presentation discusses how Adaptive
Management and Transition Management are
based on different conceptualizations of how
complex adaptive systems behave. Then we will
discuss two different cases in which Adaptive
Management and Transition Management are
applied in practice to elucidate the commonalities
and differences.The third and fourth presenta-
tions are about Adaptive Management in practice.
In the discussion afterwards, we will attempt to
synthesise learned lessons and the consequences
for management and learning.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.7 The Transition Approach and the Resilience Approach: What can we Learn?
Co-hosted by the Erasmus University Rotterdam and the Resilience Centre of the University of Stockholm, Sweden
Chair prof. Josee van Eijndhoven, Chair Sustainable Management, Research Institute for Transitions (DRIFT), Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Rutger van de Brugge, Scientific Researcher, Research Institute for Transitions (Drift), Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
dr. Per Olsson, Research Team Leader, Adaptive Governance, Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Sweden
dr. Henrik Österblom, Researcher and Science-Policy Coordinator at Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Sweden
dr. Derk Loorbach, Senior Researcher, Research Institute for Transitions (DRIFT), Erasmus University Rotterdam , the Netherlands
Derk Loorbach: ‘True democracy would be to use the collective knowledge of people to
shape, direct and change societies. Given that our current democracy was designed in a
totally different era, we are now in serious need of new mechanisms and institutions that
facilitate open exchange of knowledge, creation of new knowledge and ideas and the translation of new
insights into institutional change. This should be a key focus in sustainability research: how to create
mechanisms through which in principle all those interested and engaged can co-create new insights and
ideas to reshape society towards sustainability.’
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
Them
e 3:
Pra
ctic
al A
ppro
ache
s to
Bou
ndar
y W
ork
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
63
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th3.
5
The assessment of the societal aspects of new
and emerging technoscience is increasingly
organised in large-scale institutions, be it
programmatic networks or centers, focusing for
example on nanotechnology, biotechnology,
genomics, ICT and the convergence between these
technologies. Many of these institutions, one
could say, work at the cutting edges of ‘collabora-
tive knowledge production’ and of ‘fostering
democratic participation’. Aim of both new and
established institutions is to foster “democratic”
“participation”, “societal interaction”, up to “social
responsibility”, and to add to the production of
knowledge concerning the evaluation and
assessment of new technoscience. To various
extents, the work of such institutions is shaped
through contribution to and collaboration with
both academic actors and actors in the field of
policy and politics.
We wish to ask from the point of view of the heads
of boundary institutions: How do both established
and new institutions bring together their ambition
to add to the production of new knowledge? What
might be called the ‘democratisation of technology’
in this context? What sorts of knowledge,
interaction, and infrastructure are necessary?
This session brings together directors of a number
of both new and well-established institutions to
discuss the way in which they shape and define
the triangulation between knowledge and
democratic practices. The session will explore the
often tacit conceptions of knowledge and
democracy and the way these shape science
governance. It asks how the systematic triangula-
tion of knowledge production and democratic
impact can be realised. Finally, we will discuss how
such boundary or convergence work can be
managed efficiently and successfully.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
3.5 Boundary Institutions in Science Governance – Triangulating Knowledge and Democratic Practice
Chair dr. Peter Stegmaier, Assistant Professor, University of Twente, the Netherlands and dr. Annemiek Nelis, Director, Centre of Society and Genomics (CSG), the Netherlands
Panel dr. Daniel Barben, Associate Research Professor, Arizona State University, USA
Prof. Stefan Kuhlmann, Chair, Department of Science, Technology and Policy Studies, University of Twente, the Netherlands
mr. drs. Jan Staman, Director, Rathenau Institute, the Netherlands
prof. Steven Yearley, Director, ESRC Genomics Forum, University of Edinburgh, UK
Peter Stegmaier: “‘Knowledge Democracy’ refers to claims and projects in science governance
that are being promoted massively in some countries and forms since a couple of years. It can
mean many things to many actors and in various contexts. It is the task of social science not
only to participate in such a policy and movement, but to investigate thoroughly which claims have been
made and realised so far, how such ideas develop and what has been achieved on the level of everyday
practice (and what not).”
