nate's+imagining+change+and+solutions

= Imagining Change =

This exercise helps you think broadly about potential solutions to a sustainability problem. The questions b elow ask you to generate a list of changes that could help to solve this problem across a variety of social and technical systems.

The Problem:
Natural gas development causes environmental, health, climate, and social impacts. These impacts are not taken into account in policy making. Public misunderstanding of science, media, and policy limits public knowledge in a way that increases the severity of such impacts. Industry public relations strategies employ tactics that rely on misinformation and evidence-denial. PR is involved with the funding of illegitimate scientific studies that ignore the academic rigor of the scientific method. When these studies are used in the political decision making process there is a conflict-of-interest that undermines the democratic process.

What changes would help to solve this problem?
broadly, if corporations had less rights and individuals had more rights that would probably go a long way. not really achievable in any measurable way.


 * if information distribution was more "equal", or even if biases were declared when media is released.
 * one way of declaring a bias is to state where the support funding for your organization (news source, advocacy group, academic paper, etc)
 * including declaring that funding may represent a conflict of interest
 * same thing as wanting more "transparency" in governments and corporations.

Changes in policy (local, national, or international):

 * legislators and policymakers disallowed to accept funding from interested parties when creating legislation for said parties.
 * legislators not allowed to base decisions from evidence presented from sources with a conflict of interest.

Changes in the legal system:

 * individuals should have rights that extend beyond that of corporations.
 * reduce rights of corporations

Changes in media coverage:

 * ==== declared bias, funding, conflict of interest ====

Changes in the way political decisions are made:

 * should be based from peer-reviewed science without conflict of interest
 * science should include both hard and soft sciences

Changes in the ways organizations function:

 * be mindful of the media they produce. don't oversimplify complex concepts
 * sticks to facts
 * anecdotes are data too

Changes in the educational system:

 * encourage youth to fact check and be skeptical to teach rational interpretation of media

Changes in the way people behave:

 * ====try to become more aware of where they and others get their information====
 * take an interest in local current events. become educated about local politics and local events especially
 * scientists should be encouraged to advocate for policy they think is appropriate. I think it is a weak argument for a scientist to not participant in politics or advocacy because they want to be "purely objective". At the least, I believe they can identify and call for further research in areas they believe are important.

Changes in the way people think:

 * make a distinction between facts and claims. my understanding is that facts are verifiable and claims are opinions posed as facts. claims can have supporting evidence

Changes in the way technology is designed and used:

 * precautionary principle
 * emphasize lifecycle analyses

Changes in the way money is spent:

 * corporations: spend money on education to increase public understanding instead on pseudoscience to limit public understanding
 * government: stop accepting money from corporations
 * advocacy organizations: spend money on education and public outreach