1 / 25

Challenges and Perspectives for Applied Territorial Research: The ‘ESPON Way’

Challenges and Perspectives for Applied Territorial Research: The ‘ESPON Way’. ESPON Seminar 14-15 November 2006, Espoo Simin Davoudi Director of Social Systems IRES Institute for Research on Environment and Sustainability. Evidence matters for criminal conviction!.

lhebert
Download Presentation

Challenges and Perspectives for Applied Territorial Research: The ‘ESPON Way’

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Challenges and Perspectives for Applied Territorial Research: The ‘ESPON Way’ ESPON Seminar 14-15 November 2006, Espoo Simin Davoudi Director of Social Systems IRES Institute for Research on Environment and Sustainability

  2. Evidence matters for criminal conviction! • “It is a capital mistake to theorise before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgement”

  3. Evidence matters for political conviction, too! ESDP first official draft, points to the need for: • “undertaking longer term research on relevant spatial issues as a part of continuing updating process of the ESDP.” • (CEC, 1997:90)

  4. Contextual challenges to European territorial research At the EU level: • Low profile of territorial policy compared • Limited recognition of, and funding for, social science research in the EU research programmes • Lack of available, accessible, harmonised and consistent spatially-relevant data and indicators • Dominance of the economic imperatives in data collection

  5. Contextual challenges to European territorial research At the national level, there are differences in: • Weights given to the European dimension of territorial development in different MS • Modes of governing, funding and managing research • Ways of assessing research excellence • Approaches to dissemination and publication • Educational and research traditions • Cultural and language diversities • Data collection, compatibility, availability and accessibility

  6. Contextual challenges to European territorial research • The inter-disciplinarity: • Different understanding of what constitutes knowledge • Different intellectual traditions • Multiple methodological approaches • Different ways of conceptualising and framing the problem

  7. ‘ESPON Way’: A brave attempt!

  8. ESDP: Making the case! • Recognising the need for improving the knowledge base of the EU policy concerns about territorial disparities and diversities

  9. SPESP: Paving the way! • Piloting the idea of an observatory • Identifying key research questions • Setting up the first network of 200+ researchers

  10. ESPON 2006: Raising to the challenge ofbuilding up the evidence-base • Scientific challenge: • Type and quality of evidence produced • Socio-political challenge: • Nature and extent of influence on policy

  11. Descriptive and policy analysis Macro level trends Widening of analysis Transcending EU boundaries: ‘ESPON Space’ Highlighting gaps in data and indicators Quantitative Rigorous and consistent Committed researchers Analytic findings on causal relationships Micro level trends Deepening of analysis Being constrained by the NUTS system Being driven by data availability Qualitative Vague and fragmented Contextual constraints ESPON’s score on scientific challenge: Strengths Weaknesses

  12. Overall verdict… • An impressive outcome • 34 projects, 25000+ pages of reports, numerous indicators, typologies, models, maps and scenarios • Far beyond the initial expectations • Within a short period of time • With limited resources • Often under pressure to produce ‘quick fixes’ • But, enjoying a high degree of motivation, commitment and dedication from all people involved

  13. The socio-political challengeESPON’s interface with policy 2 views of policy-research interface • Instrumental / utilitarian view • Enlightenment / conceptual view

  14. Expert ‘on top’ model Research leads policy, hence policy is research-driven Expert ‘on tap’ model Research follows policy, hence research is policy-driven Instrumental Viewassumes that research feeds into policy in a direct, linear and unproblematic way

  15. The ‘expert on tap’ model • Evidence has to be timely and available on demand • Research for policy’s sake is highly selective • Policy making is a rational process

  16. Problem of little effect! • Much of the applied research commissioned by policy makers sit on the shelves, gather dust! • How evidence is used (or not used) in policy depends on the context within which it is used! • Evidence is not the only contender for influencing policy • There are other powerful competitors, such as: • Ideology, interests, institutional norms, …

  17. Contrary to the instrumental view: “There is more to policy and practice than the disinterested pursuit of truth and wisdom”. (Solesbury, 2002: 93)

  18. Having access to all information doesn’t make the policy-making easier! • “… there is nothing a government hates more than to be well-informed; for it makes the process of arriving at decisions much more complicated and difficult”. (John Maynard Keynes in: Skidelsky, 1992:630). • Evidence can be incomplete, contradictory or inconclusive

  19. The enlightenment view • Rather than research serving policy agenda directly, its benefits are indirect and sometimes take longer to be realised. • Rather than producing ‘punchy policy messages’, the aim is to illuminate the landscape within which policy decisions are made • The emphasis is on evidence-informed policyrather than evidence-based policy

  20. Overall verdict ESPON’s enlightening influence on policy has been as important as (if not more) its the instrumental impact • Being the follow up to the ESDP process • Advocating the significance of territorial dimension • Keeping up the momentum for developing territorial research and policy • Keeping the debate about territorial cohesion alive • Exploring new ways of conceptualising and measuring peripheralities, imbalances and potentials • Creating an expanding forum for collective learning

  21. The ‘ESPON Community’

  22. ‘Information overload’ • “The U.S. Congress works largely through face-to-face dealings. … Research that arrives in written documents doesn’t have much of a chance” • (Weiss, 2001: 286) • The ‘25000+ pages’ syndrome!

  23. ESPON 2013:Improving the evidence • Developing strengths in analytical knowledge • Further focusing on causal relationships and future scenarios • Providing comparable regionalised data for ESPON’s expanding Space but, … • without compromising the depth for the breadth • ESPON does not intend to become just a ‘better Eurostat’ • Targeted Analysis: an opportunity for: • In-depth studies • Reaching out beyond the ESPON Community • Engaging with policy and practice at the sub-national level

  24. ESPON 2013:Strengthening the interface with policy • By enlarging the space for interaction between researchers and policy makers • By continuing to be policy-informed, but… • Not following the ‘expert on tap’ model • Ensuring that time and resources are commensurate to scope and scale of research • Not expecting research to be fed into policy in a direct, linear way!

  25. Commitment to good research! • Knowledge finds its way to: • Enlighten policy domain • Inform public debate • Influence collective action • Change attitudes and behaviours

More Related