SEL 21-Part B-SSH

PROPOSAL FULL TITLE: SustainEuroLife 21—Social Platform on Sustainable Lifestyles PROPOSAL ACRONYM: SEL 21 TYPE OF FUNDING SCHEME: Coordination and Support Action – CSA (supporting) WORKPROGRAMME TOPICS ADDRESSED Because

of

the

multi-dimensional

nature

of

issues

of

sustainability,

SustainEuroLife21 connects with a wide range of areas in FP7-SSH-2010 and in the FP7 SSH Indicative Strategic Roadmap. These include all other topics and challenges in Activity 8.2 (Paths towards Sustainable Development), as well as topics and challenges envisaged for 2011 and beyond in Activity 8.3 (Major Trends in Society and their Implications), in particular around health and ageing, and also in Area 8.5.1 (The Citizen in the EU), in particular in relation to active citizenship. There are also strong links beyond the SSH programme to other thematic priorities, such as Health, Food/Agriculture, Transport, Energy and Environment (including Climate Change), as well as to the join area of FP7-Ocean-2010 (The Ocean of Tomorrow), in particular in relation to climate change. NAME OF THE COORDINATING PERSON: Dr Séamus Ó Tuama LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Participant Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Participant Organisation name University College Cork KU Leuven Växjö University Universidad de Burgos Eco Innovation Europarama University of Newcastle University of Bologna University of Manchester Ddikeoma

Country Ireland Belgium Sweden Spain Belgium Lithuania UK Italy UK Greece

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proposal Full Title: SustainEuroLife 21—Social Platform on Sustainable Lifestyles....................................................................................................................................... 1  Proposal Acronym: SEL 21 ................................................................................................ 1  Type of Funding Scheme: Coordination and Support Action – CSA (supporting)................................................................................................................................. 1  Workprogramme topics addressed ................................................................................ 1  Name of the Coordinating Person: Dr Séamus Ó Tuama.................................. 1  List of Participants ................................................................................................................... 1  1.  Scientific and Technical Quality (SSH.2010.2.1-4 Social Platform on Sustainable Lifestyles).................................................................................................................... 5  1.1.  Concept and Objectives............................................................................................... 5  1.1.1.  Key Concepts and Rationale............................................................................ 6  1.1.2.  The European Context...................................................................................... 10  1.1.3.  The Architecture of SEL21.............................................................................. 11  1.1.4.  The Vertical Pillars .............................................................................................. 13  1.1.4.1  Vertical Pillar: Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges .............. 13  1.1.4.2  Vertical Pillar: The Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services 18  1.1.4.3  Vertical Pillar: Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture........... 21  1.1.4.4  Vertical Pillar: Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism.............................................................................................................. 25  1.1.4.5  Vertical Pillar: Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights29  1.1.4.6  Vertical Pillar: Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe ......................................................................................................... 33  1.1.5.  Transversal Module: Governance and Deliberative Processes.. 37  1.1.5.1  Platform based on open innovation.................................................... 38  1.1.5.2  Eco-innovation............................................................................................... 40  1.1.5.3  The Social Platform Experience and Social Polis....................... 42  1.2.  Quality and Effectiveness of the Support Mechanisms............................ 44  1.2.1. Overall Strategy of the Work Plan.................................................................. 44 

1.2.2. Timings of the Work Packages ........................................................................ 46  1.2.3 Work Description by Workpackages .............................................................. 47  1.2.3.1  Workpackage List ........................................................................................ 47  1.2.3.2  Deliverables List ........................................................................................... 48  1.2.3.3  List of Milestones ......................................................................................... 48  1.2.3.4  Description of Each Workpackage...................................................... 49  1.2.3.5  Summary Effort Table................................................................................ 71  1.2.4 Graphical Description of Components........................................................... 76  Figure 2.1: Vertical Pillars, Workpackages and Governance of SEL 21 . 76  1.2.5 Risk and Contingency Plan ................................................................................. 77  2.  Implementation ....................................................................................................................... 78  2.1.  Management structure and procedures............................................................ 78  2.2.  Scientific Leadership - individual workpackages.......................................... 78  2.3.  Overall management of SustainEuroLife 21 .................................................. 78  2.4.  Social Platform Scientific and Deliberative Coordination (WP11)....... 78  2.5.  Administration and finance ...................................................................................... 80  2.6 Individual Participants ..................................................................................................... 82  2.6.1 University College Cork, Institute for Social Sciences in the 21st Century....................................................................................................................................... 82  2.6.2 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (K.U.Leuven), Leuven Space and Society Research Centre (LSAS)................................................................................. 84  2.6.3  Växjö University, School of Health Sciences and Social Work..... 86  2.6.4 Universidad de Burgos, CIUMEDIA................................................................ 88  2.6.5 Eco Innovation ........................................................................................................... 89  2.6.6 Europarama................................................................................................................. 91  2.6.7 Newcastle University (UNEW) – Global Urban Research Unit (GURU) ...................................................................................................................................... 93  2.6.8 Bologna University Department of Sociologi A. Ardigò ........................ 95  2.6.9 University of Manchester School of Environment and Development (SED)........................................................................................................................................... 97 

2.6.10  INSTITUTE DDIKEOMA for the sustainable evolution of the Corfiot culture ......................................................................................................................... 99  3.  IMPACT ....................................................................................................................................101  3.1.  Expected impacts listed in the work programme .......................................101  3.1.1  Describe how your project will contribute towards the expected impacts listed in the workprogramme in relation to the topic or topics in question. ..................................................................................................................................101  3.1.2 Mention the steps that will be needed to bring about these impacts. Explain why this contribution requires a European (rather than a national or local) approach. .............................................................................................................103  3.1.3 Indicate how account is taken of other national or international research activities. .............................................................................................................104  3.1.4 Mention any assumptions and external factors that may determine whether the impacts will be achieved. .....................................................................104  3.2.  Dissemination and/or exploitation of project results, and management of intellectual property...........................................................................................................104  3.2.1 Elaborate a comprehensive dissemination plan. ...................................104  3.2.2 Describe the measures you propose and how these will increase the impact of the project. ................................................................................................104  3.2.3. Describe also your plans for the management of knowledge (intellectual property) acquired in the course of the project. ........................105  4.  ETHICS.....................................................................................................................................105  5.  REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................105 

1. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL QUALITY (SSH.2010.2.1-4 SOCIAL PLATFORM ON SUSTAINABLE LIFESTYLES) 1.1. CONCEPT AND OBJECTIVES This Social Platform will be organized both horizontally and vertically, making its own governance sufficiently sustainable across its different themes and initiatives. It will address, through a series of six coalitions of themes, what we designate as Vertical Pillars and simultaneously engage in a series of dialogues across and between theses pillars to appreciate the interconnectedness of the concept of sustainable lifestyles. Sustainability in terms of European civil society must be understood in the context of a communicative community or public in which all people are understood to have a point of view and have the right to express that point of view or voice. This is an essential element in fostering sustainable lifestyles in Europe for the 21st century, which will require the continued vibrancy of civil society through processes of learning, knowledge generation, opinion formation and the shaping of future orientations and actions. The second key element, which is intrinsically linked to the first, is about the economic and environmental imperatives of sustainability. We might envisage this relationship as a sort of triangle with points of society, economy and environment (including the relations among life spheres), enclosing the public, which is sustained through a magnetic force generated through systems of engagement, inclusion and governance. This social platform is built on these assumptions of social, economic and environmental sustainability. The social platform has six vertical pillars, which will attempt to capture the central thematics of social sustainability: i. Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges; ii. The Built Environment: Energy, Mobility, Public Services; iii. Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture; iv. Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism; v. Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights; and vi. Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe. Each pillar will develop a discourse with its genesis in its own thematic area, but recognizing that sustainable lifestyles rely on interdependencies and viability and thus the discourse must inform the other themes, bring learning from and to the other themes and address the bigger question of what is meant by sustainable lifestyles in the context of a whole range of challenges. These include for

instance the necessity to reduce levels of consumption of energy, environmental resources and transport, while at the same time enhancing the quality of life of all people in Europe, including an ageing population. We will have to recognize regional variation in Europe as well as a new diversity of identity within Europe and our responsibilities to global sustainability, not least of which is our relationship to the developing world. We also have a transversal module, which addresses Democratic Governance and Deliberative Processes; this is to reflect within the working of the Social Platform socially sustainable governance and deliberative process both as a modus operandi and as a means of extending the state-of-the-art for application in wider society. The Social Platform is built on a range of actors representative of European society, with the goal of deepening and expanding the network of participants in the platform in its 24 month life-cycle. This will involve basic networking, but more importantly it will involve an inclusive process of engagement. As a Social Platform we will offer additionality to the experiences of stakeholders such as CSOs, industry and individual residents and citizens of the European Research Area by engaging with them about sustainable lifestyles and by disseminating discussions, debates, findings and conclusions emanating from SEL 21. We recognize that citizens and stakeholders are at the very core of such a platform and that their contributions make the process authentic and give real energy and capacity to the collective learning process around sustainable lifestyles. During the funding period we will engage with the other Social Platforms developing a sustainable future in which this and other platforms can continue to contribute to the European public sphere and continue to evolve. This Social Platform will contribute a policy document and other supporting material to inform the SSH.2012-13 research agenda, it will take a prospective view towards Europe in 2050, it will help inform and promote discussion within European civil society on sustainable lifestyles, and will contribute to European interaction with the rest of the world in building a global approach to sustainable lifestyles. 1.1.1. KEY CONCEPTS AND RATIONALE Before we can begin to construct a Social Platform on Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe we need to understand the two key elements of such a concept. We need to understand what we mean by Europe, and we need to understand what we mean by

sustainable lifestyles. Both concepts are deeply contestable and the definitions emerging have been heavily influenced by specific orientations. To begin with let us state that we do not define Europe exclusively in geographical, historical and political contexts, but also in terms of what Ulrich Beck famously terms the European way of life. This is critically important in terms of addressing the concept of sustainable lifestyles. Likewise there is an extensive literature addressing definitions of social sustainability, which is a key definer for what we can understand to be a sustainable lifestyle. We borrow the definition used by Colantonio and Dixon (2009) in the report ‘Measuring Socially Sustainable Urban Regeneration in Europe’, to frame a concept of social sustainability and thus sustainable lifestyles: … social sustainability concerns how individuals, communities and societies live with each other and set out to achieve the objectives of development models, which they have chosen for themselves, taking also into account the physical boundaries of their places and planet earth as a whole.(18) The city of Vancouver defines social sustainability as ‘the ability to maintain and build on its own resources and have the resiliency to prevent and/or address problems in the future’ (2005). We envisage that a social platform needs to understand sustainable lifestyles in Europe in the same terms. However it needs also to be recognized that Europe is not self-contained, nor homogenous, nor with a common set of issues that are uniformly distributed. In other words addressing a concept of sustainable lifestyles means that we have to address this at a level that acknowledges that the concept of social sustainability is deeply complex, multidimensional and is applicable right from the domestic and local levels to the planetary. It is less the task of this social platform to define social sustainability than to explore what it means for the lifestyles of Europeans in the short and medium term between now and 2050. In the first instance we need to identify within the platform best practices for engaging around these issues such that we emerge with a clearer orientation for addressing sustainable lifestyles, that we can inform the SSH research roadmap 2012-2013 for future research and that we can begin to construct coalitions of discourse around the key issues. Conceptualizing social sustainability has been a theme in research, policy and academic literature at least since the concept sustainability entered the lexicon through the environmental movement in the 1960s. It gained traction through the Brundtland Commission and in more recent times the

issue of reconciling sustainability with social concerns has become increasingly important. Over the last decade, the urgency of environmental issues has led to a proliferation of debates and new scientific approaches towards environmental protection. Although natural sciences and technology have proposed an array of technocratic solutions under the banner of ecological modernisation, in the social sciences, the discourse that has prevailed at the policy level is that of the importance of the economy for promoting sustainable development. Indeed, environmental economics today dominate environmental discourse at the policy level (from water pricing, to carbon emissions, to energy), and the whole of the EU’s environmental legislation is founded upon the axiom of the importance of economic principles, notably the polluter pays principle and the need to ‘price’ the environment. However, treating pricing as a panacea for environmental problems is not only debatable theoretically; it has already produced a number of negative social and environmental effects when put in practice. With the private sector not willing or unable to play the role of the custodian of the environment, and the state sector lacking the funds to do so, the pensee unique of pricing and the focus on the importance of environmental economics as the best strategy for managing environmental protection has led to the neglect of an issue that has always been central in the protection or destruction of the environment: namely, people’s attitude towards, and lay knowledge about nature, or, to put it differently, the cultures of nature. The more nature is removed from everyday life and experience, the more it becomes something ‘out there’ separate from human societies, the more it becomes the job of ‘experts’ (either in the natural or in the social sciences) the more negative social and environmental effects our econometrics based policies will have. Indeed, many environmental disasters are due to the change in the relations between human beings and nature: from the way animals are kept and slaughtered, to the relations of humans to forests land. Rivers, forests, pastures, fish stock, that used to be a source of livelihood and directly protected by local human communities, are now considered to be ‘nobody’s’ or worse, privately owned with negative effects. Today there is an urgent need to put the everyday cultures of nature squarely back in the debate and research agenda for sustainable development, and to apply and develop methodologies beyond indicators, that bridge social sciences with humanities and engineering in an effort to understand how the cultures of nature change, and how they impact on environmental protection.

On a more positive vein the discussion on sustainability has rescued the ‘social’, with the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, it seemed that social rights had become enshrined as universal rights, however with the crisis of the welfare state and the emergence of neo-classical liberalism they became less prominent. The political pressure for the inclusion of the social has been kept on the agenda through the sustainability discourse. Through that process it has become reshaped in a way which shifts it from the individualized focus pertaining to classical liberal rights towards a collective concern, which in turn addresses the full lifecycle and also addresses intergenerational concerns and global issues. Through taking on board concepts of responsibility driven by figures like Hans Jonas and Piet Strydom, which include a concern for all living beings and for all future living beings, we are forced to understand human lifestyles not just as a matter of social rights and welfare, but also in the context of sustainable imperatives, which we have been forced to address in a very real sense since the culmination of World War II, but with increasing articulation with the emergence of a strong environmental movement in the 1960s. We now realize that we live in a fragile planet, with a level of contingency that we previously did not imagine, and at the centre of which is human action and human lifestyle. We cannot address these issues in unidimensional ways, we cannot approach them from the perspective of rationality or even hyperrationality (Bohman) alone. We have to reach solutions, which at best are only partial and contingent, in a collective way to address what Bruntland aptly called ‘our common future’. It is in the light of these imperatives that we build this social platform, in other words we are not engaging in an enclosed discussion among privileged actors, but attempting to engage as wide a community of voices as possible, primarily focused on Europe, but bearing in mind that Europe is an integral part of a human community and ecosystem that is planetary not continental. By helping address sustainable lifestyles in Europe we are contributing to a globally sustainable approach, we are both dealing with real issues for now and our future, but we are also seeking to lay out a framework that indicates how to engage and include people in solving problems that present at every level from each individual’s unique life to the global community, all life and future generations. We are not naïve and hubristic in imagining that we can solve an incredibly complex, interrelated, and ever changing set of issues, but we are hopeful that we can present one small step towards engaging on these issues. Each small positive step is a step in the right direction, as Confucius says ‘A journey of a

thousand miles begins with a single step’, this Social Platform is one such single step. 1.1.2. THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT Bearing in mind the European tradition, which was shaped by such epochal events as the French Revolution towards an agenda of liberty, equality and solidarity. The often painful birth and unfolding of democratic processes and civil society, with advances and setbacks. The deep scars of colonialism, the horror of the holocaust, the quenching of freedoms by repressive regimes East and West. All of these have shaped Europe, the seeds sown by the enlightenment have persisted through all of these episodes, from which an optimistic Europe emerges, shaped in large part by a common commitment to civil society and a cosmopolitan future. A sustainable Europe then is not reliant on closed identity projects, but open ones, not based on insularity and exclusion, but openness and engagement with the world. Our vision of sustainable lifestyles have to be open to change and challenges, presenting from a long menu that includes, a respect for autonomy, rights and equality; the ability to harness social capacities to address our common future; an ability to generate and sustain the economic wherewithal to underpin our needs for decent lifestyles; our capacity to change our lifestyles to meet challenges like climate change and a postcarbon future; change our consumption patterns (in a range or areas including food, energy, and transport); to maintain the high quality of life enjoyed by many Europeans, but to also to extend this to less privileged Europeans, while not jeopardizing the hopes and aspirations of future generations or the billions of people with whom we share the planet (not least in the developing world); deal with massive demographic challenges like ageing and migration; safeguarding the cultural wealth and diversity of Europe; providing for the educational needs of a changing world; and to bear in mind that how Europe deals with these challenges will impact on all life on Earth. A 24-month Social Platform is a miniscule step in this massive journey. However, we can address some of these issues in a meaningful way, we can explore future directions for research and we can begin to envisage ways of engaging all Europeans in plotting a common future in which we have sustainable lifestyles. We have decided to tackle this through a Social Platform that is organized both horizontally and vertically, making its own governance sustainable across its different themes and initiatives. It will address, through a series of six coalitions of themes, what we designate as Vertical Pillars and simultaneously engage in a series of

dialogues across and between theses pillars to appreciate the interconnectedness of the concept of sustainable lifestyles. Sustainability in terms of European civil society must be understood in the context of a communicative community or public in which all people are understood to have a point of view and have the right to express that point of view or voice. This is an essential element in fostering sustainable lifestyles in Europe for the 21st century, which will require the continued vibrancy of civil society through processes of learning, knowledge generation, opinion formation and the shaping of future orientations and actions. The second key element, which is intrinsically linked to the first, is about the economic and environmental imperatives of sustainability. We might envisage this relationship as a sort of triangle with points of society, economy and environment (including the relations among life spheres), enclosing the public, which is sustained through a magnetic force generated through systems of engagement, inclusion and governance. This social platform is built on these assumptions of social, economic and environmental sustainability. 1.1.3. THE ARCHITECTURE OF SEL21 The social platform has six vertical pillars, which will attempt to capture the central thematics of social sustainability: i. Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges; ii. The Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services; iii. Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture; iv. Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism; v. Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights; and vi. Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe. Each pillar will develop a discourse with its genesis in its own thematic area, but recognizing that social sustainability relies on interdependencies and viability and thus the discourse must inform the other themes, bring learning from and to the other themes and address the bigger question of what is meant by sustainable lifestyles in the context of the types of challenge addressed above.

