In search of systemic innovation for sustainable development: A design praxis emerging from a decade of social learning inquiry

Processes of designing for systemic innovation for sustainable development (SD) through the lens of three long-term case studies are reported. All case studies, which originated from the SLIM (Social Learning for the Integrated Management and Sustainable Use of Water at Catchment Scale) Project, funded within the EU Fifth Framework Program (2001–2004), constitute inquiry pathways that are explored using a critical incident approach. The initial starting conditions for each inquiry pathway are compared; significant pathway dependencies are identified which foster the development of social learning processes locally, but constrain their uptake and embedding across the wider system of interest. In the first case study, in England & Wales, promising developments in the application of social learning approaches to river basin planning over an initial 3-year period were subsequently marginalised, only to resurface towards the end of the 10-year period of study. In the second, South African case study, significant spaces for social learning and innovation in integrated water resources management were opened up over a five year period but closed down again, primarily as the result of lack of policy support by national government. The third, Italian, case study was designed to assess options for adapting to climate change by opening up new learning spaces between researchers, stakeholders and policy makers. A case for investing in local level systemic innovation through social-learning praxis design approaches and in learning processes around well contextualised case-studies is supported. However, concomitant investment by policy makers in social learning as an alternative, but complementary, governance mechanism for systemic innovation for SD is needed.     

Graduate learning outcomes in science: variation in perceptions of single- and dual-degree students

The development of transferrable skillsets, articulated in statements of graduate learning outcomes, is emphasised in undergraduate science degree programmes. Science students enrolled in dual (double) degrees comprise a significant minority of Australian science undergraduates. Research comparing perceptions of single and dual degree students on their science learning outcomes has rarely been explored. The Science Students Skills Inventory was used to compare the perceptions of single (n = 640) and dual (n = 266) degree undergraduate science students. The instrument explored science graduate learning outcomes across six indicators: importance; the extent to which outcomes were included; the extent to which they were assessed; improvement; confidence; and likely future use. Analysis of findings, employing the planned–enacted–experienced curricula framework, offers insight into potential avenues towards coherence of the experienced curriculum by arguing the need for shared perceptions of graduate learning outcomes for single and dual degree science students. The key contribution of this study is a shift towards progressive curriculum development that draws on both single and dual degree student perspectives to achieve graduate learning outcomes. Recommendations include: whole-of-programmes curricular pathways premised on progressive development of learning outcomes that are inclusive of dual degree students, explicit interdisciplinary learning opportunities, and adoption of dual/single status as a demographic variable reported in future research.     

Where are the Missing Masses? The Quasi-Publics and Non-Publics of Technoscience

The paper offers a political-philosophical analysis of the state and publics in the age of technoscience to propose three distinct categories of publics: scientific-citizen publics constituted by civil society, quasi-publics that initiate another kind of engagement through the activation of ??political society,?? and non-publics cast outside these spheres of engagement. This re-categorization is possible when the central role of the state in its citizens?? engagement with technoscience is put upfront and the non-Western empirical contexts are taken seriously by Science, Technology and Policy (STP) studies. The paper argues that in most of the world the state maintains a political contract with technoscience to form a functional coupling as the state-technoscience duo, which shapes public engagement with science through different functional modalities of government. Civil society is the sphere of legitimate engagement and participation in technoscientific issues for the scientific-citizen publics. The quasi-publics choose to be in the shady zone of political society establishing a paralegal relationship with the state-technoscience duo, while the non-publics come into being due to conditions of extra-legality created by the duo. The non-publics are implicated in the political community paradoxically as an excluded category who cannot be included in deliberation because of their status as being expelled from political community in a ??state of exception.?? The paper proposes that the scientific-citizen publics are mobilized in contrast to the quasi-publics and with reference to the non-publics, helping STP studies to identify the ??missing masses?? of technoscience.