Jeroen P. van der Sluijs’s research while affiliated with University of Bergen and other places

This article explores how the modeling of energy systems may lead to an undue closure of alternatives by generating an excess of certainty around some of the possible policy options. We retrospectively exemplify the problem with the case of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) global modeling in the 1980s. We discuss different methodologies for quality assessment that may help mitigate this issue, which include Numeral Unit Spread Assessment Pedigree (NUSAP), diagnostic diagrams, and sensitivity auditing (SAUD). We illustrate the potential of these reflexive modeling practices in energy policy-making with three additional cases: (i) the case of the energy system modeling environment (ESME) for the creation of UK energy policy; (ii) the negative emission technologies (NETs) uptake in integrated assessment models (IAMs); and (iii) the ecological footprint indicator. We encourage modelers to adopt these approaches to achieve more robust, defensible, and inclusive modeling activities in the field of energy research.

Climate services’ main function has been to provide technical scientific evidence for decision-making in formal institutions. This article makes a case for recognising the diverse functions and meanings of climate services across the spectrum of institutions constituting climate governance. The article reports on research that identified climate services needs for building resilience in Bergen city (Norway) through a collaborative back-casting workshop with actors variously engaged in climate governance. Participants’ discussions raised four key observations on climate services. First, they saw the potential for using climate information in a diverse set of formal and informal institutions. Second, they considered how to adapt information to these diverse settings. Third, they looked at how information could enhance existing initiatives, rather than demanding ‘new’ products. And fourth, participants’ proposed climate services highlighted their diverse functions, and led the authors to suggest classifying services according to their principal functions. The article finishes by proposing a field of ‘social climate services’ that configures relationships between scientists and social actors, built on technologies of humility, for enriching the ongoing culturally and politically charged debates and practices around climatic change in informal institutional settings. Social climate services function can include enabling people to voice their concerns, learn, critically reflect on changes to culture and identity, build social networks, and try out new practices.

This paper explores how the modelling of energy systems may lead to undue closure of alternatives by generating an excess of certainty around some of the possible policy options. We exemplify the problem with two cases: first, the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) global modelling in the 1980s; and second, the modelling activity undertaken in support of the construction of a radioactive waste repository at Yucca Mountain (Nevada, USA). We discuss different methodologies for quality assessment that may help remedy this issue, which include NUSAP (Numeral Unit Spread Assessment Pedigree), diagnostic diagrams, and sensitivity auditing. We demonstrate the potential of these reflexive modelling practices in energy policy making with four additional cases: (i) stakeholders evaluation of the assessment of the external costs of a potential large-scale nuclear accident in Belgium in the context of the ExternE (External Costs of Energy) project; (ii) the case of the ESME (Energy System Modelling Environment) for the creation of UK energy policy; (iii) the NETs (Negative Emission Technologies) uptake in Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs); and (iv) the Ecological Footprint (EF) indicator. We encourage modellers to widely adopt these approaches to achieve more robust and inclusive modelling activities in the field of energy modelling.

The accumulating scientific evidence on global insect and pollinator decline is fuelling calls for pollinator conservation policies. A broad range of regulating and incentivising policies is undoubtedly needed to address the diverse threats to pollinator abundance and diversity, but implementing policies and regulations is beset by socio-political challenges. Lessons could be learned from the past and current applications of concepts central to biodiversity conservation. Given the uncertainties and data gaps, the concept of the Precautionary Principle (PP) is particularly important. The PP means that when it is scientifically plausible that human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm: uncertainty should not be an excuse to delay action. This paper reviews the role of the PP in pollinator conservation. The current research front is fragmented: the PP is briefly mentioned as relevant in literature on biodiversity conservation because of the scientific uncertainties regarding insect decline and their diverse drivers. A separate strand of literature contains studies on specific cases where the PP has played a role in the regulation of specific threats to pollinators: systemic insecticides and global trade in bees. Although limited to two significant threats to pollinator abundance and diversity, these studies provide important lessons on the challenges of implementing precautionary pollinator conservation policies and underline socio-political aspects of the ‘human-dimensions’ of pollinator conservation. Specifically, they highlight that ambiguity is a greater challenge than scientific uncertainty, which may be heightened when policies are intended to regulate specific economic sectors. We suggest that more attention should be paid to the discrepancy between the PP as formally included in policies or regulations and its inadequate implementation (too little too late) in a context of scientific uncertainty and societal conflict.

New information on the lethal and sublethal effects of neonicotinoids and fipronil on organisms is presented in this review, complementing the previous Worldwide Integrated Assessment (WIA) in 2015. The high toxicity of these systemic insecticides to invertebrates has been confirmed and expanded to include more species and compounds. Most of the recent research has focused on bees and the sublethal and ecological impacts these insecticides have on pollinators. Toxic effects on other invertebrate taxa also covered predatory and parasitoid natural enemies and aquatic arthropods. Little new information has been gathered on soil organisms. The impact on marine and coastal ecosystems is still largely uncharted. The chronic lethality of neonicotinoids to insects and crustaceans, and the strengthened evidence that these chemicals also impair the immune system and reproduction, highlights the dangers of this particular insecticidal class (neonicotinoids and fipronil), with the potential to greatly decrease populations of arthropods in both terrestrial and aquatic environments. Sublethal effects on fish, reptiles, frogs, birds, and mammals are also reported, showing a better understanding of the mechanisms of toxicity of these insecticides in vertebrates and their deleterious impacts on growth, reproduction, and neurobehaviour of most of the species tested. This review concludes with a summary of impacts on the ecosystem services and functioning, particularly on pollination, soil biota, and aquatic invertebrate communities, thus reinforcing the previous WIA conclusions (van der Sluijs et al. 2015).