Figure 1.1: Architecture of the SustainEuroLife 21 We will have to recognize regional variation in Europe as well as a new diversity of identity within Europe and our responsibilities to global sustainability, including our relationship to the developing world. We also have a transversal module, which addresses Democratic Governance and Deliberative Processes; this is to reflect within the working of the Social Platform socially sustainable governance and deliberative process both as a modus operandi and as a means of extending the state-of-the-art for application in wider society. The

Social Platform is built on a range of actors representative of European society, with the goal of deepening and expanding the network of participants in the platform in its 24-month life cycle. This will involve basic networking, but more importantly it will involve an inclusive process of engagement. As a Social Platform we will offer additionality to the experiences of stakeholders such as CSOs, industry and individual residents and citizens of the European Research Area by engaging with them about sustainable lifestyles and by disseminating discussions, debates, findings and conclusions emanating from the platform. We recognize that citizens and stakeholders are at the very core of such a platform and that their contributions make the process authentic and give real energy and capacity to the collective learning process around sustainable lifestyles. During the funding period we will engage with the other Social Platforms developing a sustainable future in which this and other platforms can continue to contribute to the European public sphere and continue to evolve. This Social Platform will contribute a policy document and other supporting material to inform the SSH.201213 research agenda, it will take a prospective view towards Europe in 2050, it will help inform and promote discussion within European civil society on sustainable lifestyles, and will contribute to European interaction with the rest of the world in building a global approach to sustainable lifestyles. We will now introduce discussion on each of the vertical pillars: 1.1.4. THE VERTICAL PILLARS 1.1.4.1 Vertical Pillar: Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges Leader: School of Health Sciences and Social Work, Växjö University Prospective sustainable Lifestyles The vertical pillar Health, Ageing and Lifestyle challenges addresses a wide range of issues at the heart of how we might conceive sustainable lifestyles in Europe. Health budgets dominate exchequer spending at national levels, connections between lifestyle and health are key issues in determining wellbeing, several epidemics like Swine Flu H1N1, but more especially epidemics of depression and consumption related conditions (e.g. obesity), HIV/AIDS, issues connected to drug and substance consumption including alcohol and tobacco, pharmaceutical policies and a host of other issues present as permanent challenges for public policy. While SEL 21 cannot cover all these issues, it can deal with a range of key health concerns vis-à-vis one of

the most serious challenges to a sustainable Europe, its ageing population. By focusing on the issue of ageing it will not only address one of the most central issues for sustainability, but it will also delve into several of the issues outlined above as this population’s health and wellbeing is intimately connected to the same agenda of issues. Depression for instance is a major issue throughout the population and is significant in the ageing population and in the area of diet we have a similar situation for example the prevalence of Type 2 diabetes has shot up as a result of increased obesity. So this platform will at once deal with some of the most significant questions relating to health and simultaneously address one of the foremost concerns for a socially sustainable Europe, its ageing population. The discussions and dialogue among stakeholders, CSOs, residents, citizens, partners, researchers will reveal what a sustainable lifestyle is in the context of a whole range of challenges that an ageing population will face across Europe in the future. A combination of demographic and socioeconomic development has provided the condition for a new kind of ‘later-lifer’. The fact that more people are getting into the third age raises many questions. Opportunities arise for new constellations of power groups, groups that create new agendas with new priorities claiming their rights, by law or by moral obligations – in what way will it contribute to sustainable lifestyles. Another question is to analyse the diversities and commonalities around Europe in terms of quality of life. A third question is to ask in what way people will use their time after retirement – do they want to use their time for another way of living, for moving or for consuming? Or do they want another career, use time for voluntary work, for family support to grandchildren, or for fulfilling private dreams like playing golf, travelling around the world or taking an active part in the community. A fourth question is what are those people doing that don’t have these types of choices being dependent and marginalised due to economy, health conditions or migration. There is a profound cultural significance in the hope for health and longevity, which is at the very heart of the meaning of sustainability, sustaining that hope is about creating a paradigm for social sustainable lifestyles, the denial of which has the opposite impact as it is a direct challenge to personal worth and dignity (Skillington, 2009). This is a serious issue too in the balancing of economic constraints against the imperatives of care. A sustainable lifestyle has to deal with different challenges and has to address these in a myriad of contexts in order to create conditions for a good quality of life for the individual and a sustainable society.

Challenges on a societal level in Europe A sustainable lifestyle has to meet challenges due to changing conditions in society affecting all citizens including an ageing population. These factors are evident in transformations emerging from demography, migration, family, quality of life and cultural interactions. European society presents both diversities and commonalities arising through different orientations towards participation in society, democracy and citizenship. Unequal conditions in different parts of Europe produce situations with different meaning of the concept social citizenship and quality of life. The challenges that have to be confronted ensue from many areas – some specific for elderly people, others more general and relevant for all citizens in Europe. Researchers from different academic backgrounds have tried to describe and analyse ageing and different ways of entering the latter stages of life (in SHAREsurvey of Health, Ageing and Retirement Europe and in ERA-AGE). Resulting from extended life expectancy there has been a need to divide old age into different phases - near-aged (55-64), young-old (65-74), old-old (75-84) and oldest old (85+) or an alternative division of life in four stages - the first is childhood and youth; the second contains the phase of working life and parental activities. The third age is a flexible period that starts with retirement whenever it occurs and continues until the fourth age, normally around the eighties; the fourth age is associated with increasing fragility and need of support in daily activities. "The Third age" can sometimes be described as “the crown of life”, empathising self-fulfilment, while the Fourth age entails dependency, fragility and death (Laslett 1989). Demographic ageing is both a challenge and an opportunity of the European social models. The European Union economic models have allowed its citizens to reach older age while the efforts ahead must focus on enhancing quality of life of all people in Europe, including an ageing population. Social sustainability relies on interdependencies and viability and address the bigger question of what is meant by sustainable lifestyles in the context of a whole range of challenges. However, population ageing poses serious challenges for instance concerning economic status, health and wellbeing, international migration and utilisation of new technologies. Ongoing changes in European welfare models call for a new and dynamic understanding of social citizenship. These changes may involve among other things new relationships between public and private responsibility for social risk protection especially in old age, between rights to receive and duties to participate. People

today (particularly those in the third age) have become more knowledgeable, selfconfident and conscious of their possibilities and rights in general and especially when dealing with front line agency staff and professional helpers. They expect to participate and have the opportunity of influencing decisions relating to their own welfare, whether these options are expressed through co-determination, user involvement, informed consent, group consultation or freedom of choice. Citizens are expected to and anticipate playing more active roles in handling risks and promoting their own lives and welfare. Individual responsibility for achieving self-sufficient protection against risks and the active use of available opportunities in the market becomes more important. Citizen self-responsibility and choice have been put in focus through public and private mix of welfare provision and more generally through the broader trends towards individualisation. Citizen participation in deliberation, planning and decision making has been both demanded and encouraged, most clearly under headings of user involvement and consultation with stakeholder groups but also through public recognition of grassroots organisations among marginalised citizens (Johansson & Hvinden 2007). This vertical pillar will benefit from these trends and actively engage with people in Europe 50+ through WP2a The Roundtable: Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges, WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles, WP7 Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe and through the virtual capacities of SEL 21. Sustainable lifestyles in Europe have to deal with new ways of living in many aspect, moving and consuming patterns, issues dealt with in more detail in Vertical Pillars The Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services; and Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture; with which this pillar will engage in cross-cutting dialogue. A consequence of a more knowledgeable and self-confident third age population is the awareness of the importance of a healthy lifestyle as a primary factor in wellbeing. Nutritious food, physical activities and healthy lifestyle have become a demand and are seen as a way to get as fit as possible ahead of the fourth age and as a way to a better quality of life. At the same time it is also regarded as a contribution to a sustainable society with less demand on services and families. Changes in society like the utilisation of new technologies influence everyday life in many ways, for instance the migration of information and services to mobile technologies and the internet could on one hand help roll out services to people with poor mobility like disabled or elderly people, but the converse is that they also hold the risk of marginalising people who are not proficient in these technologies. So for a

socially sustainable lifestyle all citizens and residents of a community need to, in Talcott Parsons (1977) words, have the ‘means to acquire minimum thresholds of cultural currency’. In the past people very often lived their whole life in the village or country where they were born. Today more people than at any previous time in history move away from their place of birth either through their own choices or because of political, religious or economic circumstances. These challenges, which are primarily address in Vertical Pillar Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism, have a direct impact in the challenges of this Vertical Pillar and will form a major part in the cross-cutting dialogue within SEL 21. There is a European approach, the so called Active ageing policy - primarily used to encourage older workers to stay substantially longer in the labour market, but it might also be relevant to other sectors in the society as there is a common demand for citizen activation and participation – a condition for an active citizen in the third age on its way to the fourth age. Type of cooperation The social platform will give opportunities to common work between partners and stakeholders from different parts of Europe in order to share experiences and build new knowledge contributing to the European agenda on health and ageing. Research shows that all countries have to contribute to a sustainable lifestyle in Europe for the future and share a process of learning, opinion formation and future actions. All parts of Europe have to be involved in order to overcome diversities and to promote common sustainable targets for better health and wellbeing throughout the lifecycle for all people living in Europe The pillar Health, Ageing and Lifestyle challenges will start with a preliminary position paper as a basic document for the roundtable and crosscutting discussions later on. The Roundtable will be organised as a process where scientific partners, CSOs, stakeholders and citizens will discuss what the key challenges for achieving sustainable lifestyles in Europe are in relation to health and ageing. A convenor will coordinate the discussion and challenges will also be presented to a panel of experts for comments and discussions. The roundtable will end up with two documents that will be discussed in WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles including all partners in the platform. The process from the Forum will be analysed

and reviewed involving participants from both round table and forum for discussions and dissemination. Key stakeholders will be indentified in different parts of Europe and included in the ongoing work of the social platform. Comments and ideas should come from networking with participation of a broad group of people, discussed and evaluated and disseminated back to people in an continuing process with policymakers, researchers, stakeholders and citizens in this pillar and in a dialog with other pillars in the social platform - and the outcome will contribute to the European debate and discussion with bottom-up responses and give contributions for future research and policymaking. Participation in the pillar The plan for this pillar is to involve CSOs, citizens, residents, policymakers, stakeholders and an interdisciplinary team of scientists and researchers representing the caring sciences, social work, economics, sociology and political science. The CSOs will represent a diversity of orientations, the stakeholders will include the banking and insurance sector, the health sector and the housing sector. The public sector contributions have their background mainly in social services and the health sector. 1.1.4.2 Vertical Pillar: The Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services Leader: Leuven Research Centre on Space and Society This pillar focuses on the built environment as an open system built, transformed and used by human beings and their collective entities. Sustainable construction of settlements linked by sustainable networks of flows (transportation, trade, energy and materials – including nature-based- and information networks) is the ultimate image of a sustainable built environment. Which lifestyles will contribute to the making and maintenance of a sustainable built environment? How can such lifestyles be designed, collectively decided and reproduced? And what will be the role of public services in the reproduction of such life-styles? A sustainable built environment Within a social platform on sustainable life-styles, the definition of a sustainable built environment cannot be purely physical, biological and technical. Obviously these dimensions are important: a sustainable built environment is (re)built respecting material and energy balances, following settlement patterns that seek to minimise the ecological

impact

of

people

movements,

resourcing

(energy,

water,

…),

transportation of goods and services. Construction methods, planning and urbanism approaches certainly play a very important role in (re)building the built environment at the relevant scale levels (from housing unit to quarter and settlement, …) But the focus here is on lifestyles which affect the construction and the use of the built environment. At this stage we will not provide an exhaustive overview on the role of lifestyles instead we persent some. examples to clarify where we want to focus: construction methods depend on the type of house consumers want. If they opt for ecologically conceived units, builders will have to follow these consumer preferences. And more ecological lifestyles can reduce the energy-dependence of existing constructions, road networks, etc. Still the multiplication of such lifestyles will lead to more explicit collective demands on energy provision systems, energy-poor transportation networks, new types of proximity, climate-conscious designs, etc. Indeed, sustainability may by now start to become mainstream at the level of the individual project (housing, enterprise, public service, etc.). However, implementing integrated sustainability on higher levels of agglomeration (the neighbourhood, the local community, the urban network, the urban political entity) is all the more complex.

At this level the profound mechanisms of societal transition towards

sustainable lifestyles come into full play. This holds as much for the physical structures (realising closed loop systems on the level of the urban network) as for the social superstructures using these physcial assets. In all of this, lifestyles refer to consumption and investment behaviour, collective attitudes and political choices influenced by the type of society and community people live and act in, the principles that lead the ideological and political debates on the role of the environment in human settlements, but also the modes of collective decision-making in the (re)production of sustainable lifestyles. Tracking sustainable lifestyles for the built environment The verb “tracking” has been chosen for its different meanings: discovering and following the direction of existent lifestyles; but also guiding and steering lifestyles according to criteria of sustainability. This pillar will work toward an overview of existing lifestyles that foster a sustainable construction and use of the built environment. Together with Vertical Pillar v. Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights; and vi. Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe it will also identify social and political processes and movements that have provided information on and developed modes of decision-making promoting sustainable lifestyles in construction, housing, services and settlement networks (transportation, material

flows, social networks, …). Thus, this focus of the built environment pillar will build-up information on both the nature of and the social making of sustainable lifestyles. Governance modes and processes play an important role in the latter because of the deep impact sustainable transitions provoke. Governance as a factor of sustainable settlements In both scientific research and collective action, governance and social sustainability are still poorly linked to each other. The main reason for this is that governance is still excessively considered as an activity meant to ‘govern’ a system or a settlement, instead of being considered as an essential element of settlement or a system. Organizations, bottom-up networks, partnerships between state and civil society actors not only develop proposals for making nature parks, neighbourhoods, cities, etc. more ecologically sustainable, but are also part of the socio-political dynamics of these systems. In other words: if these organizations or their activities are not socially sustainable, then the risk of reproducing unsustainable settlements becomes real (Parra, 2010). It is therefore important that within this built environment pillar good practices of governance of the built environment are ‘tracked’, documented and discussed with stakeholders, with the explicit objective of bringing-out some governance models of reference capable of uniting collection of information on, decision-making and consultation procedures for, and management systems of sustainably constructed settlements and their networks. The role of public services The most straightforward link to public services is the identification of services that are immediately tangible within the settlements and their networks: public transportation – semi-privatised in many countries; refuse collection; mains water supply, sewage and refuse collection systems; etc.

Largely privatised energy

provision systems make up a distinct category, since their initially public character has become confusingly hybrid or even simply suppressed. A thoughtful approach leads us to a different type of public services, which can provide information, guidance and support. Information on sustainable lifestyles and on the providers of resources to enable them (e.g. sustainable-construction firms, renewable energy providers, resource consumption watchers, existing forums and data-sources, peer group networks, …), etc. is essential and is often already collected and communicated by specialised collective services. Guidance toward sustainable lifestyles can also be an activity of such services. But a more ambitious approach would be support to and enabling of sustainability promoting planning, design and

lifestyle agendas. This could involve the generalization of Agenda 21 norms to the practice of public planning offices, the reintegration of sustainability-related communal services (environment, spatial planning, social housing, energy provision frameworks, mobility, etc. united within one municipal service for example

in

general, governance models of local authorities could be tracked toward greater inclusiveness, both with respect to their sustainable development agenda, as to the involvement of different types of stakeholders. Here, of course, close interaction with Vertical Pillar v. Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights; and and the Horizontal Pillar Processes and Capacity building for democratic engagement will be essential. 1.1.4.3 Vertical Pillar: Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture Leader: Eco Innovaton Introduction Consumption might justifiably be said to lie at the heart of contemporary European lifestyles and to provide a means by which we can better understand the social, economic, cultural and moral basis of our societies. European citizens form part of the richest quintile of the world’s population which account for around 85 per cent of global consumption. Indeed, household expenditure on consumption in the EU-15 increased by one-third between 1990 and 2002 (EEA 2005) and continues to grow in line with economic prosperity. In contrast, the world’s poorest quintile accounts for only 1.3 per cent of expenditure on consumption. Such global disparities are thrown into sharp relief by current efforts to achieve agreement on levels of greenhouse gas emissions, and underline that until European levels of material throughput are significantly reduced, we remain a long way from achieving aspirations for sustainable lifestyles. A body of work drawing upon a wide range of disciplinary insights has already begun to set out some of the different theoretical approaches to the study of consumption. It has effectively demolished assumptions that it is a rational economic act of sovereign consumers seeking to satisfy their needs and wants. Rather, such work has demonstrated that patterns of consumption are driven by complex motivations involving issues of social identity, belonging and considerable peer influence over choice. Appeals by public agencies to citizens to “consume less” are unlikely to be heeded unless there is a strong social context which provides opportunities for sustainable lifestyles with greater moral standing together with demonstrable intrinsic and extrinsic rewards.

Because the realm of consumption is so wide-ranging the thrust of this pillar will be to focus upon food, which provides an especially useful lens through which to explore prospects for sustainable lifestyles in Europe. The decision to focus upon food is underpinned by three key factors: 1. What we eat has more impact on climate change than any other aspect of daily life, accounting for 31% of the global warming potential of products consumed (Tukker, Huppes et al 2005). The redesign of food provisioning chains through which to achieve significant reductions in energy (both as process inputs and in transport) and other embedded resources (eg water) is a vital task if we are to achieve a higher level of environmental performance in the European food system. 2. Food represents an important expression of identity construction and highlights some key consumption dilemmas in lifestyle formation. Households and individuals may struggle to resolve a series of contradictions around food, for example between health and indulgence; convenience and culinary skills; frugality and extravagance; novelty and tradition and so on. 3. Food is intimately connected to health and well-being. There has been growing anxiety in public health circles over rising levels of diet-related illhealth. The incidence of obesity and overweight in adults and children with the resulting consequence of cardio-vascular disease, type-II diabetes, and other diet-related ill-health has led to a renewed emphasis on healthy eating campaigns. 4. Yet food consumption represents one of the key areas where European citizens are taking up the mantle of a call to more sustainable lifestyles. An array of grassroots initiatives – some supported by local government – provides us with one of the few opportunities to examine the development of a societal response to the challenge of consumption. Building on Existing Knowledge This vertical pillar will build upon a body of work previously undertaken across European and national levels particularly that concerned with alternative food networks (AFNs), short supply chains and other sustainable food provisioning initiatives. Amongst some of the research projects with which we have good links to coordinators and/or associated PIs include:

•

Marketing sustainable agriculture: an analysis of the potential role of new food supply chains in sustainable rural development (SUS-CHAIN) supported under FP5 and coordinated by Prof Han Wiskereke (Wageningen University).

