Future of Water-Energy-Food Nexus & Innovation Upscaling

1. Understanding the future of the water-energy-food nexus, and implications for innovation upscaling. Claire Hoolohan

2. Research questions: • In what ways will society, technology and climate of the UK WEF nexus change by 2050? (What could the UK look like in 2050?) • What are the implications of these changes for nexus-innovations? (What could nexus-innovations look like in future? What forms of governance and ownership emerge? And with what patterns of production and consumption will nexus-innovations interact?) • How do these changes affect the rate, scale and efficacy of innovation deployment? (Why do these changes matter?) • What can we learn about how to accelerate the scaling up of nexus-innovations (so that they might more effectively contribute to addressing the challenges that face the water-energy-food nexus?)

3. Key lessons: • A first? Looking at water, energy and food in an integrated way is a-typical of the scenario literature and nexus-research is primarily retrospective / prospective enquiry.

4. Key lessons: • A first? Looking at water, energy and food in an integrated way is a-typical of the scenario literature and nexus-research is primarily retrospective / prospective enquiry. • There are lots of different types of up-scaling to consider!

5. What do we mean by upscaling?

6. Key lessons: • A first? Looking at water, energy and food in an integrated way is a-typical of the scenario literature and nexus-research is primarily retrospective / prospective enquiry. • There are lots of different types of upscaling to consider. • Context is absolutely vital. The landscape of social, physical and governance developments in which innovation occurs effects both up-scaling and performance. Failing to consider context is failing to develop lasting solutions.

7. Key lessons: • A first? Looking at water, energy and food in an integrated way is a-typical of the scenario literature and nexus-research is primarily retrospective / prospective enquiry. • There are lots of different types of upscaling to consider. • Context is absolutely vital. The landscape of social, physical and governance developments in which innovation occurs effects both up-scaling and performance. Failing to consider context is failing to develop lasting solutions. • Transdisciplinary methods are disruptive. They help to unsettle dominant assumptions, framings, and methods and simultaneously open a creative dialogue about alternatives. They’re therefore essential.

8. Key lessons: • A first? Looking at water, energy and food in an integrated way is a-typical of the scenario literature and nexus-research is primarily retrospective / prospective enquiry. • There are lots of different types of upscaling to consider. • Context is absolutely vital. The landscape of social, physical and governance developments in which innovation occurs effects both up-scaling and performance. Failing to consider context is failing to develop lasting solutions. • Transdisciplinary methods are disruptive. They help to unsettle dominant assumptions, framings, and methods and simultaneously open a creative dialogue about alternatives. They’re therefore essential. • BUT it is very difficult to analyse and effectively communicate transdisciplinary research findings …

9. Method: overview • Morphological Analysis to develop three narratives: • Identified themes, discourses and root assumptions from existing single sector scenario studies; • Articulated qualitative descriptions of life in 2050 referring to social, technological and climatic changes that effect water, energy & food systems. • Workshop method 1 to validate & specify the outcomes for innovation. • Workshop method 2 to explore the implications, opportunities and processes of change in each scenario. • Analysis

10. 2. Participatory workshops • 1 day, 25 participants including “Innovators” representing anaerobic digestion, redistribution of surplus food, insects. Intermediaries; Businesses, NGO’s, Network co-ordinators, Funders. Policy makers in energy, food, water. Consultants from legal, financial and research orgs. • 2 Key questions: • 1. What are the implications of these scenarios for the nexus-innovations of today? • 2. What are the key changes that will enable effective up-scaling in each scenario?

11. Session 1: What are the implications of these scenarios for the nexus-innovations of today? • Which kinds of AD, insect production/eating, surplus food distribution flourish in this scenario (ownership models, services/functions, scale, location, connection/integration)   • Which kinds … seem like they might struggle / fail in this scenario? • Who are involved? (and who aren’t?) • What scale are we talking about? (explore “scale” in terms of throughput, number of people employed/involved, size of network / supply chains) • What challenges does this scenario pose for innovation X? • What opportunities does this scenario pose for innovation X?