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
64W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
4.7
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on
In the second part of the session different
speakers will present examples from international
experiences. This session will focus on the role of
civil society in inspecting and monitoring. The
participants will discuss the opportunities and
threats with the speakers of the first and second
part of the session.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.7 Citizens in Charge (2) - Participation in Inspection and Monitoring: International Experiences and Conclusions
Co-hosted by VIDE, the Association for Monitoring, Assessment and Inspecting, the Netherlands
Chair dr. Jeroen Kerseboom, Vice Chair, VIDE, the Association for Monitoring, Assessment and
Inspecting, the Netherlands
Jeroen Kerseboom: “If it is true that knowledge equals power, is knowledge democracy a
pleonasm? And about who’s democracy are we talking then? People bounded by what borders,
if any?”
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
65
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
th4.
8
While information seems abundant, and cheap
and easy to come by these days, the investigative
journalist plays an ever more important role in
disseminating knowledge to participating citizens
in society. For the information people need to
base their life’s decisions on, seems to retreat
behind ever thickening walls of bureaucracy,
stalling techniques and outright refusal. The
investigative journalist, with time and resources
at hand, should be ultimately equipped to break
through these barriers. But for how much longer?
In this session, we will discuss the need for clear
and easy to use Freedom of Information (FOI)
laws, both in the Netherlands and Europe. Where
the Dutch word ‘wobbing’ is coined across the
continent as the term for filing a FOI request, the
Dutch are rapidly losing their position as
champions of access to government information.
Starting in the fall of 2009, the Dutch government
will implement new ‘WOB’ guidelines and terms,
with it effectively impairing the people’s access to
information. In the broader European spectrum,
proposals on the physical state of documents (i.e.
whether digital or on paper) may exceedingly
narrow the number and scope of documents
journalists and citizens can get access to. Both
developments largely go unheeded, by law makers,
politicians, journalists, ngo’s and citizens alike.
Recent developments in the field will be presented,
views on the direction proposals to change the
‘WOB’ - both in the Netherlands and Europe - the
role of journalists, politicians and lawmakers in
improving FOI laws and regulations will be
discussed with members of all three parties
concerned.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.8 Investigative Journalism and the Battle for Access to Information
Co-hosted by the Dutch-Flemish Association for Investigative Journalism (VVOJ), Belgium and the Netherlands
Chair drs. Margo Smit MA, Director, Dutch-Flemish Association for Investigative Journalism (VVOJ), Belgium and the Netherlands
Panel drs. Brigitte Alfter, Director, European Fund for Investigative Journalism and Journalist, Denmark
Roger Vleugels, Lecturer and Legal Advisor, Freedom of Information (WOB), the Netherlands
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
Roger Vleugels: “Access to information, especially government held information, is essential
in a democracy. This access right has, of course, to excist for parliamentarians, but also for the
people themselves. This so called extra-parliamentary access right, or controll or reconstruct
tool, can be established by a freedom of information act.”
66W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
5.8
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
Elaborating the work of Herman van Gunsteren, it
seems fruitful to develop a broader perspective on
democracy, including all steps that lead to
collective decision-making.
These steps are presented as seven necessary
circumambulations, like the ritual by Muslim
pilgrims around the Ka’aba or the people around
the walls of Jericho. No single step (round) can be
left aside in democratic decision-making. So it is
quite vain to present one of them (e.g. knowledge
gathering, polling the people or representation) as
the core of democracy. This perspective is at the
same time complicating and reassuring.
This interactive workshop will help to explore the
implications of this vision on Jericho-democracy
for practical policymaking and for political
science.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.8 Knowledge Democracy or Jericho Democracy? – a Design Workshop
drs. Jan Schrijver, Senior Civil Servant, Ministry of Internal Aff airs and Kingdom Relations (BZK) and Guest Researcher at the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Ferry Tromp, Former Director of Ferry Tromp Productions, the Netherlands
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
Jan Schrijver: “The essence of knowledge democracy is for me: “The insight that in the
end Democracy is a matter of learning from each other, the willingness to take part in a
complex process of “study and enterprise”, and accepting that not one single actor (or party)
can claim to represent the truth, or that many parties represent parts of the truth simultaneously.