•

Encouraging collective farmers marketing initiatives (COFAMI) [FP6] coordinated by colleagues at Wageningen

•

Food risk communication and consumers' trust in the food supply chain (TRUST) FP6 coordinated by University of Florence

These listed projects are among a number with which we are familiar and demonstrate the important research effort that has been directed to highlighting the need for a more sustainable and multi-functional agriculture as well as measures required to enable farmers to capture more value. Research has also documented the enormous challenge of recovering the trust of consumers in food, and the steps needed in doing this, for example in the field of animal production. However, we find there has been to date little attention given to the role of food in redesigning sustainable lifestyles in Europe. We believe there is enormous value in establishing a pillar specifically to draw upon the findings of these past projects and indeed, even to enable leading researchers associated with some of these projects to share their experiences and reflections so that we might genuinely learn more about how to transform such insights into new ways of living and consuming. Consequently, in preparing the state-of-the-art review for this pillar we will draw upon documentation associated with this earlier research and then embark upon a round of consultation and dialogue with senior project researchers in order to shape a future directions paper for presentation at the Roundtable (WP2) Prospective sustainable lifestyles There are real signs of a new critical or ethical consumption emerging across Europe where individuals are not only seeking to bring more reflection to the choices they make, but to do this in a way that rejects their status as atomistic individuals within an anonymous market. Given this, we wish to focus upon those instances and cases where consumers seek to claim a new identity as citizens within a redesigned civic vision of the market. Examples of the range of alternative food initiatives involving such engagement include: community supported agriculture, box schemes and, in Italy, the spread of solidarity groups (GAS). Moreover, ‘consumers’ in ever greater number are taking up the task of engaging directly in forms of food production, witnessed by the growth in allotments, community gardens, urban agriculture and, in

the Anglophone countries especially, the rise of the Transition Town movement. These short food chains demonstrate a deeply felt need for new styles of consumption that embrace participation. In short they might be seen as exemplars of new ways of living and consuming. One of the critical elements here is the notion of ‘co-responsibility’ (Strydom) which helps us to understand the construction of social connections between ‘consumers’ and with producers. Such developments serve to re-embed moral and ethical sentiment, and trust, within more localised / regionalised economies. Our concern will not simply be to document the emergence of such initiatives but to establish, through the Platform’s spreading network of CSO partners (many of whom will be involved in facilitating and replicating such initiatives), how they are influencing the governance of local areas and how they might offer the basis for more widely adopted and sustainable lifestyles. Building on Existing Networks This pillar will also have two Roundtables, this will allow us to enhance our discussion on consumption by focusing on Northern European consumption [Eco Innovation] and Southern European consumption [University of Bologna] which will bring considerable added value to the discussion at WP3 and in the later stages of SEL 21. This vertical platform will also build on its current network connections, which will enable it extend the reach of the SEL 21 over the 24-month period. This network currently includes: a. Association of European Schools of Planning (AESOP) {Hosted a recent conference on sustainable food planning}; Prof Kevin Morgan, School of City & Regional Planning, Cardiff University; Prof Cristina Grasseni, University of Bergamo, Italy; b. CSO: Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability (FEASTA) Ireland; Sustain (UK); c. Industry: Confederation of the Food & Drinks Industries of the EU (CIAA). d. Home Food . The Association for the Guardianship and Exploitation of the Traditional Culinary-Gastronomic Heritage of Italy with the Home Food project sponsored by the Ministry of Agricultural Politics, by various regions of Italy and in collaboration with the University of Bologna, emphasises and spreads the culture of traditional food interwoven with the culture of the typical products and the

particular area. In this spirit it is possible to become a guest of Italian families and to taste foods cooked by the lady of the house, the repository of the old culinary ways and methods. Home Food has aimed to create a virtuous circuit in which antique recipes

(see:

Recipes

), the sense of hospitality, peculiarities of the area, emphasis on the typical

product

(see:

The

Home

Food

Equation

) merge into a characteristic and characterising proposal non just of the Region, but of the single Province and the specific Area (see: The Italy

of

Home

Food

) 1.1.4.4 Vertical Pillar: Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism Leader: University of Burgos The pillar on Migration: Peoples, Identities and Cosmopolitanism will generate a corpus of knowledge about migration processes that: 1) can be shared with other pillars of the Platform; 2) will contribute to the construction of a European civil society; and 3) will provide alternatives to transform our unsustainable lifestyles. Knowledge shared with the Platform The issues relevant to the vertical pillar on Health, Ageing and Lifestyle challenges, are also a concern for the pillar on Migration in relationship to the high numbers of retired Centro-Europeans living on the Mediterranean coast (more recently also in the Adriatic and Black Sea coasts), and to the high numbers of migrant women who work as care providers for European elders by non-European young women, socalled transnational ‘chains of care’. Moreover, the fact that migrants will also get old and will retire forces us to address several questions, such as who will take care of those ageing migrants, and whether or not they will return ‘home’ after retirement. In the pillar on migration we will focus on the analysis of so-called return migration (e.g. after retirement), questioning the very notion of ‘return-migration’ (as Stuart Hall and others have argued, ‘there is no home to go back’), and examining the success and/or failure of institutional ad-hoc return policies (both at local, regional, national and EU level).

The (mis)use and (ab)use of the environmental resources and the fast rate of climate change associated with this misuse addressed specificall in Vertical Pillar: The Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services; and Vertical Pillar: Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe are also relevant to migration regarding the growing numbers of displaced peoples because of armed conflicts and wars many of which originated in the European (and other so-called ‘advanced economies) colonial and post-colonial ‘quest for resources’ (raw materials and human labour), and because of climate changes (droughts, floods). In this sense, the pillar on migration will provide a space for debating the side effects of this misuse of the environment in regards to migration within and to the European Union. The pillar on migration can contribute to our knowledge in the areas addressed in the Virtual Pillar Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture in several ways. One of them is by opening up a discussion on the meanings of ‘socially sustainable well-being’ from a transnational perspective bearing always in mind that any definition of ‘well-being’ is a socio-cultural construct historically and socially situated and that, for that very reason, it goes through change. In this pillar on migration we will ask a representative group of transnational migrants and of EU nationals to provide a subjective interpretation of the notion of ‘socially sustainable well-being’ and to indicate sets of objective practices associated to sustainable lifestyles. This engagement will allow us to establish how close/far these understandings are from notions of socially sustainable lifestyles. The pillars on migration together with Vertical Pillar Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights will work very closely because any debate about citizenship and citizens’ rights has to take into account migration, especially transnational migration. Migration must count when talking about citizenship not only because transnational migrants are often denied their political rights but also because the demands of these rights have mobilised large and heterogeneous sectors of the civil society. Other issues that concern migration and citizenship may include the discretionality of European states in guaranteeing political rights to transnational migrants (who votes in which elections), and the existence of a legal framework that defines and legitimises different ways of being and belonging (e.g. citizens, EU migrants, thirdcountry nationals, irregular migrants, refugees, asylum seekers). In this pillar we will explore, debate and analyse the different ‘repertoires of rights’ that EU member states ‘offer’ to transnational immigrants that will shed light on the relationships between citizens’ rights and culturally defined notions of well-being and sustainable lifestyles.

Labour rights also constitute a fundamental issue in migration studies, not only because most migrants do work, but also because most of them work in worse conditions (salary, job contract) than ‘local’ co-workers. Contribution to the construction of a civil society The construction of a European civil society requires that people shall not be treated with disrespect in regards of their cultural practices and world views ( a theme this pillar also shares with Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights). A civil society does not ‘tolerate’, as Kant already argued two centuries ago, but rather respects and develops relations of conviviality with other members of the community. In this sense, migrant peoples who live and work in any state of the EU must be included within any project of a European civil society. Following Mouffe (2007), by civil society we understand that collective field of social action which includes political questions in its agenda and aims to have an input in the established political sphere, while not being constrained by political decision making. As a collective social field, a European civil society must ensure that trnansational migrants are also included as social actors and that migration issues (especially those related to their political, social and civic rights) are part of this agenda. In this pillar we will explore the possibilities for decoupling nationality and citizenship, given that they belong to two different spheres (culture and rights) and that in a democratic society access to rights shall not rely upon cultural practices. In this sense, we will work closely with CSOs in different European states in order to know how and to what extent transnational migrants participate in grass roots associations, in mass media, in public events and in the institutions, as well as the degree of success and/or failure of social mobilisations demanding political rights to transnational migrants. The aim is to evaluate the role that CSOs (grass roots organizations, immigrant associations) play in local and global governance and provide alternatives to the new roles that they will have to play in order to conform a more inclusive (read sustainable) society. Taking into account the relevance of Transnational Immigrant Communities in today’s society, we must also address the role that mass media and TICs play in current migration and in the configuration of a European civil society. We can start by asking about the ways in which TICs have challenged the experience of migration: from being perceived as a one-way journey with little or no contact with what Marc Augé calls ‘anthropological home’, to conforming transnational communities which maintain a regular almost everyday contact with ‘home’ (including those who have not migrated and those who have migrated elsewhere). Secondly, we should look at

the ways in which hegemonic mass media represent transnational migrants (often showing a negative and pejorative side), and the ways in which these (re)presentations

(re)produce a public opinion and a social imaginary that

problematises and stigmatises migration and migrants, especially if they are Muslims. Conversely, we shall also look at the instances in which transnational populations (are able to) develop their own strategies of representation (e.g. socalled ‘ethnic media’) and examine the symbolic distance between these social imaginaries. Finally, and given the experience of our team at the University of Burgos in education, we will also address the ways in which school materials for mandatory courses on ‘citizenship education’ deal with issues that concern a European civil society, such as citizenship, cosmopolitanism and transnationalism, which are critically important for the construction of a model of socially sustainable lifestyles. Provision of alternatives to transform our unsustainable lifestyles Regarding the notion of sustainability, we have to acknowledge that, although a sustainable lifestyle cannot be achieved once and for all (to a certain extent every society of the past and present has shown certain degree of concern about the limitations of resources), there are, nonetheless, paths towards sustainability. We believe that one of our duties as social analysts is precisely to identify those processes through which a mode of production can reproduce itself without devouring its sources (i.e. raw materials and human labour). In this sense, this pillar will address the relationships between migrant labour and sustainability by looking at the (perverse) side effects that the lack of recognition of the migrants’ experience and knowledge have in the labour market: emptying region of origin of highly qualified, well educated and motivated citizens while the region of destination do not benefit from their qualifications. Which is in the longterm an unsustainable model. Regarding the possibility of transforming our current unsustainable lifestyles we also have to acknowledge that any lifestyle is a sociocultural construct and that, therefore, it goes through change. This brings about a whole new set of questions, such as the possibility and plausability of channelling this change towards more sustainable attitudes, behaviours and ways of living, especially if we want to avoid falling into what some authors call the ‘ontology of spontaneity’. Another set of questions has to do with the twofold character of any lifestyle, both as practice and as a social imaginary (about notions of well being, growth, progress, rights) and with the necessity to carry out changes on both sides if we are to follow the path of

sustainability. In this sense, we consider that it is urgent to question and, hopefully, transform the classic paradigm of growth that identifies economic growth with progress. In this pillar we will pay attention to those practices brought by immigrants, which may enhance the possibility of developing sustainable lifestyles in Europe, such as patterns of solidarity and reciprocity that are not commodified and that allow for a more sustainable use of human and material resources. 1.1.4.5 Vertical Pillar: Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights Leader: Institute for Social Science in the 21st Century, University College Cork This Vertical Pillar contributes to the Social Platform on the assumption that the concept of sustainable lifestyles is premised upon an active and open civil society, founded on rights and the rule of law, and is committed to the continued enhancement of democratic processes and best governance processes. Within the pillar we will not just explore theories of best practice, but will attempt to implement best practice. This pillar will work closely with the transversal module, which addresses Democratic Governance and Deliberative Processes, and will attempt to enhance crosscutting discourse between the other five Vertical Pillars. Governance Challenge Democratic processes are coming under increased stress in attempting to deal with the sheer volume and complexity of issues that are presenting on the agenda and are often engaged in a holding operation after key decisions have already been taken. This presents a challenge of crisis and possibility. Firstly we don’t seem to have the means to discuss, debate or make decisions about new possibilities or sustainable lifestyle opportunities. The issues fall layer upon layer, leaving the decision-making systems and processes seemingly hopelessly overloaded. There is no possibility of the full citizenry, nor indeed of professional politicians, staying abreast of the full scale of issues arising. The second level of crisis is represented by the struggles to imagine ways in which we could democratically take back control over our destinies (O Tuama, 2005). This also presents us with challenges to stretch our political and social imaginations to address the kinds of issues we need to address if we wish to establish sustainable lifestyles in Europe. Active political engagement today is not confined to parliaments, assemblies, politicians, public officials and political institutions. We have seen the emergence of new kinds of actors, CSOs, new social movements, new deliberative institutions like citizens’ juries and consensus conferences and new ways of understanding and engaging with the

political. This new dispensation is messy, fluid, unpredictable and not necessarily closure oriented. However it is also dynamic and capable of a level of complexity and diversity not possible under traditional models. It allows for the development of pockets of public expertise capable of engaging and influencing both policy and public perspectives and behaviour. It is in the light of these challenges we situate this vertical pillar. Deliberative Opportunities The traditional institutions of democratic decision making are less and less successful in involving citizens in political processes, despite higher levels of education. Deliberative democratic innovations can provide answers to some of these challenges, which are key to sustainable lifestyle, such as informing and educating the public, creating opportunities for citizens to shape policy and the restoration of citizen trust and engagement in politics. Using mechanisms such as citizens’

juries,

consensus

conferences

and

deliberative

polls,

deliberative

democratic approaches can bring European citizens and residents into partnership as decision-makers through dialogue-based processes of policy-development that includes agenda setting, policy design, and implementation. As Iris Marion Young states; Through the process of public discussion with a

plurality of differently

opinionated and situated others, people often gain new information, learn of different experiences of their collective problems, or find that their own initial opinions are founded on prejudice or ignorance, or that they have misunderstood the relation of their own interests to others (2000:26) Deliberative and discursive theorists such as Habermas, Barber, Elster, Fishkin, Young and Dryzek emphasise refined and reflective preferences, arguing that democratic processes and institutions should be built around ‘reasonable’ political judgement. They argue that it is not majoritarian support that renders a political decision legitimate. But that it can be deemed legitimate if it can be agreed to after withstanding scrutiny by those that are bound by it. Under the deliberative model collective decisions are made through reflective public reasoning which its proponents believe encourage more informed rational decisions, fairer and more publicly oriented outcomes and improved civic skills (Hendriks, 2006:491). For them to succeed deliberative practices need to be open, inclusive, ‘reasonable’(also known as recognition and respect) and public. They need to be public, include on equal

terms all affected members of a community, and they must be justified to all in a free, tolerant, respectful debate. Appropriately designed deliberative processes can ensure the inclusion of all groups of citizens in decisions that affect them. And deliberative dialogues can offer the space for sustained citizen engagement with the policy process thereby providing wider input while deepening policy legitimation. This would seem to be a key prerequisite for what could be deemed a sustainable lifestyle. Research reveals that participation in deliberation processes has a positive impact on the standard of political thinking as participants’ awareness of the logical connections between different issues relevant to the problem discussed increases (Gastil and Dillard 1999). It has also been shown that deliberation can have a profound and sustained impact (Muhlberger 2005). Finally, a successful deliberative experience may lead to increased participation in other democratic, public activities, a position long held by civic republicans. Studies of citizens’ juries have found that those who participated in the successful jury deliberation were more inclined to vote in the subsequent national elections than those who did not serve (Gastil, Deess and Weiser 2002). Citizenship and Rights Neither a cosmological justification of rights as deriving from God nor a natural law justification of rights are sustainable options in Europe in the 21st century. At their most fundamental level all humans require recognition, a human who is not respected, has his or her dignity assaulted. This is important at two levels. It is important in terms of the quality of life, autonomy and identity of each individual and it is also important in terms of how we begin to formulate clear and irrefutable justifications for human rights for future sustainable lifestyles. After World War II great strides were made to enshrine human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set an international standard, many countries adopted new constitutions and bills of rights or significantly advanced existing ones. However despite all these advances, concerns continue to arise about human rights. The twenty-first century opened with a whole range of human rights issues from the treatment of prisoners in connection with the so-called war on terror (Guantanamo Bay, Extraordinary Rendition, Abugraib); human rights abuses in major powers like Russia and China being relegated behind economic interests; Genocide in Darfur (so soon after Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia); the continuing dismal outlook for the majority of the world’s population in less developed countries; issues like

discrimination against girls and women; rogue states like North Korea and Burma systematically denying rights to their citizens, the list could go on. On the other side we may count many important advances, at national level new constitutions, bills of rights, human rights legislation, stronger courts and public opinion in support of human rights. On the international plane the emergence of the United Nations with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and important advances like the legally binding Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), the European Convention on Human Rights (1950) and European Court of Human Rights, the International Criminal Court (and its predecessors from Nuremberg onwards), greater recognition for cultural, racial and religious minorities and greater public awareness of human rights violations have all helped to improve the landscape. Yet clouds hang over human rights, we certainly cannot claim that they are universally respected nor that the trend is necessarily inevitably towards their expansion or adherence to at either national or international levels. In the developed world for instance we see instances of a reduction in legal guarantees for certain categories of people (especially suspected terrorists) and the situation vis-à-vis non-nationals has tended to become more stringently codified, but not necessarily more liberal. For a sustainable future in Europe we not only need to reaffirm our commitment to human rights, through the instruments discussed above and the Copenhagen criteria (1993) which demand that candidate countries must guarantee democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for minorities. However we also need to demonstrate within Europe that we are not prepared to compromise them for extraneous reasons and we must equally demonstrate to the rest of the world that human rights are an integral part of any global concept of sustainability. It is important to remind ourselves that social sustainability is premised on a respect for autonomy, rights and equality; the ability to harness social capacities to address the demands of a model for sustainable lifestyles. Social Capital In this pillar we address social capital at the level of a Roundtable from which we will integrate it into our overall approach of democratic building towards sustainable lifestyles as stated in the overall logic of SEL 21. In this regard Putnam’s approach has certain weaknesses. Mouritsen (2003) and Newton (2001) convincingly argue that Putnam misreads both the republican ancestry he claims for his work (going back to J.S. Mill and Tocqueville) as well as the notion of social capital itself. For Putnam civic community is spontaneous and voluntaristic, but republican theory emphasizes the creation of civil society from above by state-building and broader

political associations. Putnam’s social capital seems to be a generalized, all-purpose resource with positive effects only, while modern republicans such as Tocqueville stress normative ambiguities of civic space and see the associational cradles of modern trust and solidarity as much more demanding and complex than Putnam is ready to admit. Putnam’s civil society is a harmonious, ‘functioning’ and thriving, inherently pacific place, which never seems to clash with the state, while republicans stress conflict between citizens and between citizens and the state. Almond and Verba (1963) identified capitalist development as the main mover of liberal institutions, only moderate exercises of certain civic virtues are required, preferably coupled with much passive acquiescence and even myths of democratic equality. To be concrete, what we need for sustainable lifestyles is a civicness directed at relevant levels of government and governance which challenges fossilized institutions, fights corruption, improves solidarity and forms new political platforms to these ends. This is not to say that Putnam’s associations have no impact on trust and cooperation in social life, but that a different conceptualisation of civil society would provide more relevant variables of ‘working democracy’, as has been convincingly argued in the literature. Conclusion This Vertical Pillar will play a major role in linking the ‘social’ aspect of sustainability across all the Vertical Platforms and help consolidate a vision of social sustainability within the overall SEL 21 Social Platform. 1.1.4.6 Vertical Pillar: Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe Leader: EUROPARAMA This Vertical Pillar will scope, reflect upon, disseminate and engage a wide range of stakeholders and citizens on new knowledge about sustainable lifestyles arising from the adoption and use of renewable technologies in European communities in response to the climate change agenda. It is expected that this Vertical Pillar will provide the stakeholders and citizens involved with a better understanding of social experiments that are taking place in Europe and around the world in an attempt to create sustainable living environments in communities and will map out the social challenges facing these Post-Carbon experimental communities: their dwellers and planners. Mapping the needs of communities that sustain their lifestyles through the use of renewable energy.

