| Title: |
Knowledge Representation for Socio- Natural Research
|
| Resource Type: |
document --> technical publication --> report
|
| Country: |
EU Projects
|
| Year: |
2002 |
| Availability: |
Knowledge Representation for Socio-Natural Research (N. Winder), Dicussion paper
|
| Author 1/Producer: |
Winder, N.
|
| Author / Producer Type: |
EC Project
|
|
EUGRIS Keyword(s): |
Contaminated land-->Soil and groundwater processes-->Soil and groundwater processes overview
|
| Short description: |
New computational technology allows us to produce beautiful software tools
and so has created a situation in which applied scientists can no longer ignore
cosmetic issues. Almost everyone engaged in the development of Decision
Support Systems (DSS) is adding computational bells and whistles and daisychaining
established simulation tools to justify the adjectives “generic” and
“user-friendly” that secure peer approval and access to competitively tendered
research contracts. Using the word “generic” in this context is ironic. If there
really are generic lessons to be learned about DSS, they are unlikely be found
by deploying computational artefacts with a life expectancy of three to five
years. Indeed, some experienced commentators complain that form is now
valued more highly than content. They describe the latest generation of DSS
tools as LIAR systems (Let It Appear Realistic) and shake their snowy heads
in mock disbelief.
They are only half right. There is no reason why the exploitation of “front-end”
technology to bring results easily before the eye should be equated with weak
science. However, it is indubitable that trends towards increasing complexity
in DSS seem to be driven by an aesthetic, rather than an intellectual agenda.
It is possible to develop methods of DSS evaluation that look beyond the
beautiful “front end” to see whether the conceptual core is sound or rotten but
this hardly ever happens. Instead, evaluators and developers talk about DSS
as ‘stand-alone’ software tools as if they were games, word processors or
spreadsheets. This is no longer acceptable.
The AQUADAPT papers Winder – Knowledge representation
The fifth Framework Programme requires that the policy maker be integrated
into the development and deployment of DSS tools. This has created many
problems for consortia, not least among them that of divining who policy
makers are and what they do with the results of scientific endeavour. I am not
going to address these issues in my briefing paper but will seek instead to
communicate some ideas about integrative systems developed within the
management- and political-science literature. My paper resolves into three
parts. The first part deals with developments in systems theory over the
second half of the last century. Its purpose is to show why “hard” systems
methods often fail. The second part uses ideas from “soft” systems theory and
personal experience to construct a formal model of scientific endeavour. The
third section sketches the principal results of a practical case study and seeks
to ease the reader towards a less cosmetic approach to policy relevant
research.
|
|
Submitted By:
|
Dr Stefan Gödeke WhoDoesWhat?
Last update: 14/02/2006
|
|
|