Epistemologically: democracy = social constructivism.”
67
Wed
nes
da
y, A
ug
ust
26
thTh
eme
5: D
efini
ng K
now
ledg
e D
emoc
racy
|
Para
llel s
essi
on5.
9
The gap between scientific research and policy,
even if that research is policy-directed, is often
analyzed and described. From both a scientific
point of view and from the world of public
administration solutions are presented to bridge
the gap. In recent years this has led to many new
initiatives worldwide. In this workshop we present
promising initiatives from the Netherlands and
other countries. We focus mainly on institutional
innovations, both within the world of public
administration and within the world of science.
· Which institutions (with varying degrees of
organisational hardness) are created in order to
bridge the gap? For example, in the Netherlands
in recent years the Top Institute for Evidence
Based Education Research, the Knowledge
Institute for Mobility, the NICIS and other
public-private partnerships aimed at knowledge
development have been established. Other
examples are departmental knowledge chambers
and covenants that have been made with
organisations in the knowledge world.
· How do existing institutions and figurations of
institutions become restructured to ensure
effective linkages between research and policy?
In the Netherlands the review of the advisory
system especially in the physical domain and
the knowledge arenas are interesting
phenomena. What are the first experiences in
this field?
· How do these new institutions act on the existing
arrangements and which tensions arise here?
What is the impact of new public management
within departments?
· Which forms of brokerage work and which do not
work to connect demand and supply of
knowledge? Is the by national research councils
(e.g. NWO) claimed role of independent, national
agency going to be successful or not?
In the workshop we will focus on two domains,
namely the physical and social domain. In both
domains, different knowledge institutes are active
and various departments. Part of the presentations
and discussions is how in these two domains
connections between the different knowledge
institutes, departments and intermediary
implementation organisations are fostered.
August 26th 16.15 - 18.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.9 Facing and Bridging the Gap: Organising Knowledge for Policy-making
Co-hosted by the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) and the Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), the Netherlands
Chair dr. Arnold Jonk, Director of the Knowledge Directorate, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW), the Netherlands (invited)
Panel ir. Ben Geurts, Director Strategy and Knowledge, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), the Netherlands
prof. Wim Hafk amp, Scientific Director, NICIS Institute for Urban Research, the Netherlands
prof. Kurt Aagaard Neilsen, Roskilde University, Denmark
prof. Theo Toonen, Dean of the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology (TU), the Netherlands
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
68W
edn
esd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
6th
16.15 - 16.30 We’re Only in It for the Knowledge. Does Democracy Pay?
by drs. Hans Keune, Political Scientist at the University of Antwerp, Belgium
16.30 - 16.45 People Empower Each Other, Information Technology Helps Only in Facilitating Them
by drs. Marga Jacobs, Lecturer at the Avans University of Applied Sciences and President of
the Human Environment Foundation (Vereniging Leefmilieu), the Netherlands
16.45 - 17.00 Dissemination and Implementation of Knowledge within the Public Health Sector
by dr. Lenneke Vaandrager, Associate Professor at Wageningen University and Research
Centre, the Netherlands
17.00 - 17.15 Globalization and Governance Reforms in India
by dr. Vasant Moharir, Retired Academic and Former President of the Foundation for Critical
Choices for India, the Netherlands
August 26th 16.15 - 17.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Open Sessions Part 2
Ope
n Se
ssio
ns P
art
2 |
Para
llel s
essi
on
18.15 SPEECH BY DRS. HENRI LENFERINK, MAYOR CITY OF LEIDEN @ FORMER LIBRARY BUILDING
69
Thu
rsd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
7th
Reg
istr
atio
n To
wa
rds
Kn
ow
led
ge
Dem
ocr
acy
In 1882, Heike Kamerlingh Onnes (then 29 years
old) was appointed in Leiden as professor of
experimental physics. He was not only a brilliant
scientist, but also a thorough research manager.