Two types of communities will be included in the analysis: individual municipalities which decided to go zero-energy (e.g. Samsø in Denmark, Jühnde in Germany, Outer Hebrides in Scotland) and social groups which embraced climate change ideas and adopted the use of renewables for pursuing their lifestyles outside of the mainstream society (such as off-grid communities, eco-villages, local climate actions groups). A pilot mapping of these communities will be carried out for collecting socioeconomic and technological data available online and through desktop research. The outcome of the task: an overview of the communities in Europe and their needs using renewables to address climate change. This Vertical Platform will include stakeholder networks, representing industry (such as European Association for Photovoltaic Industry), knowledge transfer (such as PVNMS.NET, an EU new Member States Photovoltaic Portal, a free web TV TeamSolarPV.tv), technology developers (such as European Technology Platform on Photovoltaic Energy, 3S Swiss Solar Systems AG), EU public policy actors (such as Sustainable Energy Europe Campaign, FEDARENE – European network of regional and local organizations) and CSOs (GEN Europe, a European ecovillage association which includes 92 CSOs from over 30 countries).1. The outcome of the engagements with stakeholders and citizens and the cross-cutting dialogue with other pillars in SEL 21 will lead to an identification of best practices for addressing climate change and building sustainable lifestyles through the use of renewables. Main issues to be addressed in the pillar In order to facilitate the scoping, reflection and dissemination of the new knowledge two issues have been identified (in view of the current debates and the State-of-Art) to serve as the key themes to be addressed by this Vertical Pillar, namely 1) the obstacles in technology and knowledge transfer in addressing climate change, and 2) the challenges for making the use of renewable technologies work for sustainable lifestyles. Obstacles in technology and knowledge transfer in addressing the climate change Climate change due to greenhouse gas emissions is being discussed all over the world in recent years. The Copenhagen summit on climate change, to be held in

                                                          1

 Prof. Airi‐Allina Allaste, a sociologist at Tallinn University (a partner in FP7 SAL project supervised by  Europarama), who has been studying ecovillage communities in Europe and has been involved in the  work of GEN Europe network, will provide contacts to reach out to the individual CSOs involved in this  network; http://www.gen‐europe.org    

December 2009, seeks to reach a global agreement on binding greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. The more developing countries have to reduce emissions of GHG the greater is the economic costs to them. Recent estimates by the OECD (2008) suggest that ambitious world-wide abatement targets may both be costly for developing countries, and that the cost relative to GDP may be higher for developing than for developed countries. This, in the context of EU27, creates the potential for widening the gap between EU15 and EU12. Given this disparity in the distribution of abatement costs between developing and developed countries, raises the question of how the developed countries can best help the developing countries achieve the necessary emission reductions in ambitious GHG abatement scenarios in a manner that does not put too much pressure on their economies. Access to renewable technology for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and decreasing fossil energy needs is an important part of the solution to the climate challenge, however, in recent years renewable technology has become increasingly patented (private domain). Technology transfers in view of tackling climate change from developed countries to the rest of the world were recently discussed at the Beijing international conference (November 2008) on carbon abatement technology transfers. On that occasion, China and India proposed that the TRIPS flexibility for medicines (compulsory licensing) should be extended to cover carbon abatement technology.2 The argument was that climate is a public good, just like health, and that hence the international community should follow the principle of ‘guidance by government – participation by enterprises’. In this respect the obstacles for technology and knowledge transfer for tackling climate change by developing countries and lower-wage societies is becoming one of the major political and social issues of the 21st century. Challenges for making the use of renewables work for sustainable lifestyles Until now the main pattern of technology transfer of patented renewable technologies followed the paradigm of closed innovation, which saw technologies being marketed to customers through demonstration projects which included either a demonstration of technology on the site of a potential user community or involvement of local municipalities in a showcase experiment. The latter development led to the establishment of a number of zero-energy or renewable-energy zones which sought to implement utopian visions of future societies living on non-fossil energy sources.

                                                          2

 Copenhagen Economics and The IPR Company, Are IPR a Barrier to the Transfer of Climate Change Technology?””, a report  commissioned by DG Trade, 19 Jan., 2009 

The most spectacular of these developments was the creation of Masdar City in Abu Dhabi, the most ambitious sustainable development in the world – the first zero carbon, zero waste city powered entirely by renewable energy sources. In 2007 the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has established an academic presence in the city in the form of the Masdar Institute of Science and Technology to analyse the energy issues from the social sciences point of view.3 Closer to home, in Europe, a few smaller-scale social experiments have emerged which tried to follow the idea of the utopian city, self-reliant on energy sources, serving as a template for the 21st century societies. Among these experiments the most notable is the Samsø Renewable Energy Island (Denmark).4 In 1997 the energy supply on Samsø was based almost entirely on fossil energy sources. Today the island’s eleven onshore wind turbines supply enough energy to meet the island’s entire electricity needs. About 70% of island heating needs are met by way of renewable energy based on straw, solar power and woodchips, and energy used for transportation is 100% generated by the electricity production from the island’s ten offshore wind turbines. A key element in the successful implementation of the plan has been the strength of commitment from both the islanders themselves and local companies, many of whose businesses have benefited. The experiences from such living laboratories have been used for dissemination purposes in a number of EU projects, their results will be used for preparation of discussion documentation in WP2f The Roundtable: Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe; WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles and WP7 Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe and towards engaging across all the other five Vertical Platforms. It will also play a mjaor role in the final reports emanating from SEL 21.5 Limitations of the existing approach and challenges for the project However, most of the above developments have been driven top-down as experimental showcases which aimed at setting examples for the adoption of

                                                          3

A sociologist Dr Georgetta Vidican working at the Masdar Institute, which whom Europarama have had a working contact, will provide the input into the social platform pillar on climate change on the latest advancements in this area. 4 Neven Duić et al., “RenewIslands methodology for sustainable energy and resource planning for islands“, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews Volume 12, Issue 4,May 2008, Pages 1032-1062 5

The EU projects which addressed this phenomena included: Mountain RES – an EREC project. “RES and RUE Stimulation in Mountainous - Agricultural Communities towards Sustainable Development – Mountain RES/RUE was carried out under the umbrella of the Intelligent Energy for Europe Programme (Project no: EIE/07/040/S12.466710). Project European RE- Islands (European Renewable Energy Islands) was a project which was co-finaced by the European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport within the context ALTENER programme (April 2003 to September 2005. Energy Ambassadors. An Intelligent Energy Europe project.

technology through imitation. Yet this has been done without paying much attention to the fact that the adoption of renewable energy technologies is a lifestyle changing experience which effects daily lives and cultural practices of human behaviour. In the 1960s city planners, driven by a desire to modernize urban environments, created a number of new cities around Europe with exactly the same hope – to make better living environments on the basis of new technologies and infrastructures.6 This has proven to be a failure in many cases, since these developments did not address the social challenges which came with the use of a new type of infrastructure, and new forms of living.7 The nature of SEL 21 is that all the Vertical Pillars will engage on this and all the other issues involved in developing socially sustainable lifestyles and through this process attempt to address these deficiencies. In response to the failure of some of the social experiments in urban planning a new ecological lifestyle has emerged which has recently started to experiment with renewable technologies. A key challenge for this Vertical Pillar will be to involve those communities with wider society by sharing common concerns for climate change, renewables and a postcarbon Europe in the context of the other challenges for socially sustainable lifestyles in Europe. 1.1.5. TRANSVERSAL MODULE: GOVERNANCE AND DELIBERATIVE PROCESSES The idea of the transversal module is to enhance deliberative and discursive interaction within the social platform. This module will develop processes, methodologies and systems in WP4 that will be used in WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles [EFSSL] and a revised scheme in WP 8 ahead of WP7 Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe. It will draw particularly on the experience on P1 which has been involved in several citizen engagement processes including the European Citizens’ Consultations 2009 being led by the Belgian King Baudouin Foundation (http://www.european-citizens-consultations.eu/), through activities with CSOs, community based training programmes, the Irish Democracy Commission and through the academic research interests of some of the personnel involved directly in SEL 21. It will also see the development and deployment of a Public Engagement Online Platform, which will enhance the possiblities for virtual engagement by CSOs,

                                                          6

Clapson, Mark, 2002, 'Suburban paradox? Planners' intentions and residents' preferences in two new towns of the 1960s: Reston, Virginia and Milton Keynes, England', Planning Perspectives (Taylor & Francis) 17 (2), April, pp145-, 7

 Lock, David, 2002, 'The Neglected Laboratory' (on the House of Commons inquiry into new towns), Town and Country  Planning, September 71 (9), p214 

citizens, residents and all other stakeholders both at pivotal moments in the social platform and also in an ongoing basis. 1.1.5.1 Platform based on open innovation The platform used will be developed specifically for SEL 21 adapting technologies and approaches currently used or being developed by P5 and P6. Until recently the main form of the communication and involvement of stakeholders and users into the participatory and consensus building mechanism have been governed by the topdown approach, which characterised both early Internet communication and the more advanced Web 2 systems, where users were involved in the exchange of information in pre-defined structures. A new paradigm of open innovation, which has been put into a comprehensive theory by Henry Chesbourgh and Eric von Hippel.8 Both have advanced new understanding into the nature of online social relationships and their impact on the identity building and user-driven innovation. The open innovation principles have been endorsed by the European Commission and implemented in Living Labs related projects, funded by EC, such as CoreLabs, CLOCK, OpenFutures, Collaboration@Rural, CoSpaces, ECOSPACE, Laboranova, [email protected] Further, the importance of open innovation in fostering innovation and creating knowledge economy in Europe has been acknowledged by the project VISION Era-Net (Shared Knowledge Bases for Sustainable Innovation Policies). The project involved, among others, also Henry Chesbrough. One of the contributors to this project and Chesborough‘s co-author of the report ‘Policies for Open Innovation: Theory, Framework and Cases’ (July, 2008), Tarmo Kalvet from PRAXIS Centre of Policy Studies (Estonia) will be involved in the consultation process for building the virtual platform for SEL 21.10 The proposed virtual platform for SEL21 will be based on the principles of open innovation. The system will consists of three levels of user-interaction which will be interconnected through the same interface and the set of functionalities as described in the figure below: 1. At individual user level a virtual space will be provided for uploading/sharing audio-video and other files on the site, using mail client and webcam broadcast functionality for shaping and defining individual identities by users themselves within the framework of SEL21;

                                                          8

 For a full list of the most important research done in this area see  http://www.openinnovation.net/Research/Bibliography.html  9  For the overview of Living Labs projects see http://www.openlivinglabs.eu/  10  http://www.visioneranet.org 

2. At social group level a virtual space will be provided for registered users from across the platform and from outside to create networks and link with the large global social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc. This level will serve the purpose of the self-sustained identity building and involvement; 3. At stakeholder level a virtual space will be provided for the individual Virtual Pillars and other specified activities of SEL21 to create and maintain their repositories of audio-video and other data which will be shared across the platform. This level will serve the purpose of a continuous collective action in the form of discussed ideas, best practices and recommendations that will feed into the outcome of SEL21. All three levels (spaces) will be additionally provided with two functionalities to create a heightened sense of belonging and urgency, namely, 1) the polling functionality which will enable to create, run and compare results of the ad-hoc polls and larger surveys at any given level of the platform, and 2) the geospatial mapping functionality, which will allow to view the maps generated automatically for each social network and stakeholder group according to individual categories created by users, social networks and/or stakeholder groups. This mapping functionality (based on googlemap API) will provide also a possibility to use the generated code for embedding the maps on any other websites, and thus extending the reach of the platform to the global Web.

Figure 1.2: The structure of the virtual platform for SEL21 (Europarama) 1.1.5.2 Eco-innovation Barriers to knowledge circulation threaten innovation for sustainable innovation (which we term “eco-innovation”11) and thus the possibilities of achieving sustainable lifestyles. Knowledge is often mentioned almost exclusively with reference to the 'knowledge base' resulting from R&D. The circulation of this knowledge through education appears to be somewhat overlooked. Education, awareness-raising and their target audiences are traditionally not give much attention, although in some sectors knowledge and education represent serious and documented barriers to the take-up of eco-innovations. To overcome these barriers SEL21 will also use the eCollab platform to allow ordinary citizens, residents, CSOs and other stakeholders to interact with SEL 21. Among the typical problems stakeholders face when managing information include:

                                                          11

See e.g., http://www.eco-innovation.net/developing-eco-innovation#Box%20%20comparing%20definitions

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Email proliferation, email loss or information repetition. Unsecure communication media. Difficult and cumbersome sharing important ideas, websites, articles and events with correspondents. Lack of opportunities for effective brainstorming sessions or collaborative research discussions due to geographical distance. Difficult task management Difficulties in keeping up to date with the progress of the research project and tracking the work of individual group members. Loss of data because they are not systematically backed up. There are sub-groups in the project who would benefit from information channeling and restriction. Lack of online repository for reports, working papers, summaries or other files that need to be shared online. Multimedia problems such as a non-user-friendly interface, poor graphics or difficulties with uploading and inserting photos and videos. Lack of expertise in digital platforms, website design and Web2.0, and lack of training in how to use online collaboration technologies or the project website. Low rankings in Google searches. eCollab: Screenshot of a blog entry

Figure 1.3: eCollab: Screenshot of a page restricted to a specific group

Figure 1.4: eCollab: Screenshot of the roles and permissions assigned to a user

Figure 1.5: eCollab: Screenshot of the permissions assigned to a user The aim is to use best democratic practices within SEL 21 in terms of the engagement between partners, both in relation to the practical governance of the social platform and in how we engage on the substantive issue of sustainable lifestyles. We are determined also to interact with the public on the same basis, as equals engaged in serious discussion on sustainable lifestyles. We hope that the experience of the social platform will lead to the evolution of new understandings on public engagement that will have applications beyond the lifetime of this social platform. 1.1.5.3 The Social Platform Experience and Social Polis

After the successful establishment of a number of Technology Platforms12, several of which are concerned with sustainable technologies, the EC DG Research has been expanding this approach to the social sciences and humanities in recent years through the introduction of Social Platforms (see Social Platforms on Social Cohesion and the City and on Research for Families and Family Policies). The K.U.Leuven (P2) partner in SEL21 coordinated the first Social Platform on the theme of Social Cohesion and the City (Social Polis, see http://www.socialpolis.eu/) and has experience in co-operating with similar social platforms outside the realm of EC Research policy such as the Platform of European Social NGOs (Social Platform, see http://www.socialplatform.org/), the alliance of representative European federations and networks of NGOs active in the social sector. The Social Polis experience with stakeholder involvement in research agenda setting will be incorporated in SEL21 and SEL21 will build further on relevant stakeholder relations established in Social Polis (e.g. from experiential field 5 ‘Urban Ecology and Environment,

see

http://www.socialpolis.eu/

index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=87&Itemid=62) by including them in this new Social Platform. While SEL 21 is quite distinct in terms of concept and design, it will benefit greatly from the experience of P2 in Social Polis and hence P2 has been given a prominent role next to P1 in the architecture of SEL 21.

                                                          12

 See http://cordis.europa.eu/technology‐platforms/individual_en.html for a list of individual  Technology Platforms. 

1.2. QUALITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SUPPORT MECHANISMS 1.2.1. OVERALL STRATEGY OF THE WORK PLAN SEL 21 is organized both horizontally and vertically. It will engage, through a series of six coalitions of themes or Vertical Pillars, in a series of dialogues across and between pillars to appreciate the interconnectedness of the concept of sustainable lifestyles, engaging the European public in a progressive networking system, operating both in real time and virtually, to extend its reach to every country in the ERA and capture as wide a range as possible of European society. The six vertical pillars are aimed at capturing the key components in understanding the concept of sustainable lifestyles. These represent the three dynamics of social sustainability discussed above viz. social, economic and environmental sustainability.

The six pillars: i. Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges; ii. The Built Environment: Energy, Mobility, Public Services; iii. Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture; iv. Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism; v. Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights; and vi. Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe. Each pillar will develop a discourse with its genesis in its own thematic area, but recognizing that sustainable lifestyles rely on interdependencies and viability and thus the discourse must inform the other themes, bring learning from and to the other themes and address the bigger question of what is meant by sustainable lifestyles in the context of a whole range of challenges. The transversal module of SEL 21 addresses Democratic Governance and Deliberative Processes; this is to reflect a socially sustainable governance and

deliberative process both as a modus operandi and as a means of extending the state-of-the-art to wider society. The SEL21 Public Engagement online platform is designed to enhance this process.

1.2.2. TIMINGS OF THE WORK PACKAGES

1.2.3 WORK DESCRIPTION BY WORKPACKAGES 1.2.3.1 Workpackage List

WP No.