12. What could nexus-innovations look like? Share and Connect • AD: • Plants of varying sizes provide local communities with bespoke resource management solutions, focussed on nutrient and organic waste management. • Large commercial plants uncommon without community share schemes. • Planning disputes are mediated by community interest groups. • Insects • Insect production uses organic waste and heat from local industry (including AD). • Insects included in the ‘grow your own’ market and small farms are found in allotments and community gardens. Eaten by growers or used as chicken feed. • Community owned insect farms are common with people holding shares in larger, more efficient production processes. • Redistribution • Food waste reduced by low-tech solutions that also improve social cohesion (e.g. apps, supper clubs and community fridges). • SMEs and community enterprises produce secondary products from edible wastes (e.g. Toast Ale and ChicP). • Restaurants vary their menus, working with suppliers to accommodate surpluses. Workshop report available online: https://bit.ly/2REsONH

13. What could nexus-innovations look like?Create and Cope • AD: • Growth in UK farming increases demand. For fertilisers and biofuels. Rapid innovation enhances the quality of non-energy outputs. • Small scale AD common in both rural and urban areas. Households and businesses use AD to turn inedible food waste into growing material and bio-gas. • Large scale AD is used to process inedible wastes from the agri-food system to produce biomaterials, fuel, chemicals, digestate and gas for UK industry. • Insects • Insects extensively used as animal feed; large-scale UK farming reduces the reliance on overseas imports. • Food courts provide outlets to experiment with food, including new insect products for personal consumption. Household insect farms are common; entrepreneurs have designed ‘coffee-pod-style’ starter kits to increase accessibility. • Redistribution • Risks of food scarcity evident, food prices high, tolerance of wonky produce increases. • A resurgence of traditional skills allows people to prolong the life of produce, manage gluts and make use of damaged produce. A higher incidence of dining-out makes edible wastes easier to use and inedible wastes easier to collect.

14. What could nexus-innovations look like?Big and Smart • AD: • AD the preferred route for inedible organic wastes. • Farms and factories have AD on site (sometimes in same space) to produce energy, biomaterials, pharmaceuticals, and chemicals from hybridised feedstocks. • Public services have appropriately sized digesters on-site. • Delivery of digestate to soils is optimised with regulation and automated application. • Insects • Production dominated by few large, heavily automated businesses. • Localised and standardised; verified breeds, breeding systems and trade practices. • Insects are used as feed for livestock and pets, or as an enriching agent in products for people, reducing the volume of meat proteins in the market. • Redistribution • Overproduction lessened by smart management (retailers accommodate gluts, farmers adapt to demand). Smart packaging senses deterioration to reduce waste . • Rise in convenience food increases end-of night surplus; eateries commonly offer cheap or free food at closing time. • Inedible wastes are disposed via a centralised organic waste management system (e.g. via macerators). Workshop report available online: https://bit.ly/2REsONH

15. Session 2: What are the key changes that might need to happen to enable effective up-scaling in each scenario? • Society, Economy, Policy, Technology • Short term (up to 2025) • Mid term (2025-40) • Long term (2040 – 50)

16. Results Things that effect nexus innovation performance and the rate and pace of implementation: • Changing public opinion that aid or inhibit innovation uptake; • Changing everyday practices effect the compatibility of a given nexus-innovation; • Locality the situation of an innovation relative to its inputs / users; • Regional climate and how changes will effect demand in future; • Transparency & trust within the wider innovation system; • Ownership and organisation and the political, legal and financial arrangements within which innovations become situated.

17. Key lessons: Context is vital. Failing to consider the wider developments in which an innovation is to fail to develop solutions that will fit with future society. • Risks that anticipated benefits are not realised, or not on the timelines anticipated. • Risks locking-in unsustainable solutions. • Risks diverting investment from alternatives. A critique of IAMs: • IAMs do not capture wider developments in which technologies are situated so offer strong support for technologies with profound caveats and contingencies; • By assuming ‘one size fits all’, IAMs do not reflect the varying performance of innovations in different places; • By emphasising technologies that ‘fit’ with today’s society, “solutions” are unlikely to be appropriate for future conditions. • Though technological solutions may offer relief, investment in isolation risks missing; (i) the interconnected changes in the practices of people and organisations through which their benefits will be realised; (ii) the physical and geographical determinants of their efficacy; and (iii) dependencies on governance goals/processes that leave them vulnerable to future change.

18. Different types of research needed • For an innovation to be up-scaled there is need for efforts to reconfigure societal systems such that incumbent systems of production, provision and consumption are unsettled and space is created for alternatives. • Transdisciplinary methods are disruptive, and so part of this process. They help to unsettle dominant assumptions, framings, and methods and simultaneously open a creative dialogue about alternatives. • Questions regarding risk, justice, equity, prosperity and societal wellbeing are pertinent to all discussions on societal transition, and no less so of those designed to address grand environmental challenges. Indeed there are noteworthy injustices and inequitable outcomes in present innovation trajectories, particularly around the distribution of benefits. Participation in research, planning and policy-making is vital. • It is absolutely imperative that a more rich and accurate understanding of grand challenges is not overlooked simply because it appears too complex. • Allowing sensitivities such as these to inform policy and management requires different research methods and decision support tools to those that dominate the policy landscape at present. In short, rebalancing the influence of quantitative, sector specific tools with integrated transdisciplinary approaches is critical for decision making that is sustainable across the water-energy-food nexus.