On his initiative, the dusty laboratory on the
canal was transformed into one of the most
advanced research laboratories in the world. He
created a new laboratory-style in which research
and education were intertwined.
Kamerlingh Onnes was in 1908 the first to
succeed in liquifying helium gas on the lowest
critical temperature, for which he received the
Nobel Prize in 1913.
August 276th 08.30 - 09.15 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Registration
70Th
urs
da
y, A
ug
ust
27
thTh
eme
1: K
now
ledg
e &
Fut
ure
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on1.
5
Whereas developing political visions about the
future can be attractive for politicians, concrete
political decision making about the long term
seems to be less popular. The results of such
decisions are usually harvested by future
politicians but the investments (capacity, money)
lie in the present. This is only one of many
reasons why long-term decisions tend to be
postponed or cancelled, even if there is consider-
able evidence that taking measures now prevents
enormous costs in the future.
This session discusses the conclusions of the
EEAC WG Governance paper on the governance of
long-term decision making within the perspective
of the emerging knowledge democracy.
August 27th 09.00 - 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
1.5 Towards a Better Governance of Long-term Decision Making
Co-hosted by the Working Group Governance of the Network of European Environment and
Sustainable Development Advisory Councils (EEAC), Belgium
Chair prof. Roeland J. in ‘t Veld, Chair, RMNO, the Netherlands
Panel dr. Louis Meuleman, Secretary General, RMNO, the Netherlands
drs. Koen Moerman, Researcher, Federal Council for Sustainable Development, Belgium
prof. Miranda Schreurs, FU Berlin, Germany
drs. Bart Vink, Project Manager Randstad 2040, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), the Netherlands
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Louis Meuleman: “Knowledge democracy is about taking the responsibility to develop and
maintain productive relationships between science, politics and the media, which reflect the
challenges of our time.”
71
Thu
rsd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
7th
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Diverse types of complex problems we face today
are increasingly addressed in collaborations
between scientists, policy-makers, citizens,
consumers and entrepreneurs, collaborations in
which knowledge and solutions are co-produced.
For the actors involved, participating in these
types of collaborative research approaches can be
exciting and meaningful, but also challenging. The
modes of operations in transdisciplinary research
projects often differ significantly from the modes
of operation in other institutional/homogenous
settings.
Can we relate the modes of operation in
transdisciplinary research to specific assump-
tions, competences, personality, attitude and
knowledge of involved actors? What are the
specific qualities required for managing or guiding
these processes? What action perspectives can
we define for coping with differences between
institutional settings and the collaborative
practice?
August 27th 09.00 - 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.8 Roles, Competence and Action Perspectives of Actors in Transdisciplinary Research
Co-hosted by the VU University Amsterdam, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Competence Centre for Transitions and TransForum, the Netherlands
Chair dr.Huib Silvis, Head of the Public Issues Division, Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI), Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
Panel ir. Jose Andringa, Senior Programme Advisor, Competence Centre Transitions (CCT), the Netherlands
drs. Jolanda van den Berg, Senior Researcher, Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI), Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
drs. Sander Mager, Vice President, TransForum, the Netherlands
prof. Chris Peterson, Michigan State University Product Center for Agriculture and Natural Resources, USA
drs. Barbara Regeer, Assistant Professor, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
prof. Roland Scholz, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), Switzerland
dr. ir. Barbara Sterk, Postdoc Researcher, Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands
2.8
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on
Huib Silvis: “Policy decisions are often guided by the protection of special interests. Knowledge
democracy is the ambition to have decisions based on empirical and normative science for the
good of the people.”
72Th
urs
da
y, A
ug
ust
27
th2.
9
During the last years the resilience of the water
system has been degradating step by step, by all
of our infrastructure, building estates and land
use. This is not only the case in western countries
but also in Africa and Asia. The deltas have
become vulnerable for too much, too little and too
dirty water, affecting life considerably and
creating unacceptable risks and casualties.