WP Name Vertical Scoping WP1 Exercise The WP2 Roundtables European Forum on Socially Sustainable WP3 Lifestyles Processes and Capacity building for democratic WP4 engagement Review and Learning from WP5 EFSSL Social Platform Network Dissemination and Inclusion WP6 Wave Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in WP7 Europe Democratic Governance and Deliberative WP8 Processes Social Platform WP9 Transition Social Platform WP10 Management

Type of Activity

Lead Particip ant No

Lead Participant No

SUPP

1 UCC

SUPP

1 UCC

SUPP

1 UCC

SUPP

Eco 5 Innovation

SUPP

1 UCC

SUPP

1 UCC

SUPP

2 KU Leuven

SUPP

1 UCC

SUPP

1 UCC

MGT

1 UCC

Person Start End Months Month Month

Social Platform Scientific and Deliberative WP11 Coordination Virtual WP12 Platform

SUPP

2 UCC

SUPP

6 Europrama

1.2.3.2 Deliverables List

Deliverables No.

Deliverable

WP

D1x6 D2x6 D3 D4 D5 D6x6 D7x6 D8 D9 D10x6 D11 D12 D13 D14 D15

Discussion document for each V. Pillar Enhanced SCOO document for each V. Pillar Virtual collaboration platform Phase 1 Periodic Activity and Management Reports to EC Report on EFSS Democratic engagement document Review document for each Pillar Expanded network Increased citizen awareness Congress Phase 1 Report each Pillar Methodology for citizen inclusion in virtual platform Virtual collaboration platform Phase 2 Final Report Policy Document Final and Periodic Activity/Management Reports to EC

1 2 12 10 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 12 9 9 10

Delivery date M3 M10 M10 M12 M12 M10 M15 M20 M24 M20 M20 M14 M24 M24 M24

1.2.3.3 List of Milestones Milestones No.

Milestone

Work

Month

Means of verification

Package MS1

6 roundtable meetings

2

M4

D2

MS2

1st Board Meeting

10

M2

Minutes

MS3

EFSS

3, 4

M10

D5, D7

MS4

Virtual collaboration platform launched

12

M10

Website

MS5

2nd Board Meeting

10

M10

Minutes

MS6

Congress

7,8

M20

D10

MS7

3rd Board Meeting

10

M20

Minutes

MS8

Final Report

9

M24

D13

MS9

Policy document

9

M24

D14

1.2.3.4 Description of Each Workpackage Below is a detailed description of the each workpackage Workpackage Number

WP1a

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Vertical Scoping Exercise: Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

3

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This is an enhanced scoping exercise through which the key themes, theories, and discussions within the remit of the Vertical Pillar [VP] on Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges are developed and enhanced

Description of Work: To: i. develop documentation for WP2 The Roundtable; ii. act as a preliminary position paper (which will be reviewed and revised as a results of WP2) for discussion and to inform emerging key issues from this VP and on cross-cutting discussions at the level of WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and iii. as a foundational statement for the development of this VP and the overall Social Platform (taking on board both specific issues within this VP and cross-cutting issues).

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP1b

Workpackage Title

Vertical Scoping Exercise: Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

2

7

Start date/event:

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This is an enhanced scoping exercise through which the key themes, theories, and discussions within the remit of the Vertical Pillar [VP] on Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services are developed and enhanced

Description of Work: To: i. develop documentation for WP2 The Roundtable; ii. act as a preliminary position paper (which will be reviewed and revised as a results of WP2) for discussion and to inform emerging key issues from this VP and on cross-cutting discussions at the level of WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and iii. as a foundational statement for the development of this VP and the overall Social Platform (taking on board both specific issues within this VP and cross-cutting issues).

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP1c

Workpackage Title

Vertical Scoping Exercise: Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

2

7

Start date/event:

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This is an enhanced scoping exercise through which the key themes, theories, and discussions within the remit of the Vertical Pillar [VP] on Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture are developed and enhanced

Description of Work: To: i. develop documentation for WP2 The Roundtable; ii. act as a preliminary position paper (which will be reviewed and revised as a results of WP2) for discussion and to inform emerging key issues from this VP and on cross-cutting discussions at the level of WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and iii. as a foundational statement for the development of this VP and the overall Social Platform (taking on board both specific issues within this VP and cross-cutting issues).

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP1d

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Vertical Scoping Exercise: Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

4

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This is an enhanced scoping exercise through which the key themes, theories, and discussions within the remit of the Vertical Pillar [VP] on Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism are developed and enhanced

Description of Work: To: i. develop documentation for WP2 The Roundtable; ii. act as a preliminary position paper (which will be reviewed and revised as a results of WP2) for discussion and to inform emerging key issues from this VP and on cross-cutting discussions at the level of WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and iii. as a foundational statement for the development of this VP and the overall Social Platform (taking on board both specific issues within this VP and cross-cutting issues).

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP1e

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Vertical Scoping Exercise: Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This is an enhanced scoping exercise through which the key themes,

theories, and discussions within the remit of the Vertical Pillar [VP] on Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights are developed and enhanced

Description of Work: To: i. develop documentation for WP2 The Roundtable; ii. act as a preliminary position paper (which will be reviewed and revised as a results of WP2) for discussion and to inform emerging key issues from this VP and on cross-cutting discussions at the level of WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and iii. as a foundational statement for the development of this VP and the overall Social Platform (taking on board both specific issues within this VP and cross-cutting issues).

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP1f

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Vertical Scoping Exercise: Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

6

9

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This is an enhanced scoping exercise through which the key themes, theories, and discussions within the remit of the Vertical Pillar [VP] on Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe are developed and enhanced

Description of Work: To: i. develop documentation for WP2 The Roundtable; ii. act as a preliminary position paper (which will be reviewed and revised as a results of WP2) for discussion and to inform emerging key issues from this VP and on cross-cutting discussions at the level of WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and iii. as a foundational statement for the development of this VP and the overall Social Platform (taking on board both specific issues within this VP and cross-cutting issues).

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP1g

Workpackage Title

Vertical Scoping Exercise: Social Capital and Sustainable Lifestyles

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

6

9

Start date/event:

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This is an enhanced scoping exercise through which the key themes, theories, and discussions concerning Social Capital and Sustainable Lifestyles are developed and enhanced

Description of Work: To: i. develop documentation for WP2 The Roundtable; ii. act as a preliminary position paper (which will be reviewed and revised as a results of WP2) for discussion and to inform emerging key issues in the VP Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights and on cross-cutting discussions at the level of WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and iii. as a foundational statement for the development of this VP and the overall Social Platform (taking on board both specific issues within this VP and cross-cutting issues).

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP2a

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

The Roundtable: Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

3

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To begin a process of engagement among stakeholders in a deliberative contxt to address the key question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Health, Ageing and Lifestyle’

It will prepare documentation for dissemination and discussion within VP Health, Ageing & Lifestyle in the later stages of SEL 21 and for dissemination via WP12 SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and through the networking process to engage more CSO’s and other collective and individual stakeholders.

Description of Work: The Roundtable will be conceived and organized on the principles of deliberative processes. It shall include 21 external participants, comprising seats as follows: Partners/Scientific (4 seats); CSOs (4 seats); Industry/Stakeholders (4 seats); Citizens/Residents (4 seats); Public Sector (4 seats) and one Wildcard Seat to be allocated at the discretion of the Leader of WP2a. It shall address the question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Health, Ageing and Lifestyle’. The Leader for WP2a will appoint a Convener to coordinate the overall discussion, which will be carried out in three groups of seven, with a facilitator for each group, one of whom shall be from the Coordinating Partner to facilitate cross-cutting discussion. The challenges will be presented to a Panel of Experts, for comment and open discussion at the Roundtable, after which they will be further refined, and then become part of the documentation prepared as the submission from VP Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges for WP3. Seats at the roundtable shall be allocated taking into account a need for fair and equitable representation of the overall population of Europe, identity, gender and age as far as is practicable.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP2b

Workpackage Title

The Roundtable: Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

2

7

Start date/event:

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To begin a process of engagement among stakeholders in a deliberative context to address the key question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services’ It will prepare documentation for dissemination and discussion within VP Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services in the later stages of SEL 21 and for dissemination via WP12 SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and through the networking process to engage more CSO’s and other collective and individual stakeholders.

Description of Work: There will be two Roundtables in this Vertical Pillar: a) Continental Challenges (P2) and b) Coastal Challenge (P7). Each Roundtable will be conceived and organized on the principles of deliberative processes. It shall include 21 external participants, comprising seats as follows: Partners/Scientific (4 seats); CSOs (4 seats); Industry/Stakeholders (4 seats); Citizens/Residents (4 seats); Public Sector (4 seats); and one Wildcard Seat to be allocated at the discretion of the Leader of WP2a. It shall address the question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services’. The Leaders for WP2b will appoint a Convener to coordinate the overall discussion, which will be carried out in three groups of seven, with a facilitator for each group, one of whom shall be from the Coordinating Partner to facilitate cross-cutting discussion. The challenges will be presented to a Panel of Experts, for comment and open discussion at the Roundtable, after which they will be further refined, and then become part of the documentation prepared as the submission from VP Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services for WP3. Seats at the roundtable shall be allocated taking into account a need for fair and equitable representation of the overall population of Europe, identity, gender and age as far as is practicable.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP2c

Workpackage Title

The Roundtable: Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

8

5

Start date/event:

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To begin a process of engagement among stakeholders in a deliberative context to address the key question: What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture’ It will prepare documentation for dissemination and discussion within VP Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture in the later stages of SEL 21 and for dissemination via WP12 SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and through the networking process to engage more CSO’s and other collective and individual stakeholders.

Description of Work: There will be two Roundtables in this Vertical Pillar: a)

Perspectives in Northern Europe (P5) and b) Perspectives in Southern Europe (P8). Each Roundtable will be conceived and organized on the principles of deliberative processes. It shall include 21 external participants, comprising seats as follows: Partners/Scientific (4 seats); CSOs (4 seats); Industry/Stakeholders (4 seats); Citizens/Residents (4 seats); Public Sector (4 seats); and one Wildcard Seat to be allocated at the discretion of the Leader of WP2a. It shall address the question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture’. The Leaders for WP2c will appoint a Convener to coordinate the overall discussion, which will be carried out in three groups of seven, with a facilitator for each group, one of whom shall be from the Coordinating Partner to facilitate cross-cutting discussion. The challenges will be presented to a Panel of Experts, for comment and open discussion at the Roundtable, after which they will be further refined, and then become part of the documentation prepared as the submission from VP Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture for WP3. Seats at the roundtable shall be allocated taking into account a need for fair and equitable representation of the overall population of Europe, identity, gender and age as far as is practicable.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP2d

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

The Roundtable: Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism’

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

4

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To begin a process of engagement among stakeholders in a deliberative context to address the key question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism’ It will prepare documentation for dissemination and discussion within VP Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism in the later stages of SEL 21 and for dissemination via WP12 SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and through the networking process to engage more CSO’s and other collective and individual stakeholders.

Description of Work: The Roundtable will be conceived and organized on the principles of deliberative processes. It shall include 21 external participants, comprising seats as follows: Partners/Scientific (4 seats); CSOs (4 seats); Industry/Stakeholders (4 seats); Citizens/Residents (4 seats); Public Sector (4

seats); and one Wildcard Seat to be allocated at the discretion of the Leader of WP2a. It shall address the question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism’. The Leader for WP2d will appoint a Convener to coordinate the overall discussion, which will be carried out in three groups of seven, with a facilitator for each group, one of whom shall be from the Coordinating Partner to facilitate cross-cutting discussion. The challenges will be presented to a Panel of Experts, for comment and open discussion at the Roundtable, after which they will be further refined, and then become part of the documentation prepared as the submission from VP Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism for WP3. Seats at the roundtable shall be allocated taking into account a need for fair and equitable representation of the overall population of Europe, identity, gender and age as far as is practicable.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP2e

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

The Roundtable: Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights’

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To begin a process of engagement among stakeholders in a deliberative context to address the key question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights’. It will prepare documentation for dissemination and discussion within VP Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights in the later stages of SEL 21 and for dissemination via WP12 SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and through the networking process to engage more CSO’s and other collective and individual stakeholders.

Description of Work: The Roundtable will be conceived and organized on the

principles of deliberative processes. It shall include 21 external participants, comprising seats as follows: Partners/Scientific (4 seats); CSOs (4 seats); Industry/Stakeholders (4 seats); Citizens/Residents (4 seats); Public Sector (4 seats); and one Wildcard Seat to be allocated at the discretion of the Leader of WP2a. It shall address the question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights’. The Leader for WP2e will appoint a Convener to coordinate the overall discussion, which will be carried out in three groups of seven, with a facilitator for each group, one of whom shall be from the Coordinating Partner to facilitate cross-cutting discussion. The challenges will be presented to a Panel of Experts, for comment and open discussion at the Roundtable, after which they will be further refined, and then become part of the documentation prepared as the submission from VP Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights for WP3. Seats at the roundtable shall be allocated taking into account a need for fair and equitable representation of the overall population of Europe, identity, gender and age as far as is practicabl

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP2f

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

The Roundtable: Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

6

9

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To begin a process of engagement among stakeholders in a deliberative context to address the key question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe’. It will prepare documentation for dissemination and discussion within VP Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe in the later stages of SEL 21 and for dissemination via WP12 SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and through the networking process to engage more CSO’s and other collective and individual stakeholders.

Description of Work: There will be two Roundtables in this Vertical Pillar: a) Issues and challenges specific to Eastern and Southern Europe (P6) and b) Issues and challenges specific to Northern and Western Europe (P9). Each Roundtable will be conceived and organized on the principles of deliberative processes. It shall include 21 external participants, comprising seats as follows: Partners/Scientific (4 seats);

CSOs (4 seats); Industry/Stakeholders (4 seats); Citizens/Residents (4 seats); Public Sector (4 seats); and one Wildcard Seat to be allocated at the discretion of the Leader of WP2a. It shall address the question: ‘What are the key challenges for achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe’. The Leaders for WP2f will appoint a Convener to coordinate the overall discussion, which will be carried out in three groups of seven, with a facilitator for each group, one of whom shall be from the Coordinating Partner to facilitate cross-cutting discussion. The challenges will be presented to a Panel of Experts, for comment and open discussion at the Roundtable, after which they will be further refined, and then become part of the documentation prepared as the submission from VP Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe for WP3. Seats at the roundtable shall be allocated taking into account a need for fair and equitable representation of the overall population of Europe, identity, gender and age as far as is practicable.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP2g

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

The Roundtable: Social Capital and Sustainable Lifestyles e

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

10

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To begin a process of engagement among stakeholders in a deliberative context to address the key question: ‘How best can Social Capital be conceived in achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights’. It will prepare documentation for dissemination and discussion within VP Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights in the later stages of SEL 21 and for dissemination via WP12 SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and through the networking process to engage more CSO’s and other collective and individual stakeholders.

Description of Work: The Roundtable will be conceived and organized on the principles of deliberative processes. It shall include 21 external participants, comprising seats as follows: Partners/Scientific (4 seats); CSOs (4 seats); Industry/Stakeholders (4 seats); Citizens/Residents (4 seats); Public Sector (4 seats); and one Wildcard Seat to be allocated at the discretion of the Leader of WP2a. It shall address the question: ‘How best can Social Capital be conceived in achieving Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, given challenges in Governance,

Citizenship, Democracy, Rights’. The Leader for WP2g will appoint a Convener to coordinate the overall discussion, which will be carried out in three groups of seven, with a facilitator for each group, one of whom shall be from the Coordinating Partner to facilitate cross-cutting discussion. The challenges will be presented to a Panel of Experts, for comment and open discussion at the Roundtable, after which they will be further refined, and then become part of the documentation prepared as the submission from VP Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights for WP3. Seats at the roundtable shall be allocated taking into account a need for fair and equitable representation of the overall population of Europe, identity, gender and age as far as is practicable.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP3

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To engage in a pan-European discussion on Sustainable Lifestyles, with a large number of key stakeholders (representative of Europe) in real time and to a wider audience of participants across Europe via SEL 21 Public Engagement online Platform.

Description of Work: This Forum involves all partners in the Vertical Pillars and additional key stakeholders (selected from WP2 or alternatives), who will engage in a discursive process to plot sustainability coordinates around the key thematic ‘socially sustainable lifestyles in Europe’ in the context of: a) SSH Research Roadmap 20122013 and b) Europe towards 2050 The lead partner(s) in each vertical pillar will present two discussion documents, which will outline: 1. An enhanced State-of –the Art, Key Challenges, Key Obstacles and Key Opportunities for the theme of their Vertical Pillar of the Social Platform (Informed by WP1 and WP2). 2. Presentation on key crosscutting issues between each of the vertical pillars (Informed by WP1 and WP2). The Forum will be open to participation by all interested external parties, through a virtual platform and will continue to take feedback on an open basis till the Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP4

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Processes and Capacity building for democratic engagement

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To establish best deliberative and discursive methods for engaging stakeholders in real time at the European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles, to begin to construct systems for engagement of citizens and stakeholders in wider European society both independently and via SEL 21 Public Engagement online Platform.

Description of Work: This workpackage will develop processes, methodologies and systems to be deployed in WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles [EFSSL]. It will be an open concept through which the processes, methodologies and systems will adapt and evolve to the needs of an evolving social platform and ultimately as a model for citizen engagement in Europe towards 2050.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP5a

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Review and Learning from EFSSL: Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

3

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and

outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, with a view of capturing key lessons and knowledge, building knowledge within the VP and across SEL 21 and to enhance the work of the social platform in terms of the development of documents, dissemination and networking.

Description of Work: The leader of WP5a will coordinate an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, engaging and taking feedback from the participants of both WP5a and WP2a with the purpose of informing WP6 and enhancing learning and knowledge accumulation around the key issues relevant to this VP and in the context of cross-cutting issues for Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP5b

Workpackage Title

Review and Learning from EFSSL: Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

2

9

Start date/event:

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, with a view of capturing key lessons and knowledge, building knowledge within the VP and across SEL 21 and to enhance the work of the social platform in terms of the development of documents, dissemination and networking.

Description of Work: The leaders of WP5b will coordinate an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, engaging and taking feedback from the participants of both WP5a and WP2a with the purpose of informing WP6 and enhancing learning and knowledge accumulation around the key issues relevant to this VP and in the context of cross-cutting issues for Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP5c

Workpackage Title

Review and Learning from EFSSL: Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

5

8

Start date/event:

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, with a view of capturing key lessons and knowledge, building knowledge within the VP and across SEL 21 and to enhance the work of the social platform in terms of the development of documents, dissemination and networking.

Description of Work: The leaders of WP5c will coordinate an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, engaging and taking feedback from the participants of both WP5a and WP2a with the purpose of informing WP6 and enhancing learning and knowledge accumulation around the key issues relevant to this VP and in the context of cross-cutting issues for Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP5d

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Review and Learning from EFSSL: Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

4

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, with a view of capturing key lessons and knowledge, building knowledge within the VP and across SEL 21 and to enhance the work of the social platform in terms of the development of documents, dissemination and

networking.