19. Outputs: Papers: • Larkin, Hoolohan, McLachlan Embracing context and complexity in the water-energy-food nexus. Manuscriptsubmitted to Global Environmental Change • Hoolohan, Larkin, McLachlan Transdisciplinary learning about complexity with water-energy-food scenarios Manuscript in prep for Futures maybe? Also: • C. Hoolohan, A. Larkin, C. McLachlan, R. Falconer, I. Soutar, J. Suckling, L. Varga, I. Haltas, A. Druckman, D. Lumbroso, M. Scott, D. Gilmour, R. Ledbetter, S. McGrane, C. Mitchell, D. Yu, 2018 Engaging stakeholders in research to address water–energy–food (WEF) nexus challenges. Sustainability Science 13(5):1415–1426 • C. Hoolohan, I. Soutar, J. Suckling, A. Druckman, A. Larkin, C. McLachlan 2018 Stepping-up innovations in the water–energy–food nexus: A case study of anaerobic digestion in the UK. Geographical Journal 0(0):1-15 https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12259 Blogs: • Larkin et al., (2018) Messy but meaningful – how to make interdisciplinary water-energy-food-environment research more influential. Policy@Manchester. https://bit.ly/2zg6VxD • Hoolohan et al., (2018) Understanding the future of the water, energy, food nexus. Stepping Up Blog: https://bit.ly/2Fp7AAE Reports: Hoolohan et al. (2017) The water-energy-food nexus in 2050: Understanding challenges and opportunities for up-scaling innovations. Report prepared by the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change, University of Manchester, UK Available online: https://bit.ly/2REsONH

20. Planned continuations • The scenarios are to be used to consider the possibilities and challenges of achieving a sustainable Industry 4.0 in the water and food sector (Hoolohan, fellowship). • UKRI and MetOffice Climate Resilience (lead by Larkin) unsuccessful, reviewing options …

21. Thanks!More info: steppingupnexus.org.ukclaire.hoolohan@manchester.ac.uk@clairehoolohan

23. Overview: • Research questions • Key lessons (Quick version) • Method • Results • Key lessons (The longer version) • Outputs • Continuations (planned and possible)

24. Scenarios (in a backcasting sense) Method “Structurally different stories about how the future might develop, […] presented in a way that triggers imagination and reflection, thus creating visions of the future. Scenarios challenge underlying assumptions and established truths. http://www.forschungsnetzwerk.at/downloadpub/IGLO_WP2009-10_Scenarios.pdf

25. Method: Morphological analysis overview • Select one option on each row to give a broad description of change. • Not exclusive ; selecting ‘state’ doesn’t exclude ‘market’ and ‘society’ agency, but state becomes primary focus). • Pro’s: • Transparent & structured; • scenarios are distinctive and balanced; and • retains complexity and multidimensionality. • Cons: • - Simplistic (no more so than other scenario generation methods)

26. Method: Key descriptives • Climate Impact: • Climate change is inevitable; • Various sources of uncertainty mean the UK’s future climate is unknowable; • UKCP09 scenarios provide reference data to understand possibilities. • Climate Action: • Adaptation and mitigation efforts have wide-ranging implications for future society. • Many perspectives + unknown effects of action + decisions built on decision outcomes that are not yet known = substantial uncertainty. • IPCC, CCC reports etc. offer qual./quant guidance on what could happen. • Governance: • Different modes of governance make different futures possible, probable and unlikely etc. • It is rare that governance is articulated in scenarios research. • But existing social science research provides guidance to consider certain dimensions such as the level of participation, reflexivity, and centrality of decision making. • Here we are careful to be explicit about the assumptions made to connect to this literature.

28. Decentralised service based economy; highly entrepreneurial / experimental society; high rate of participation. Low level of climate impact, due to a high level of climate action that permeates through every economic sector. Centralised development of large-scale smart, automated) operations. Low participation but high level of social satisfaction; climate action the lowest level of climate action (still in line with CCC 2oC); climate impacts less than modelled predictions. Climate action didn’t go as well or as quickly as planned; climate impacts have been greater than anticipated in some areas; one-size-fits-all mitigation and adaptation has proven problematic but creative local solutions abound. High level of variation in different areas of the UK, and different communities.