Climate change, in fact climate roughness, will
increase these problems. We are facing many
uncertainties, not only related to climate change
but also from the global economy, energy, food
production and especially changing socio-demo-
graphic conditions. Climate adaptation will
mainly focus on restoration of resilience of the
earth’s system, including the water and soil
system. This requires a strong symbiosis between
spatial planning and water management in the
deltas. Reconstruction and renewal of built areas
(a permanent process in western world, in urban
as well as in industrialised areas) provides
opportunities to implement these step by step
investments in resilience. This is not only the
responsibility of the water managers: powerful
cooperation with spatial planners, the municipali-
ties and other regional authorities, the other land
users and the water authorities is needed.
These developments require a shift towards a
pro-active long term approach, in order to cope
with the long term challenges that accompany
the creation of sustainable deltas. Cooperation
with other domains is necessary for the transition
from water management to spatial choreography.
Applied research in these fields has been
conducted and the first pilots have proven to be
successful. But to achieve the goals, the research
has to be accompanied by knowledge dissemina-
tion. This not only a question of communication,
(scientific) publications, training the professionals
in workshops and master classes: in this field
70% can be characterized as tacit knowledge,
requiring new approaches of knowledge transfer.
The workshop will address the challenges of
knowledge transfer in this transition process from
water management towards spatial
choreography.
August 27th 09.00 - 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
2.9 Research and Knowledge Transfer in Water Management
Co-hosted by the Research Programme Living with Water, the Netherlands
Chair ir. Bert Satijn, Director, Research Programme Living with Water, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Tijs J. van Maasakkers, PhD Candidate, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
drs. ing. Beke Romp, Junior Researcher, Delft University of Technology (TU), the Netherlands
dr. Erik Rongen, Client IT Architect for Public sector, IBM Netherlands - Global Water Management Centre of Excellence, the Netherlands
prof. ing. Geert R. Teisman, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Council Member of the RMNO, the Netherlands
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Beke Romp: “There is a need for a new nexus. Democratisation of knowledge brings new actors
into the nexus between policymakers and technical experts. As a result policymakers become
knowledge jugglers.”
Them
e 2:
Sta
te o
f the
Art
in T
rans
disc
iplin
ary
Res
earc
h |
Para
llel s
essi
on
73
Thu
rsd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
7th
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Unilinearity in the transfer of knowledge from
science to policy is empirically discredited. Of
course, this does not mean a complete blurring of
the boundaries.
Rather, the science-policy interface may be
conceptualised as boundary work. It is, like a living
apart together relationship, simultaneously about
keeping distance by demarcation of your own
domain (expert advice respectively policy work),
and staying close enough to coordinate your
activities. Boundary work occurs in a vast array of
types of boundary arrangements.
In the Netherlands alone this runs from highly
institutionalised boundary organisations like the
WRR to mission-oriented sectored councils like
the RMNO, and research ‘centers of excellence’, all
the way to informal hybrid real-time or virtual
forums where academics, professionals, business
and government officials meet around shared
problems (Halffman & Hoppe, 2005).The
‘ideal-type’ boundary organisation may be
characterised by properties like (Guston, Clark,
Miller, Halffman):
· Double participation
· Dual accountability
· Creation and maintenance of a suitable set of
(textual) boundary objects
· Production of salient, flexible and legitimate
information
· Co-production of social and cognitive order,
using practices of negotiation and confrontation
· Mediation
· Meta-governance and capacity building.
August 27th 09.00 - 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
3.6 Implications for the Science-Policy Interface
Chair prof. Robert Hoppe, University of Twente, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Sarah Cummings, Communications Coordinator, IKM Emergent, the Netherlands
dr. Iina Hellsten, Assistant Professor, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Martin Schulz, Advisor, Berenschot Consultancy, the Netherlands
prof. Dirk J. Wolfson, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Them
e 3:
Pra
ctic
al A
ppro
ache
s to
Bou
ndar
y W
ork
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
3.6
Dirk Wolfson: “Knowledge Democracy is a blissful state in which people are well-informed
about social problems and politicians behave as honest brokers of individual preference.
