445
edits
Students:Reframing workshop: Difference between revisions
Students:Reframing workshop (view source)
Revision as of 12:33, 27 August 2012
, 12:33, 27 August 2012no edit summary
Jana Dlouha (talk | contribs) (Created page with "3 groups of students representing: *Environmental capital *Ecological capital *Social capital For our case: identify resources, processes, products or benefits, mutual interre...") |
Jana Dlouha (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | |||
"Workshop setting which allows participants to explore different analytical frameworks and refine their problem perception."<ref>Ridder, D., Mostert, E., & Wolters, H. A. (2005). Learning together to manage together. Improving participation in water management. Harmonizing Collaborative Planning European Project. University of Osnabrück (Eds), Osnabrück, Germany. Available from http://www.harmonicop.uni-osnabrueck.de/handbook.php</ref> | |||
''Do you se the glass half empty, or half full? Reframing is the art of turning problems into possibilities.'' | |||
== Workshop setting == | |||
3 groups of students representing: | 3 groups of students representing: | ||
*Environmental capital | *Environmental capital | ||
*Ecological capital | *Ecological capital | ||
*Social capital | *Social capital | ||
Each group should: identify resources, processes, products or benefits, mutual interrelations of or within each of the concepts - relevant for our case. | |||
Which development goals are associated with them? Are there in principle | Which development goals are associated with them? Are there 3 (in principle) different development scenarios? Or do they empower each other? | ||
== Issue (brown coal mining) from diverse perspectives (envi, eco social | == Issue (brown coal mining) from diverse perspectives (envi, eco, social)== | ||
*Which of the perspectives contradict to the other(s)? | |||
*Which of the perspectives contradict | |||
*Are there any stakeholders that perceive situation mainly from one of these viewpoints? | *Are there any stakeholders that perceive situation mainly from one of these viewpoints? | ||
*Pay attention to social capital – how is it related to other two? | *Pay attention to social capital – how is it related to the other two? | ||
* | *Sustainable development strategies should include all 3 dimensions – how is it possible to outline links between them? Is there any integrative perspective? | ||
== Analysis of mind maps and cases by individual stakeholders == | == Analysis of mind maps and cases by individual stakeholders == | ||
| Line 18: | Line 22: | ||
#Reveal “hidden paradigms” under stakeholder perceptions: envi, eco social capital. | #Reveal “hidden paradigms” under stakeholder perceptions: envi, eco social capital. | ||
#Where the conflict in these assumptions causes the conflict in real activities and future perspectives? | #Where the conflict in these assumptions causes the conflict in real activities and future perspectives? | ||
#3 development scenarios (social = integrative?, economic = socially destructive?) - how are affected by the “hidden paradigms”? | #Analyse 3 development scenarios (social = integrative?, economic = socially destructive?) - how are affected by the “hidden paradigms”? | ||
== References == | |||
<references/> | |||