Description of Work: The leader of WP5d will coordinate an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, engaging and taking feedback from the participants of both WP5a and WP2a with the purpose of informing WP6 and enhancing learning and knowledge accumulation around the key issues relevant to this VP and in the context of cross-cutting issues for Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP5e

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Review and Learning from EFSSL: Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

10

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, with a view of capturing key lessons and knowledge, building knowledge within the VP and across SEL 21 and to enhance the work of the social platform in terms of the development of documents, dissemination and networking.

Description of Work: The leader of WP5e will coordinate an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, engaging and taking feedback from the participants of both WP5a and WP2a with the purpose of informing WP6 and enhancing learning and knowledge accumulation around the key issues relevant to this VP and in the context of cross-cutting issues for Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP5f

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Review and Learning from EFSSL: Climate Change,

Renewables, and a Postcarbon Europe Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

6

9

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, with a view of capturing key lessons and knowledge, building knowledge within the VP and across SEL 21 and to enhance the work of the social platform in terms of the development of documents, dissemination and networking.

Description of Work: The leaders of WP5f will coordinate an in-depth analysis and review of the processes and outcomes of WP3 EFSSL, engaging and taking feedback from the participants of both WP5a and WP2a with the purpose of informing WP6 and enhancing learning and knowledge accumulation around the key issues relevant to this VP and in the context of cross-cutting issues for Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP6

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Review and Learning from EFSSL: Climate Change, Renewables, and a Postcarbon Europe

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: The key objective of this workpackage will be to raise awareness and enhance resonation around the key issues of socially sustainable lifestyles, through a major networking exercise emanating from each of the partners

Description of Work: This workpackage will have three key dimensions; a) dissemination of key outcomes from Review and Learning from EFSSL in each of the

VPs and in the context of cross-cutting social sustainability imperatives; b) each VP will identify key stakeholders in all parts of the European Research Area for inclusion into the ongoing work of the Social Platform; c) and concerted efforts will be made to reach citizens and non-citizen residents of the European Research Area.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP7

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: The key objective of this workpackage is to engage with 180 stakeholders and citizens (residents) of the ERA in a carefully designed deliberative forum on sustainable lifestyles in European in real time, with extensive virtual participation. The aim will be to produce synthesis documents on key issues around sustainable lifestyles that will be publicly available and feed directly into D13 and D14.

Description of Work: This is a congress involving all partners in the VPs and additional key stakeholders and citizens emerging from WP5, A core Congress will be staged at a central location with invitations to a sample of 180 stakeholders and citizens (residents) of the ERA, to achieve a representative cohort, in each of the six Vertical Platforms (VPs). These will engage in a discursive process:

Phase One – six parallel thematic groups engaged in and around the themes and key questions from each of the VPs. These will be organized to the same formula as pertained in WP2 The Roundtable including the Expert Panel. In Phase One the lead partner(s) in each vertical pillar will present two discussion documents, which will outline emerging and immanent challenges, key obstacles and opportunities for the theme of their vertical pillar as informed by each of the preceding stages of the Social Platform. The outcomes and recommendations will feed into Phase Two.

Phase Two - In Phase Two the Convener from each of the six parallel thematic groups will present a report on discussions and recommendations from Phase One. These will be taken up in discussion in six parallel roundtables, of six participants each, following the formula used in WP2 including the Expert Panel. Each group will comprise two members from each of the thematic groups in Phase One, to facilitate

the elaboration of crosscutting issues. The agenda for this phase will be shaped by the report from Phase One and addressing ‘socially sustainable lifestyles in Europe’ in the context of: a) SSH Research Roadmap 2012-2013 and b) Europe towards 2050 The Congress will be open to the public to both observe and participate through SEL 21 Public Engagement online platform, which will allow for parallel sessions by CSOs, educational institutions, public bodies other interested groups and/or individual citizen (resident) participation.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP8

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Democratic Governance and Deliberative Processes

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: The key objective of this workpackage is to develop methods that will facilitate and maximize the potential of the Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, especially vis-à-vis the participation of citizens (residents) in both real time and virtually and to ensure that their contributions are meaningfully carried forward.

Description of Work: Building on experience of stakeholders and transdiciplianry research this workpackage will develop processes, methodologies and systems for the deliberative and inclusive participation of citizens and key stakeholders in real time and virtually in WP7 Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe. This will be an extremely complex process as it will involve a very large number of actors dealing with very challenging agenda.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP9

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Social Platform Transition

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: The key objective of this workpackage will be to create the two main final deliverables D13 and D14. To liaise with other Social Platforms to devise common approaches for a sustainable future after the EC funding period.

Description of Work: This Workpackage will involve all partners, in finalizing the two main reports from the Social Platform: 1. Final Report to the European Commission (D13) 2. Policy Document on shaping SSH Research Policy 2012-13 (D14) This workpackage will also seek to establish protocols for the continuation of advances made in the Social Platform beyond the EC funding period. This Social Platform will collaborate with the other Social Platforms in devising a common sustainability strategy for Social Platforms..

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP10

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Social Platform Management

Activity Type

MGT

Participant Number

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This workpackage will be concerned with the efficient management of the social platform, to ensure it delivers a social platform in line with the requirements of the call. Ultimate responsibility for management will rest with the coordinator (P1), it will communicate with all partners in an open and transparent way. It will take full responsibility for the overall financial management of the platform.

Description of Work: Given the short period of the contract, the complexity of the work to be achieved, the early need for deliverables and clear and sustainable progress from the beginning the main management tasks are vested in P1, with devolved roles for other partners. P1 will be the general financial administrator for project funds, which is envisaged as a major component of WP10 Social Platform Management. P1 will liaise with the administrative and financial services of partner institutions to ensure financial and administrative accountability, for example by distributing funds according to the approved budget and ensuring that contracts are duly signed. P1 will also liaise with the financial and administrative services of the EC. P1 will also convene three Social Platform Board Meetings, at which all partners will be represented, one at the beginning of the project and one in conjunction with the Forum and the Congress

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP11

Start date/event:

Workpackage Title

Social Platform Management

Activity Type

MGT

Participant Number

1

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: This workpackage will be concerned with maintaining the scientific merit of the whole social platform.

Description of Work: It will ensure that all partners are fully engaged with the principal mission of the platform viz to explore, discuss and develop concepts around socially sustainable lifestyles in Europe. It will ensure that the concept of sustainability remains a central focus and that each of the Vertical Platforms pursue this in the context of both their own thematic area and also as a crosscutting issue within the platform. It will also ensure that the best practice is observed when engaging stakeholders, citizens and residents and that the social platform operates to best ethical standards. It will be headed by P1 and P2, the latter will bring a lot of experience to WP11 from their role in the Social Platform Social Polis.

Deliverables:

Workpackage Number

WP12

Workpackage Title

SEL 21 Public Engagement online platform

Activity Type

SUPP

Participant Number

1

2

Start date/event:

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Participant Short Name Person Months (per particip.)

Objectives: To provide a platform to remedy a recurrently stressed and tentatively addressed problem by policy reforms in recent years: the lack of engagement of all citizens. To provide a virtual platform for SEL21 that will be based on the principles of open innovation. The system will consist of three levels of user-interaction, which will be interconnected through the same interface.

Description of Work: This workpackage will be led jointly by P5 and P6, with inputs from P1 and P2 and other partners. P5 will provide an eCollab collaboration platform under Drupal 6 with highly customisable functionalities for internal ‘social web’ communication for the consortium and for public visitors: blog, forum, work groups, tagging, multimedia publishing, news aggregator, tracking, online repository, survey, etc. In addition, P5 will deliver the following services: Training: one-to-one for webmasters (email, phone) and online for other users via video tutorials covering the main platform functionalities. • Hosting and basic maintenance services: Drupal core and contributed modules maintenance and security updates. Full website backup (files and database). • Testing and site design. eCollab will integrate a shared video/audio, webcast broadcasting virtual facility for sustainable lifestyle groups, provided by P6 with an extended geospatial mapping functionality. This facility will allow the stakeholder groups and CSOs from all pillars of the social platform to upload and share audio/video/webcam broadcast real-time files showing the multitude forms of sustainable lifestyles in Europe. •

In addition P6 will define the requirements and create the structure of the SEL 21 data base. The scoping of requirements will be carried out by identifying the categories of data to be used by stakeholder groups and network members in each Vertical Pillar of the platform. The database will be created by using MySQL. P6 will also provide programming code for the platform. The programming will be carried out by using programming languages PHP, AJAX, HTML, Smarty. Preparation of initial documentation with instructions for users on security, access, usage of the system. P6 will also develop the interface and plug-ins for integration with external servers.

The following scripts will be used: googlemaps API, googlespreadsheet API, java script, flash. P6 will carry out beta testing of the system and optimization of parameters. The testing of a fully running system will be carried out on a dedicated server with software: Adobe Media Server Flash, FFMPEG, PHP and MySQL, Java applications enabled, RAID-Disks. Task 5. Final release of the system and preparation of user documentation. The final release will be carried out on a hired dedicated server with unlimited bandwith, up to 4 GB RAM, 3 GHz processor frequency, 3TB hard drives with RAID controller. A user manual will be prepared in English and compiled in a searchable pdf file.

Deliverables: Deliverable 12.1: live, usable and used platform (Month 3). Deliverable 12.2: Report on the construction and implementation of the online platform (M24).

1.2.3.5 Summary Effort Table

Work Package Vertical Scoping Exercise Roundtables European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles Processes and Capacity-building for Democratic Engagement Review and Learning from ESSL Social Platform Network Dissemination and Inclusion Wave Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe Democratic Governance and Deliberative Processes Social Platform Transition Social Platform Management Social Platform Scientific and Deliberative Coordination Virtual Platform Total

Budget 126,000 160,176 133,816

Participant University College Cork KU Leuven Vaxjo University Universidad de Burgos Eco Innovation

Budget 479,212 279,410 87,560 87,561 133,750

57,587 68,400 173,814 169, 590 58,255 112,098 214,382 174,541 49,000 1,497,525

Europarama University of Newcastle University of Bologna University of Manchester Ddikeoma Total

133,741 87,459 94,695 83,000 31,137 1,497,525

Budget Per Participant

P1: Coordinator: University College Cork Staff S. O’Tuama 50% (2 years) C. Harris 30% (2 years) C. Sage 12% (2 years) Research Manager 50% (2 years) Administrative/Financial 70% (2 years) Research Assistant 33% (1 Year) Travel Consumables Hosting 1 and attending all Roundtables Hosting EFSS Forum (60 delegates, 2 days) Subtotal Direct Costs except subcontracting 7% Overheads on Direct Costs exc subcontracting Audit costs (subcontracting) Total Budget

297,927

21,000 25,000 23,000 80,000 446,927 31,285 1,000 479,212

P2: KU Leuven Staff13 Travel Consumables Hosting Roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress (180 delegates) Hosting virtual platform subtotal Direct Costs

120196 15000 4000 10935 106000 5000 261131

                                                          13

 A doctoral researcher will be hired, whose research in the framework of this project will focus on methods of stakeholder involvement in research on sustainable lifestyles (transdisciplinarity) and be an important input for the completion of a PhD on this topic. The researcher will be involved in all WPs, but strictly organisational and coordination work will be taken over by a research assistant (**) in WPs 2 (roundtable, 1 person month) and WP 7 (congress, 2 person months). *** Prof. Frank Moulaert will spend 2 person months on the scientific coordination of the project. The labour costs are based on the standard wage costs for these different personnel statutes at Flemish universities.  

7% Overheads on Direct Costs Total Budget Person-months Year 1: 14 Person-months Year 2: 15

18279 279410

P3: Vaxjo University Category Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 5 Person-months Year 2: 4

Budget 56,682 9,950 15,200 0 0 81832 5728 87560

P4: Universidad de Burgos Category Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 7.5 Person-months Year 2: 8

Budget 49832 16000 12000 0 4000 81832 5728 87561

P5: Eco Innovation Category Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Hosting virtual platform Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 10 Person-months Year 2: 6

Budget 96,000 8,000 16,000 0 3000 2000 125,000 8750 133,750

P6: Europarama Category

Budget

Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 6.6 Person-months Year 2: 6.6

65,995 20,424 14,273 0 10,280 124,992 8749 133,741

P7: University of Newcastle Category Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 7.3 Person-months Year 2: 4

Budget 63,778 5,619 11,140 0 1,200 81,737 5,722 87,459

P8: University of Bologna Category Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 11 Person-months Year 2: 11

Budget 50,000 17,000 15,500 0 6000 88,500 6,195 94,695

P9: University of Manchester Category Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 4.4 Person-months Year 2: 4.4

Budget 43,070 7,000 15,500 0 12,000 77,570 5,430 83,000

P10: Ddikeoma Category Staff Travel Hosting roundtable (25 delegates) Hosting Congress Consumables Total Direct Costs 7% indirect costs Total Person-months Year 1: 2 Person-months Year 2: 1

Budget 13,700 3,600 11,000 0 800 29100 2037 31137

FIGURE 2.1: VERTICAL PILLARS, WORKPACKAGES AND GOVERNANCE OF SEL 21

1.2.4 GRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENTS

1.2.5 RISK AND CONTINGENCY PLAN

Nature of Risk

Contingencies to Reduce Risk

1

Loss of key member(s) of coordination team

The proposed co-ordination team includes a number of experienced research leaders providing the robustness to absorb the loss of team members, it also located within a very large transdisciplinary institute.

2

Loss, or failure to deliver, of a partner in the core network

The extensive network of experienced partners would minimise the impact of failure in relation to network member. Loss of knowledge in relation to specific Virtual Pillars can, in some case be shared within the platform, in other case it would have to be addressed by contract renegotiation of budget allocation within the consortium or through contracting expert inputs.

3

Failure to obtain co-operation of users/stakeholders in process of engagement or withdrawal of stakeholders

The consultation strategy will build on established working relationships between the core network and stakeholders which will reduce the possibilities of non-cooperation

4

Financial overspend

Key spend areas will be closely monitored by P1, where unforeseen additional costs beyond the reach of the budget are envisaged alternative methdologies will be deployed e.g. SEL 21 Public Engagement online platform in place of actual interface. The nature of the network is that it is flexible and cost might be reduced by reducint the scale of events or their location.

5

Timetable slippage

The range of experienced partners, the range of approaches, a clear common workprogramme with defined achievable milestones and effective coordination and management will greatly reduce this risk.

2. IMPLEMENTATION 2.1. MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AND PROCEDURES SustainEuroLife 21 is a coordination action involving six thematic areas or Vertical Pillars; one transversal module, which addresses Democratic Governance and Deliberative Processes (inside and outside SEL 21); it has ten partners, which are in turn linked into thematic networks of CSOs, researchers, public sector organisations, industry, academics, citizens and other stakeholders. There is a need for strong coordination and clear lines of accountability. Given the short period of the contract, the complexity of the work to be achieved, the early need for deliverables and clear and sustainable progress from the beginning the main management tasks are vested in P1 (ISSI21-UCC), while coordination is strongly led by P1 and P2 (KUL) with devolved roles for other partners. SEL 21. The management style will be open, and fair and will be conducted in close cooperation with all other partners. The specific tasks of each partner in SEL 21 are outlined below.

2.2. SCIENTIFIC LEADERSHIP - INDIVIDUAL WORKPACKAGES SustainEuroLife 21is a social platform, which is essentially organised around the six Vertical Pillars and some workpackages falling under the transversal module. Responsibility is devolved to each partner according to defined responsibilities within the vertical pillars and specific responsibilities related to individual workpackages. Given that coordination of effort is essential and that cross cutting dialogue is a sine qua non for conceptualising sustainable lifestyles, partner P1 is connected to every Vertical Pillar, and all aspects of the transversal module and the workpackages. In terms of conceptualising this we have constructed a table, which indicates the partners involved in each workpackage. 2.3. OVERALL MANAGEMENT OF SUSTAINEUROLIFE 21 The Social Platform will be managed by P1, but it will have a formal Social Platform Board, which shall meet in real time on three occasions, at the start of the project and in conjunction with both the European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and the Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe. It will also be convened monthly using the platform developed under WP12: SEL21 Public Engagement online platform. All partners shall be members of the Social Platform Board. It shall be responsible for monitoring progress against the platform objectives, and for endorsing any alterations to the implementation plan. It shall endeavour to reach decisions through consensus. P1 will be responsible for convening, coordinating and facilitating the Board and shall also be its secretariat. Within the Board partners will be allocated portfolios around good practice in a cabinet style system as follows: Gender and Diversity (P4); Ethics (P3); Sustainable Practices (P5); Networking and Inclusion (P2). 2.4. SOCIAL PLATFORM SCIENTIFIC AND DELIBERATIVE COORDINATION (WP11)

Coordination of the scientific, deliberative and networking core of SEL 21 is central to the building of the social platform, and a management activity in its own right. This will be the responsibility of P1 and P2 who, in cooperation with the other partners, will maintain up-to-date network records and will ensure the implementation of the social platform as an inclusive and constantly growing community of engagement around sustainable lifestyles in Europe. It will ensure that each partner is adopting best practices and pursuing the goals as laid out in the workplan. P1 shall also take advice and council from the SustainEuroLife Advisory Committee in helping it The SustainEuroLife Advisory Committee (SAC) will be hosted at home institution of P1. It is a voluntary board, whose purpose will be to monitor the work of the social platform, by way of guiding suggestions and review from the perspective of both the state-of-the art and international debates and discussions. It will advise and comment on i.

current issues and emerging topics relative to each of the Vertical Pillars and cross-cutting issues;

ii.

the process of engagement of the public (citizens, residents, CSOs, policy makers, industry, politicians and other stakeholders;

iii.

documentation emerging from SEL 21;

iv.

deliverables

v.

future directions for the platform subsequent to the 24 month project period.