Rela life is different. The present paradigm shift away from laissez-faire creates a window of
opportunity to realise democracy.”
74Th
urs
da
y, A
ug
ust
27
th3.
7
According to Hoppe (2002) the worlds of science
and politics meet more often nowadays, giving
rise to boundary traffic. Boundary work may
occur through special organisations such as the
RMNO, through formal platforms such as the SER,
and on an ad-hoc basis as happened in the
preparation of the 4th National Environmental
Policy Plan (Kemp and Rotmans, 2009).
This session seeks to discuss the issue of
boundary work between institutional domains:
science and policy, business and NGOs, and NGOs
and politics. The focus is on boundary work in
relation to transformative change. Transformative
change represents an interesting issue because
usually neither science nor policy is well-equipped
to deal with it, so it is important to learn from
experiences. Examples of transformative change
are preventive health care and demand-based
cure, nano-based materials and mobility leasing.
In boundary arrangements people learn about
issues of mutual interest: possible futures and
risks, visions and practical knowledge for
decision-making. Knowledge is being coproduced
by actors involved, who may or may not form a
discourse coalition to challenge regime arrange-
ments. The session will bring together practical
approaches to boundary work, with the aim to
reflect on these.
August 27th 09.00 - 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
3.7 Practical Approaches to Boundary Work around Transformative Change
Chair dr. René Kemp, Senior Researcher, Maastricht University, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Flor Avelino, PhD Researcher, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
drs. Erica ter Haar, PhD Researcher, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
dr. Sibout Nooteboom, Associate Professor, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
dr. Maarten Vrolijk, Researcher, Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR)
Them
e 3:
Pra
ctic
al A
ppro
ache
s to
Bou
ndar
y W
ork
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
René Kemp: “Experts can be defined
by what they know and what they don’t
know.”
75
Thu
rsd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
7th
Policy makers must prepare responsible action
concerning societal problems. When such
problems are ‘wicked’, contested, emotional and
value-laden, the quality of the production and use
of knowledge becomes crucial. There are many
examples of such controversial issues, like the use
of chemicals, animal testing, genetic modified
organisms, animal disease control, and nuclear
energy.
Sometimes democratic decision making is
delayed or even impossible due to societal
distrust, and the way in which politicians cope
with this. The media sometimes play an
influential role when they advocate one position
in the debate, or when they increase the
controversy by creating hypes around such
issues.
In this session several examples will be presented,
in order to define lessons and perspectives for
new action.
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on4.
9
August 27th 9.00 – 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.9 Communication about Controversial Issues
Chair drs. Pieter Hilhorst, Publicist and Journalist, newspaper De Volkskrant (among others), the Netherlands
Panel prof. Tjard de Cock Buning, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
mr. Frans Evers, Vice Chair, Commission on Environmental Assessment Reports (MER) and Council Member of the RMNO, the Netherlands
Max von Olenhusen, Legal Advisor, Novartis European Public Affairs, Belgium
prof. Bastiaan Zoeteman, Chair, Commission on Genetic Modification (COGEM), the Netherlands
Tjard de Cock Buning: “Knowledge
democracy is conditional for a fair
world.”
76Th
urs
da
y, A
ug
ust
27
th4,
10
Both the “old” media and even more the
internet-based “new” media are characterised by
speed, high velocity in subjects and opinions and
an intense variety in supply. This allows little
time to reflect on how they work and which
choices they make and why. In this session
practitioners will explain in which ways they are
responsible for the knowledge and information on
which citizens and politicians base their opinions,
and a politician will react: what should be the
responsibility of the media from a politician’s
perspective?
