Previous | Next | Session 3
Topic: BioPlatform E-conference closing comments
Conf: Session 3, Msg: 3935
From: Andreas Troumbis (atro@aegean.gr)
Date: 24/04/2003 12:02 PM
BioPlatform E-conference closing comments Andreas Troumbis andreas atro@aegean.gr
Dear e-conference participants,
With the end of our e-conference that lasted for a full 3 week period let us take the opportunity to thank you for your contribution and your interest that made our endeavor a success! As already announced, the opinions submitted will be presented and discussed after a stage of synthesis in the forthcoming EPBRS Meeting next month in Lesvos, Greece. The final document resulting from your contribution will be sent to you soon after the meeting.
Summaries of the 3 sessions have been posted, where the major points raised during the discussions are highlighted. However, the major and novel element of this conference is the omnipresent need expressed by scientists to explore paths connecting their research strategies and epistemological method to a broader ethical perspective. The theme of biotic resources was supposed to explore the limits of the utilitarian argument as well as its usefulness regarding the ongoing societal 'mutations' initiated by a deeply transforming society, economy and understanding of environmental determinism. The message I got is that scientists are not longer 'satisfied' in the traditional role of procuring knowledge and tools to the society for informed policy-making. Rather, they ask for increased collaboration, cross-fertilisation and possibly integration between different perspectives, disciplines, scales and methods for coping with the challenge of global environmental change.
In other words, what appeared an unnecessary burden, driven by the political-correctness of the Commission five years ago, seems to be a pre-requisite today. Is this a sign of capitulation of scientists in the 'fight' around the two cultures' gap? Probably not! Biodiversity and environmental science were (are!) typically meta-science, with all advantages from the multitude of approaches and concepts coming from their constituent parties, but also several pathologies caused by the methodological chaos and sometimes ignorance of the foundations of individual disciplines.
I would like to think that we live the birth of a real biodiversity and environmental science, where the primary focus will be the understanding of complex environment-society interactions, the identification of driving forces for change and the exploration of development trajectories that should have a significantly smaller burden on the environment.
Cordially,
Andreas Troumbis and Yiannis Matsinos, E-conference moderators