It will not have a managerial or directive role and will serve the purpose of offering an outsider’s perspective and in keeping the social platform grounded and focused on its primary objectives of addressing sustainable lifestyles in Europe. It will also act as a conduit for extending the reach of SEL 21, as each of the named individuals are members of pan-European networks in their fields of expertise and are linked to the Irish Social Sciences Platform through ISS 21. The Board will be convened four times during the 24-month period of the project, but all members will be included in the platform developed under WP12: SEL21 Public Engagement online platform and will be free to participate like any other resident of Europe in all of the discussions of SEL 21. All members of the Board are associates of the Institute for Social Sciences in the 21st Century (ISS 21) and shall comprise the following: External Chair: Mr Tom O’Connor (Retired Senior Civil Servant) Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges Dr Orla O’Donovan, Department of Applied Social Studies Dr Monica O’Mullane, Department of General Practice Built Environment, Energy, Mobility, Public Services Mr Brendan O’Sullivan, MPlan Planning & Sustainable Development Dr Denis Linehan, Department of Geography Consumption, Wellbeing, Food, Culture Dr Colin Sage, Department of Geography

Dr Joan Buckley, Department of Management & Marketing Migration, People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism Dr Piaras McEnri, Department of Geography Piet Strydom, Sociology Department Governance, Citizenship, Democracy, Rights Dr Tracey Skillington, Department of Sociology Dr Siobhan Mullally, Department of Law/Centre of Criminal Justice & Rights Climate Change, Renewables and a Postcarbon Europe Prof. Robert Devoy, Department Geography Dr Gerard Mullally, Department of Sociology Mr Niall Dunphy, Cleaner Production Promotion Unit Social Capital Dr Linda Conolly, Department of Sociology Dr Cathal O’Connell, Department of Applied Social Studies 2.5. ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE P1 will be the general financial administrator for project funds, which is envisaged as a major component of WP10 Social Platform Management. P1 will liaise with the administrative and financial services of partner institutions to ensure financial and administrative accountability, for example by distributing funds according to the approved budget and ensuring that contracts are duly signed. P1 will also liaise with the financial and administrative services of the EC.

Figure 2.1: Management Structure of SEL 21

2.6 INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANTS 2.6.1 UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK, INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL SCIENCES IN THE 21ST CENTURY UCC is one of the premier research institutions in Ireland, with a research income which is one of the highest in the country and a strong track record of managing EUfunded projects, attracting on average €7M annually in EU funds. ISS21 (www.ucc.ie/en/iss21/ISS21/) is an interdisciplinary research institute which involves researchers from across the social sciences in building and enhancing research on social and economic issues for the 21st century. As part of the Irish Social Sciences Platform (ISSP: www.issplatform.ie), it received significant funding under PRTLI414 and has recently led a major ISSP proposal for a structured PhD programme ‘Smart Economy, Smart Society’ with a focus on developing sustainable models of social and economic development. Research Associates of ISS21 have significant experience of managing and being involved in large EU-funded projects (see below). ISS21 will provide lead coordination for SEL21, taking lead responsibility for Work Packages 3,4,6,8,9,10 and 11, including scientific coordination and management, and will participate in all 12 WPs. ISS21 will lead the Vertical Pillar on Governance and will also have a role in the Horizontal Pillar on Consumption. Dr. Seamus O’Tuama is Research Associate of ISS21 and Senior Lecturer in Government. His expertise is in governance, citizenship and rights. Previous projects include EUINTP JEP 25254 – 2004, EU Publin, PRTLI3 Collective Responsibility, PRTLI1 Technological Citizenship, EU HPVI ENSIPP and EU T-JEP-10832. He has been an Expert Evaluator 8 times on EU FP6 and FP7 panels in the areas of citizenship, governance and science/technology. Dr. Colin Sage is Research Associate of ISS21 and Senior Lecturer in Geography. He has won over €600,000 in competitive research funding in the areas of food and sustainability since 2000, including a Senior Research Fellowship (IRCHSS15 08-09) on The challenge of sustainability for the contemporary food system in Ireland, and Risk and responsibility: Developing a model of sustainable environmental risk assessment (PRTLI3 02-05), and was involved in the FP6 SPICOSA project. Dr. Clodagh Harris is Research Associate of ISS21 and Lecturer in Government. She is an expert in the area of active democratic citizenship in Ireland and Europe.

                                                          14

Higher Education Authority (Ireland): Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions 15 Irish Research Council for Humanities and Social Sciences

She has been involved in a major research project with Tasc and Democratic Dialogue in the area of democracy, and has been lead facilitator at the European Citizens’ consultation for the European Movement as well as the National Forum on European Citizens’ Consultation. Dr. Caitríona Ní Laoire is Research Manager of ISS21 and has recently successfully completed and managed

a Marie Curie Excellence Team Project

(MEXT-014204) for which she was awarded €1.2M. Relevant publications Harris, C. (2008) The Irish taskforce on active citizenship – the CLEAR analysis, Journal of Representative Democracy 44 (1) Harris C. with Hughes, I. Clancy P. Beetham D. (2007) Power to the People? Assessing democracy in Ireland, New Island: Dublin. Ó Tuama, S Ed. (2009) Critical Turns in Critical Theory: New Directions in Social and Political Thought. London: Tauris. Ó Tuama, S (2008) ‘Judicial review under the Irish Constitution: more American than Commonwealth’, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law (ISSN 1387-3091) 12 (2), October, 2008 Sage, C. (2009) The sustainability and security of the global food system: The challenges of peak oil, climate change and freshwater depletion, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Food Science & Technology Sage, C. (2002) Food security. In Human Security and the Environment: International Comparisons (E.Page & M.Redclift, eds.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 128-153. Redclift, M. and C.Sage (eds) (1994) Strategies for Sustainable Development: Local Agendas for the Southern Hemisphere. John Wiley: Chichester pp.200.

2.6.2 KATHOLIEKE UNIVERSITEIT LEUVEN (K.U.LEUVEN), LEUVEN SPACE AND SOCIETY RESEARCH CENTRE (LSAS) K.U.Leuven is the 6th European university in the Leiden ranking; European surveys rank K.U.Leuven among the top European universities in terms of output. Annual research expenditures are close to €300M. K.U.Leuven is vigilantly open to contemporary societal needs and has largely internationalized its competitive research. Leuven Space and Society Research Centre (LSAS) is an interdisciplinary research platform that promotes research on the built environment from various disciplines working at the intersection of space and society: planning, sustainable building methods, conservation, urbanism, architecture, social geography, landscape research and spatial data applications. K.U.Leuven has considerable experience with European RTD funding programs. In FP6, K.U.Leuven participated in 267 collaborative research projects, placing the university at 4th position in Europe. In FP7, K.U.Leuven participates in over 75 collaborative research contracts so far. LSAS director prof. LSAS brings together researchers with experience in transdisciplinary research on sustainable building design, social sustainability, strategic and institutional planning, social innovation and stakeholder involvement in research. Tasks: K.U.Leuven will lead the vertical pillar ‘the built environment: energy, mobility and public services’ (WP1,2,5) and will assist UCC in scientific coordination (WP11). It will play a role in the WPs focussed on stakeholder involvement and democratic deliberation (WP3,4,6,8) and is lead partner for WP7. Prof. Frank Moulaert is full professor in Spatial Planning and LSAS director. He has 20 years of experience with coordinating and executing EU collaborative research projects (URSPIC, FP4; SINGOCOM, FP5,; DEMOLOGOS, FP6; KATARSIS, FP6) and other transdisciplinary projects (eg SPINDUS); he coordinated the first Social Platform (Social Polis: www.socialpolis.eu). He has published widely in the field of integrated area development, social innovation and planning. Prof. Frank De Troyer is associate professor in Design and Building Methodology and member of LSAS. Trained as engineer-architect and in business economics, he has long term research and valorisation expertise in the field of sustainable construction, environmental impacts assessments of buildings and building economics (e.g. SuFiQuaD and Innovation Stimulation on Flexible and Dismountable Building). Dr. Stijn Oosterlynck is a post-doctoral research fellow and co-ordinator of LSAS. Trained as a sociologist and with broad research experience in the fields of urban and regional development studies, strategic and institutional planning and political sociology, his work is strongly multi-disciplinary. Drs. Han Vandevyvere is trained as engineer-architect with more than 15 years of research and practical experience in architectural design and urban planning, with a particular focus on sustainability in the built environment. He is a member of LSAS and coordinator of the Competence Node on Sustainable Construction (http://www.codubo.asro.kuleuven.be/). Relevant publications: Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Gonzalez, S. and Swyngedouw, E. (2007) ‘Social innovation and governance in European cities: urban development between path dependency and radical innovation’, European Urban and Regional Studies, 14(3):195-209; Moulaert, F. (2000) Globalization and integrated area development in European cities, Oxford University Press, Oxford; De Troyer, F.,

Tablada De La Torre, A. (2005) ‘Quantification of possibilities for comfort improvement in tropical contexts by passive ventilation based on the “Test Reference Year’, in: Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Lebanon, Notre Dame University; Allacker, K., De Troyer F. (2007) Combining environmental impact and financial cost calculations with quality assessment at the building level, in: Proceedings of International Conference on Whole Life Urban Sustainability and its Assessment, Glasgow. Oosterlynck, S. and Swyngedouw, E. (2010) ‘Noise reduction: The post-political quandary of night flights at Brussels airport’, Environment & Planning A (forthcoming); Vandevyvere H., Neuckermans H. (2005) From sustainable housing sciences to sustainable housing policies: Challenging the social responsibility of researchers and designers, in: de Villiers, A.; Ural, O.; Osman, A. (eds.) Transforming Housing Environments through Design, Proceedings of the XXXIII IAHS World Congress on Housing, Pretoria, September 27-30.

2.6.3

VÄXJÖ UNIVERSITY, SCHOOL OF HEALTH SCIENCES AND SOCIAL WORK

On 1 January 2010 Växjö University and the University of Kalmar will merge to form Linnaeus University. A new, exciting seat of learning will be created with 31 000 students. Research at Linnaeus University is multifaceted, with both in-depth subject study and interdisciplinary specialisation. It spans humanities, social sciences, natural sciences and technology, including well-established fields of research in labour market policy and welfare issues. The common research focus at the School of Health Sciences and Social Work is the individual and his/her situation in modern society, the need for social support and care and society’s way of meeting those needs. Tasks: VXU will provide the lead coordination of the Vertical Pillar on Health, Ageing & Lifestyle Challenges, taking responsibility for W P 1a, 2a and 5a and participant in WP3, 4,6,7,8, 9 and 11. Previous experience: Växjö University is coordinating IP-CHRISGAS FP6-2002Energy-1 and participating in IP-DYNAMITE FP6-2004-IST-NMP-2, ASPA FP7-SSH2007-1, OpenScienceResources eContentplus ECP-2008-EDU-428045. VXU has previously participated in FP6 DYNAMO, CROSSWORKS and CONNECT. VXU was also a member of the South Sweden team promoting the introduction of Social Platforms into FP7. Associated professor Kerstin Gynnerstedt holds a PHD in political science from Lund University 1993 and before that an BSc in social work and another BSc in social sciences. Associated professor in social work from 2002(Jönköping University). Current position Associated professor in social work and since 2006 head of department at Växjö University. The research focus has during the last years been on combining theories from political science and social sciences especially in the field of social policy including national and international aspects. Her research has during the last years been mainly on ageing and disability policies. She leads a national network of researchers in ageing with focus on social issues and is involved in international research on personal assistance. She has experiences from international coordination of several EU funded projects during ten years. Dr Kristiina Heikkilä, holds a PhD in nursing 2004 from Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm University. Her current employment is as a Senior lecturer , School of Health Sciences and social work, Växjö University. Her research interests include Elderly care and health related issues, especially connected to ethnic minority and immigration questions. Relevant publications Gynnerstedt, K (2002) Citizenship, theories and politics of the elderly in Bo Malmberg & Cecilia Henning (eds) Aspects on Ageing, old age care and local contexts. Programmet Åldrande och äldreomsorg i ett lokalt sammanhang. Hälsohögskolan i Jönköping. Report nr 2, 2002 Albin Björn, Gynnerstedt K, Kemp Joan. (2000). Sustainable European links – a Britain –Swedish experience. Rapporter från Växjö Universitet nr 1 2001 Locke M, Gynnerstedt K, Ebersold S (2000) Partners on the route to employment The FairWind transnational project. Final evaluation report. Rapporter från Växjö Universitet nr 3 2001

Gynnerstedt Kerstin (2005) Social economy, social entrepreneurship and social cooperatives – cooperation across Europe –Report from the Reseda project (European Social Fund) CD Publishing Gynnerstedt, Kerstin Does the baby boom generation change the world. Aging and deciding conference, Rouen, France October 2008 Heikkilä, K. (2004) The role of ethnicity in care of elderly Finnish immigrants. Department of Neurotec, Centre of Excellence in Elderly Care Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden (Thesis) Heikkilä, K. & Ekman, S-L. (2000): Health care experiences and beliefs of elderly Finnish immigrants in Sweden. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 11 (4): 281-289. Heikkilä, K. & Ekman, S-L. (2003): Elderly care for ethnic minorities – wishes and expectations among elderly Finns in Sweden. Ethnicity & Health, 8 (2): 135-146.

2.6.4 UNIVERSIDAD DE BURGOS, CIUMEDIA CIUMEDIA is an inter-disciplinary research team based at the University of Burgos which investigates issues related to citizenship, transnational migration, intercultural education and conviviality in multicultural societies. Universidad de Burgos will lead the Vertical Pillar on Migration: People, Identity and Cosmopolitanism and will participate in Work Packages 1-9 and 11. Staff profile Mónica Ibáñez-Angulo (PhD in Anthropology, Univerity of Chicago 1999) is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Burgos in the Area of Sociology and teaches both graduate and undergraduate courses. She has directed several regional research projects on transnational migration and currently she is the director of CIUMEDIA. Also, Professor Ibáñez-Angulo has participated in other European research projects, such as an EU project on sustainable development in rural areas (SEJ200602111/JURI FEDER A) and on local projects on the use of social services by the immigrant population. Selected References Ibanez, M. (2008) “Nation Building within the European Union: Reframing Bulgarian Identity from Abroad”, in Elena Marushiakova (Ed.) Dynamics of National Identity and Transnational Identities in the Process of European Integration: 154-188 Ibanez, M. (2008) “Procesos migratorios desde Europa Central y del Este en España: Estatus jurídico, identidad social e inserción laboral”, Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internationals, N. 84: 105-152 Ibanez, M. (2009) ‘La Política Agraria Común y la Agroecología. Una Lectura desde la Sociología’, in Vattier Fuenzalida, C. (Ed.). Desarrollo Sostenible en el Ámbito Rural : 125-144, Ibanez, M. (forthcoming 2009) ‘From National Identity to Transnational Citizenship: Citizens’ Rights and Transnational Migration, in Jones, Terry Ann & Mielants, Eric (Eds), Mass Migration in the World System: Past, Present and Future, Paradigm Publishers.

2.6.5 ECO INNOVATION Eco Innovation (EI) was created in 2005 as a charitable organisation under Irish law and has been relocated in Brussels in 2009 as an international not-for-profit organisation (association internationale sans but lucratif). EI aims i) to support the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy with a particular focus on the direction and the systemic impact of innovation, as well as on the horizontal and vertical integration of policy initiatives; ii) to advance the understanding of eco-innovation processes; and iii) to support eco-innovators in their development. To these ends, EI i) contributes to eco-innovation R&D, ii) develops online content management systems and blended learning services aiming to fulfil innovative quality criteria16; iii) collect and represent EI’s members in European policy-making; and iv) promotes sustainable urban agriculture in Brussels through the creation of urban gardens and the support of urban gardeners. EI will co-lead the Vertical Pillar on Consumption: Wellbeing, Food and Culture and will participate in Workpackages 1-9 and 11. Frédéric Morand is the co-founding Executive Director of Eco Innovation. His main research interest is innovation for sustainable development and related issues of 'policy greening' and policy implementation in agri-environment, agro-tourism, food and sport turf. He has taken part in several international research projects since FP4, as researcher, coordinator and proposer. His responsibilities also include the networking of urban agriculture actors across the 19 municipalities of the Brussels Region (Belgium). Colin Sage is Senior Lecturer in Geography, UCC, and Eco Innovation Director since 2005. He works within a theoretically informed, socially engaged and policy relevant interpretation of environmental geography with particular emphasis upon understanding emerging geographies of food. Relevant Publications Morand, F. and Barzman, M. 2006; European sustainable development policy (1972-2005): fostering a two-dimensional integration for more effective institutions (WP1); IDARI Working Paper, Eco Innovation / Humboldt University of Berlin - RTD project QLRT-2002-02718, 30 p., (www.eco-innovation.net/integrating-policy). Morand F. 2006; Integrating concepts of institutions: a comparative introduction to Thévenot's conventions (WP2); IDARI Working Paper, (May), Eco Innovation / Humboldt University of Berlin - RTD project QLRT-2002-02718; Galway (Ireland), 30 p., (http://eco-innovation.net/integrating-concepts). Morand F. and Visser, M. 2006; Eco-innovation in golf: pest control or stress control? Institutional aspects of the control of Microdochium patch disease in Great Britain and Ireland (WP4); Working Paper, Eco Innovation / Humboldt University of Berlin - RTD project QLRT-2002-02718, (www.eco-innovation.net/institutions-andgolf-stimulation); Morand F. 2008; Developing eco-innovation: opportunities for education and policy integration; News and commentary from the 5th ETAP Forum, Budapest, 15 Oct. 2008, Eco Innovation; Dilbeek (Belgium), 12 p., (http://ecoinnovation.net/developing-eco-innovation). Morand F., Agerberg, J. and Collin, P. 2009; Intérêts et contraintes des potagers suspendus urbains dans la perspective du Plan Régional de Développement de la Région Bruxelloise 2009-2014; Working paper, (Décembre), Eco Innovation; Bruxelles, 25 p., (http://eco-innovation.net/le-portail-du-potager). Sage, C. ‘Bending science to match their convictions': Hygienist conceptions of food safety as a challenge to alternative food enterprises in Ireland . Alternative Food

                                                          16

http://eco-innovation.net/ecol

Geographies: Representation and Practice (D. Maye, L. Holloway and M. Kneafsey, eds). London : Elsevier, pp.203-221. (2007) Sage, C. Trust in markets: Economies of regard and spaces of contestation in alternative food networks. In Street Markets: Commerce in a globalising world (J.Cross & A. Morales, eds) New York : Routledge (2007). Sage, C. Social embeddedness and relations of regard: Alternative 'good food' networks in South West Ireland. Journal of Rural Studies 19: 47-60 (2003).