August 27th 09.00 - 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
4.10 From Response to Responsibility
Chair drs. Willem Schoonen, Chief Editor, newspaper Trouw, the Netherlands
Panel Hanns-J. Neubert, President, European Science Journalists Organisation (EUSJA), France
drs. Marnix Norder, Alderman, City of The Hague, the Netherlands
Peter Scheffer, Communications Consultant, City of The Hague and Former Political Campaigner, the Netherlands
Ovais Ahmed Tanweer, Anchor and Producer, Dawn News TV, Pakistan
Them
e 4:
Med
ia, P
olit
ics
and
Kno
wle
dge
Flow
|
Para
llel s
essi
on
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Hanns-J. Neubert: “In times of information overflow it is most important that all people are
put into the position to gain and acquire knowledge in learning how to handle and integrate
informational bits and pieces. However, knowledge is not necessarily a ticket for the ability to
contribute to democratic processes, it can even foster authoritarian developments. Knowledge has to
exceed its own borders and lead to literacy – an improper translation of the German term “Bildung” – of
all people, which effectuates passion, sympathy, tolerance and interest, which are prerequisites of real
democracy.”
77
Thu
rsd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
7th
Required competences and capabilities to deal
with the tensions between science and politics,
the challenges of translation and articulation of
strategic knowledge questions seem to be
underdeveloped. What skills are especially
missing - from the viewpoint of boundary workers
and scientists? Do we truly understand which
factors are responsible for this deficiency? Do we
need tailor-made development programmes, are
there already good examples? In this session
these questions are addressed.
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
5.10
August 27th 9.00 – 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.10 Wanted: Competent Public Officials
Co-hosted by the Offi ce for the Senior Civil Service (ABD), Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (BZK), the Netherlands
Chair drs. Kees Vijlbrief, Deputy Director General, Office for the Senior Civil Service (ABD), Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, the Netherlands
Panel drs. Hugo Brouwer, Director of Energy Transitions, Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Netherlands
David Clements MPA, Vice President, Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, Canada
dr. Henk van Latesteijn, General Manager, TransForum, the Netherlands
prof. Harald Plamper, Teamleader Management of Public Expenditures of the Project Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, German Association for Technical Cooperation (GTZ), Germany
Henk van Latesteijn: “Democratisation of knowledge is not a scientific discourse but a
working method. This means we should be willing to get dirty hands.”
78Th
urs
da
y, A
ug
ust
27
th5,
11
In this session a short review is presented of the
unique situation of policy research in the
Netherlands. In comparison with e.g. other EU
member states, a market has emerged for
independent research institutes and for entrepre-
neurship on the field of policy research. In the
seventies and eighties the Dutch government has
stimulated this growing market by giving
assignments to those highly specialised research
institutes. Nowadays there is a solid and
professional market for policy research in The
Netherlands. In other countries policy research is
more or less the exclusive domain of universities
and embedded researchers within the governmen-
tal organizations itself.
The session will include presentations on the
following subjects:
· Highlights of a recent VBO-survey on the use of
policy research in the Netherlands
· How do private research-companies success-
fully compete with the universities and
researchers within the government?
· Differences between academic research and
contract research, examples of co-operation
between research institutes and universities
and strengths and weaknesses of the two
Following the presentations the pros and cons of
the Dutch situation will be discussed and it is
questioned whether this situation leads to
co-operation or competition between universities
and independent research institutes. Does the
ongoing system of public tendering in the field of
policy research effect this relationship in a
positive or negative way? And what are the
experiences in other countries on this subject? All
contributions from the audience are welcome.
August 27th 09.00 - 11.00 Kamerlingh Onnes Building
5.11 Improvement of Knowledge Transfer: Co-operation or Competition in the Research Field?
Co-hosted by the Association for Policy Research (VBO), the Netherlands
Chair drs. Martin van der Gugten cmc, President, Association for Policy Research (VBO) and Director of DSP-Group BV, the Netherlands
Panel prof. Hans Boutellier, Executive Director, Verwey-Jonker Institute, the Netherlands
prof. Peter van Hoesel, Erasmus University Rotterdam and Director of Panteia, the Netherlands
dr. Peter van der Knaap, Performance Audit Director, The Court of Audit, the Netherlands
Them
e 5:
Defi
ning
Kno
wle
dge
Dem
ocra
cy
| Pa
ralle
l ses
sion
11.00 - 11.20 COFFEE BREAK @ KAMERLINGH ONNES BUILDING
Martin Van der Gugten: “In my opinion notions of Democracy and Knowledge are so strongly
connected that one could not survive without the other. In an information-flooded society as we
live in, we have be sure that policymaking is based on well-tailored, validated information and
applied knowledge. Otherwise our democratic future will be in the hands of populists and manipulators.”
79
Thu
rsd
ay
, Au
gu
st 2
7th
Defining challenges and taking next steps towards
Knowledge Democracy.
In this session the results, of the individual
contribution from each participant of the
conference, will be harvested.
The recommendations that will be handed out
after lunch will be prepared through discussion
and prioritisation by the participants in this
session.
12.30 - 13.00 LUNCH BREAK AND WALK TO ACADEMY BUILDING
Plen
ary
Sess
ion
Plan
ning
for
Act
ion
• Pr
epar
ing
Rec
omm
enda
tion
s |
Plen
ary
Sess
ion
August 27th 11.20 – 12.30
Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Preparing Recommendations
August 27th 11.20 – 12.30
Kamerlingh Onnes Building
Planning for action
In this open space session, the central objective is
to design a framework to disseminate the results
of the conference throughout society. Your
initiatives are welcome!
80Th
urs
da
y, A
ug
ust
27
th
The accumulated recommendations of the
participants of the conference will be presented to
distinguished leaders in the domains of Politics,
Science, Media and Industry.
Hans van der Vlist is the Permanent Secretary of
the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment since 26 january 2007. Additional
functions he fulfills are President of the
Corporation for Local Products in the Nederlands,
Membership of the Boards of: International
Filmfestival Rotterdam, Rotterdam Festivals,
Member of Advisory Board TNO Construction and
Substrate, Member of Rotterdam Energy and
Climate Council. From 2001 until the end of 2006
he was Director-General for Environmental
Protection at the Ministry of Housing, Spatial
Planning and the Environment. Other previous
positions were related to Water Management and
Public Works. Hans van der Vlist studied Road and
Hydraulic Engineering at the Delft University of
Technology (TU), the Netherlands.
15.30 FINAL REMARKS BY THE CONFERENCE CHAIR, ROELAND J. IN ’T VELD
15.30 HIGH TEA
Pres
enta
tion
of R
ecom
men
dati
ons
| Pl
enar
y Se
ssio
n
August 27th 3.30 – 15.30 Academy Building
Presentation of Recommendations
Chair ir. Hans van der Vlist, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), the Netherlands
Panel prof. Paul F. van der Heijden, Rector Magnificus, Leiden University, the Netherlands
prof. Uri Rosenthal, Leiden University and Senator, the Netherlands
drs. Willem Schoonen, Chief Editor, newspaper Trouw, the Netherlands
dr. Herman Tjeenk Willink, Vice President, Council of State, the Netherlands
mrs. Gerdi Verbeet, President, House of Representatives of the States General, the Netherlands
dr. Hans Wijers, Chair of the Board of Management, AkzoNobel, the Netherlands
Hans Wijers: “It is time we put our money where our mouth is. Without a significant step-up in
investing in the knowledge economy, our country will become yesterday’s news.”
Uri Rosenthal: “The direct transference of academic and professional knowledge is merely
one of the great array of impulses affecting politicians’ thought processes and actions. For
academics and professionals, this is often difficult to understand. They can however find solace
in the fact that their knowledge does indirectly influence policy and decision-making processes.”
colofon
© 2009, RMNO, Den Haag, Netherland
Conference Manager Ana Lidia Aneas Moyano, RMNO
Graphic design A10plus, Rotterdam
Print Delta Hage, Den Haag
colofon
© 2009, RMNO, Den Haag, Netherland
Conference Manager Ana Lidia Aneas Moyano, RMNO
Graphic design A10plus, Rotterdam
Print Delta Hage, Den Haag