2.6.6 EUROPARAMA EUROPARAMA is a Dutch-Lithuanian renewable technology transfer agency based in Vilnius, working to support innovative RTD projects in renewable (mostly, solar) energy technologies since 2002. In addition to technology-related activities Europarama has been also working together with university partners on social science projects, which involved the analysis of the societies in transition from the perspective of the impact of technologies on modern lifestyles and the disengagement of citizens from the mainstream society. Europarama has been managing the FP6 STREP project SAL (Society and Lifestyles: Towards Enhancing Social Harmonisation through Knowledge of Subcultural Communities) which involved 15 partners from 10 countries. Europarama has been further involved in contributing to a number of EU-wide policy analysis studies, commissioned by the EC to support policy developments at the cross-roads of technology and society. Tasks: Europarama will lead the Vertical Pillar of SEL21 on Climate Change, Renewables and Post-Carbon Europe, will co-lead WP12 and will participate in all WPs except WP10. Dr. Juras Ulbikas is director and a co-founder of Europarama with a 15 years experience in coordinating RTD projects and policy studies. His expertise includes consulting on the European RTD and Innovation Policy sector, the Framework Programme and the EU Structural Funds programmes. He is a member of the European PV Technology Platform National Programmes Mirror Group, and expert evaluator for DG TREN. Dr. Linas Eriksonas holds a PhD from University of Aberdeen. Currently he is leading a tender study on ICT RTD technological audit in Lithuania, conducted for DG INFSO, and is a national expert for the study on the development of the Information Society in EU rural development and regional policies. He is an Expert for the ECOSOC Panel for FP7 Marie Curie Individual International Fellowships and an Expert for Research Council of Lithuania. Dr. Egidija Ramanauskaitė is Senior Expert at Europarama and Associate Professor and Head of the Centre for Cultural Studies at Vytautas Magnus University. She has been the scientific coordinator of the FP6 SAL project. Her research interests are in the ethnographic research of groups of different values, religious beliefs and ethnicities, including from historical and anthropological approaches. Dr. Dalia Štreimikienė has 25 years experience in the field of evaluation of external costs associated with electricity generation using different fuels and technologies She has worked on energy technologies assessment, application of economic tools of environmental regulation, implementation of sustainable development and climate change mitigation policy, and participated in international projects as an expert in environmental regulation, sustainable development, climate change. Relevant publications Future Perspectives on Lithuanian Research in Sustainable Energy Technologies and Nanotechnologies: A NENNET Report, Europarama, The CIRCA Group Europe Ltd., 2006. Markandya A., Pedroso S., Streimikiene, Dalia. Energy Efficiency in Transition Economies // Energy Economics 28 (2006) 121-145. ISSN 0140-9883.

Streimikiene D., Mikalauskiene A. Application of flexible Kyoto mechanisms for renewable energy projects in Baltic States.//Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 11, issue 5, (2007), p. 753-775. ISSN 0301-4215. Streimikiene D., Klevas V., Bubeliene J. Use of Structural Funds for sustainable energy development in new EU member states.//Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 11, issue 6, 2007, p. 1167-1187. ISSN 0301-4215. Streimikiene D., Šivickas G. The EU sustainable energy policy indicators framework.// Environment International 34 (2008), p. 1227-1240. ISSN 0160-4120. Štreimikienė D., S. Girdzijauskas. Assessment of post-Kyoto climate change mitigation regimes impact on sustainable development.// Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, No 13 (2009) p. 129–141. ISSN 0301-4215. Klevas V., Štreimikienė D., Klevienė A. Sustainability assessment of the energy projects implementation in regional scale // Renewable & sustainable energy reviews. ISSN 1364-0321 . 2009. Vol. 13, Iss. 1, p. 144-155.

2.6.7 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY (UNEW) – GLOBAL URBAN RESEARCH UNIT (GURU) Newcastle University is among the top 20 higher education institutions in the UK in terms of research power, based on the results of the Research Assessment Exercise 2008, which found that in over two thirds of subjects assessed, at least half of all research was placed in the top two categories of 4* (world leading) and 3* (internationally excellent). The researchers involved in this project are regularly engaged in interdisciplinary research and are affiliated with Global Urban Research Unit (GURU) and the Institute for Research on Environment and Sustainability (IRES). Research at IRES (www.ncl.ac.uk/environment) addresses social, economic, environmental and technological issues to improve the quality of life for people regionally, nationally and internationally. GURU research centre (www.ncl.ac.uk/guru) provides a multidisciplinary platform at the leading edge of contemporary thinking and research about urban issues. The scope of GURU is global, encompassing in particular the UK, Europe and countries in the developing world. GURU covers a wider range of research areas flexibly organized around three themes: Spatial Planning and Environment; Place and Social Cohesion; and, Cities and International Development. UNEW has one of the largest European Union research portfolios in the UK and is a member of the prestigious Russell Group, comprising 20 leading research institutions in the UK. It has extensive experience of EU projects and currently has over 80 projects in FP7, at different stages. Both Prof Davoudi and Dr Mehmood have research and publishing experience on the issues of environment and sustainability, governance and climate change as indicated in their individual profiles below. They are also managing an interdisciplinary Sustainability and Environment Network in Social Sciences (SENS) (research.ncl.ac.uk/sens). Tasks The UNEW team will work on the Climate Change pillar. It will engage in Vertical Scoping Exercise (WP1f) and the Roundtable (WP2f) and review the feedback from European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles (WP3) through feedback as part of WP5. The team will help drafting discussion documents for WP4 and will be involved in learning, dissemination and outreaching stakeholders for the SSLE Congress (WP7), stakeholder participation (WP8) and persistent engagement (WP11). We will also be involved in producing final report and policy documents for the Commission (WP9). Previous experience Simin Davoudi is Professor of Environment Policy and Planning at the School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape and Co-Director of IRES at Newcastle University. She has held Presidency of the Association of the European Schools of Planning (AESOP), and is a member of the Expert Group for the EU DG Environment and DG Regional Policy and the Advisory Board of the Irish Social Sciences Platform. Simin is editor of the Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Her two recent books (2009) are ‘Planning for Climate Change’ and ‘Conceptions of Space and Place in Strategic Spatial Planning’. Her current research focuses on the UK and European spatial planning, environmental governance and climate change through ARCADIA, SUME and other projects. Simin will contribute to the vertical pillar on climate change as well as transversal module on democratic governance and deliberative processes. Abid Mehmood is a postdoctoral researcher at Newcastle University, working in the fields of environment and sustainability. His work focuses on interdisciplinary issues of climate change policy and planning at different spatial scales. He has previously worked on FP6 projects DEMOLOGOS and KATARSIS, and is presently working on

planning and policy responses to climate change in the UK. In 2009 he co-edited a book (with Simin Davoudi and Jenny Crawford) on Planning for Climate Change (Earthscan). For the social platform, Abid will particularly contribute to the climate change pillar while bridging it with other tracks. Relevant publications Davoudi, S., Crawford, J. and Mehmood, A. (eds) (2009) Planning and Climate Change, London: Earthscan Davoudi, S., Crawford, J. and Mehmood, A. (2009) ‘Climate change and spatial planning responses’, in S. Davoudi, J. Crawford, and A. Mehmood (eds) Planning for Climate Change, London: Earthscan Davoudi, S. and Strange, I. (eds) (2009) Conceptions of Space and Place in Strategic Spatial Planning, London: Routledge Davoudi, S. (2006) Strategic Waste Planning: the Interface between the ‘technical’ and the ‘social’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 24(5): 681700 Layard, A., Davoudi, S. and Batty, S. (eds) (2001) Planning for a Sustainable Future, London: Spon.

2.6.8 BOLOGNA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGI A. ARDIGÒ The University of Bologna, Alma Mater Studiorum, was founded in 1088 and is considered to be the oldest university in Western Europe. The Department of Sociology A. Ardigò, within the University firmly retains the autonomy of each individual instructor and researcher belonging to the department, promotes and coordinates, at the University of Bologna, the research activities in the sectors of relevant competence and relative sectors to the divisions of research activities within the Department. The University of Bologna successfully participated in FP6 with a total of 103 projects funded by the European Commission in the different specific programmes. The University acted as coordinator in 14 of these projects. As far as FP7 is concerned, up to now a total of 98 projects were selected for funding. Bologna University participate in WPs 1-9 and 11, and will co-lead the Vertical Pillar on ‘Consumption: wellbeing, food and culture’, focusing on food consumption practices on the convergence of production and consumption and on the raising of political consumerism, stressing the implications of this “epochal shift” for business, politics and society. The aim is to promote a sustainable development which implies a new ethics of consumption.

Dr. Roberta Paltrinieri is associated Professor in Sociology and Sociology of Consumption, at the Faculty of Political Science University of Bologna. She is member of the Etichs Committee of Impronta Etica Italian non profit organisation for the development of a Corporate Social Responsibility culture from 2007. She has carried out research promoted by the European Community Leonardo Project, Strikers two year period 2004-2006. She carries out research and consulting activities in the matter of the theme of Corporate Social Responsibility for local government and association of companies. Dr. Paola Parmiggiani is Professor in Sociology and Social Communication at the Faculty of Political Science of the Bologna University. Her scientific and empirical interests are mainly oriented to the symbolic and communicative dimension of the practices of consumption in the global society. About these themes she has carried out several researches, promoted by the Italian Ministry of University and Research (from to 2004 to 2009) and by the European Community Leonardo Project (20042006). Dr. Piergiorgio Degli Esposti is Assistant Professor in the disciplinary sector Sociology of cultural and communicative processes, within the Department of Sociology. Since 2006 he has been responsible for the EU project “Leonardo Da Vinci”; he is also representative for the Political Science Faculty of the Erasmus Palcement Project for Political Science Faculty. At the moment he is visiting professor in the 2009 fall semester at Maryland University and member of the Goerge Ritzer Prosumer Research Group within the same University. Dr. Pierluigi Musarò is Assistant Professor of Sociology, faculty of Political Science. Dr. Roberto Rizza, Researcher, (Assistant Professor) has been a member of the EURO NET-WORK, a European research network on the topic of “Creation, development and operation of a Network of Excellence to analyse and to monitor changes in work in the knowledge society”.

Relevant publications Di Nallo E., Paltrinieri R. (a cura di) (2007): , Cum sumo. Prospettive di analisi del consumo nella società globale, MILANO, Franco Angeli, 2006, pp. 460 (Consumo, Comunicazione, Innovazione). Paltrinieri R., Parmiggiani P. (2008), Responsabili non per caso. The corporate social responsibility in small and medium enterprise in european union, BOLOGNA, La Mandragora, , pp. 1-206 (). [libro] Degli Esposti P. (2004), Il cibo dalla modernità alla postmodernità, MILANO, FrancoAngeli, Milano, (Consumo, comunicazione, innovazione). [libro] Di Nallo E., Degli Esposti P. (2007),, Prospettive dell'alimentazione, le tenedenze del futuro, in: DI NALLO E., DEGLI ESPOSTI P., IORI C., TAMINO G., TUBILI C., BISASCI G., TIRELLI D., FABRIS G., BERTAGNONI G., MONTANARI M., GALLINI G., BURSI T., TEDESCHI M., GALLI G., GABRIELLI V., , Workshop cir food 20042006, REGGIO EMILIA, Gruppo CIR food, 2007, pp. 21 - 26 (atti di: cosa mangeremo tra 20 anni. l'alimentazione tra cultura e slute, hotel classic Reggio Emilia, 29 maggio 2004).

2.6.9 UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT (SED) The SED at the University of Manchester (UOM), a multi-disciplinary centre comprising Geography, Urban Planning, Architecture and Development Studies (www.manchester.ac.uk/sed) is one of the largest units in the UK researching social, economic, environmental and cultural aspects of sustainability & urban change. The SED includes: the Space, Culture and Society Research Group (SCaS), focusing on urban cultures, lifestyles, and consumption, the Geographical Political Economy Research Group (GPE), focusing on socio-environmental change, and the Manchester Architecture Research Centre (MARC), a leading research centre for sustainable technology & urban design. The Society and Environment Research Group (SERG) is an interdisciplinary research network drawn from the SED and the School of Social Sciences at UOM. SERG focuses on the development and application of new theories of society-environment interactions, the empirical analyses of environmental change in the global North and South, urban political ecology and evaluations of policy approaches in environmental management and sustainability. The UOM also hosts the Sustainable Consumption Institute (SCI) a leading centre on sustainable behaviour, consumption and lifestyles. Prof. Kaika leads the SCaS group and is member of SERG & MARC. Prof. Swyngedouw is member of the GPE & SERG. Tasks: The UOM team will contribute to 2 pillars (Governance Citizenship, Democracy; and Build environment) and will be involved in WPs 1-11. Previous experience: Prof. Kaika and Prof. Swyngedouw have long-standing and proven experience in international research projects on urban political, social, economic and environmental issues. They participated in several relevant European Union Projects, including METRON (Metropolitan water sustainability), PARTICIPGOV (participatory governance and environment), URSPIC (urban development and large scale urban projects), SINGOCOM (social innovation and governance), DEMOLOGOS (trajectories of socio-economic and socio-ecological development), and SOCIAL POLIS (Platform on Social Cohesion and the City). Staff profile Prof. Maria Kaika is Professor of Urban and Cultural Geography at the School of Environment and Development, University of Manchester, where she leads the Social and Cultural Geography Research Group. She is chief editor elect of the International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Her research interests include: urban political ecology, urban sustainability and architecture, contemporary urban utopias and lifestyles. She is author of “City of Flows”, co editor of “In the Nature of Cities” and has published numerous papers in top academic journals. Prof. Erik Swyngedouw is currently Professor of Geography in the School of Environment and Development, Manchester University. He was previously professor of Geography at the University of Oxford. He is senior member of the Geographical Political Economy Research Group and of the Society and Environment Research Group (SERG). His recent research interests include political-ecology, water and water resources, the political-economy of capitalist societies, the dynamics of urban and regional change, urbanization and the environment, democratic governance and socio-environmental regulation. He has published over 80 papers on these themes. Relevant publications ■Kaika, M. (2005) City of Flows: Nature, Modernity and the City Routledge, NY ■Heynen N. Kaika, M. & E. Swyngedouw (Eds.) (2006) In the Nature of Cities: Urban Political Ecology and the Politics of Urban Metabolism, Routledge ■Swyngedouw E. 2004 Social Power and the Urbanization of Water Flows of Power, University Press, Oxford. ■Moulaert F., Rodriguez A. and Swyngedouw E. (Eds.) (2003) The Globalized City – Economic Restructuring and Social Polarization in European Cities, University Press, Oxford. ■Kaika M and

Thielen K 2006 Form follows power: a genealogy of spectacular building. City: analysis of urban trends, culture, theory 10: 59-69 ■Getimis P., Heinelt H., Kafkalas G., Smith R. & Swyngedouw E. (Eds.) (2002) Participatory Governance in Multi-Level Context: Concepts and Experience, Leske & Budrich, Opladen. ■Kaika M 2004 Domesticating Nature and Constructing the Autonomy of the Modern Home. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 28: 265-86 ■Kaika M 2003 The European Water Framework Directive: a new directive for a changing social, political and economic European framework. European Planning Studies 11: 303-2 ■Kaika M 2006 The urbanization of nature between geographical imagination and materiality. Annals, Association of American Geographers 96: 276-301 ■Swyngedouw E. (2010) “Apocalypse Forever? Post-Political Populism and the Spectre of Climate Change”, Theory, Culture, Society (forthcoming). ■Swyngedouw E. (2009) The Antinomies of the Post-Political City – In search of a Democratic Politics of Environmental Production, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33:3

2.6.10 INSTITUTE DDIKEOMA FOR THE SUSTAINABLE EVOLUTION OF THE CORFIOT CULTURE The INSTITUTE DDIKEOMA for the sustainable evolution of Corfiot culture (NGO/Number in Hellenic Court 93/2006) was founded on 14.3.2006 with the goal of supporting creative cooperation and exchange toward the scientific, intellectual, social and cultural development of Corfu. The team of young people for the “walks in sustainable evolution of the corfiot culture” is a part of the corfiot civil society and operates in the frame of DDikeoma union. DDikeoma Institute serves towards sustainable occupation as a centre for volunteerism on Corfu and accordingly works extensively with volunteers and local organizations that rely on volunteers. INSTITUTE DDIKEOMA is a non-profit non-governmental organisation.

Institute Ddikeoma will contribute expertise in the area of social capital to the Vertical Pillar on Governance and will participate in WPs 1,2, 3 and 7.

Previous experience The Insititute has 4 years of experience in actions about local sustainability, that include: FACEBOOK PAGE / http://www.facebook.com/pages/Corfu-Greece/ddikeomaNGONON-PROFIT-NON-GOVERNMENTAL-ORGANISATION/42392925902 Group 1 http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=128793592481 Group 2 http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=36725025345 Group 3 http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=113655330186 Event 1 http://www.facebook.com/pages/Corfu-Greece/ddikeomaNGO-NONPROFIT-NON-GOVERNMENTALORGANISATION/42392925902#/event.php?eid=84264098254 Event 2 http://www.facebook.com/pages/Corfu-Greece/ddikeomaNGO-NONPROFIT-NON-GOVERNMENTALORGANISATION/42392925902#/event.php?eid=72967015508 Event 3 http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/event.php?eid=303613635601&ref=mf

Staff profile Prof Leonidas Papakostantinidis (Ph.D) Mr. Apostolos Petroulias (M.Sc) Mrs Aggeliki Bouziou (B.Sc)

Relevant publications

Papakonstantinidis L.A (2007) “Bargaining Problem and Local Development” Gutenberg, (trnsl –GREEK) Athens, 2007 Papakonstantinidis L.A (2007) “Clustering & Networking SMEs in Rural Areas & win-win-win Model” ISA – World Congress’s minutes, Durban South Africa (July, 2006) Papakonstantinidis L.A (2008) Win-Win-Win Methodology on Rural Tourism Activities / Good Practices from Greece” The Asian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism (AJHT) – v1/iss 1 – Santo Tomas University Manila Philippines , pp 95-120 Papakonstantinidis L.A (2008) "Forecasting the tourist impact based on GINI Index: Flexible development policies" Journal ITTM / India (Vol.1 No.2) pages 48-57. Papakonstantinidis L.A (2008) “Bargaining as the basic Globalization Ideology” Review of Social Sciences –Dec 2008- draft (approved) Papakonstantinidis L.A (2008-Sept) Building Social Capital for Local Development: The Economy of Poor and the win-win-win Model” International Sociological Association/ First ISA Forum of Sociology “Sociological Research and Public DebateBarcelona Spain September 5-8 2008, Official e-minutes (2008S00879)

3. IMPACT 3.1. EXPECTED IMPACTS LISTED IN THE WORK PROGRAMME 3.1.1

DESCRIBE HOW YOUR PROJECT WILL CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS THE EXPECTED IMPACTS LISTED IN THE WORKPROGRAMME IN RELATION TO THE TOPIC OR TOPICS IN QUESTION.

SustainEuroLife 21 is a Social Platform on Sustainable Lifestyles which addresses societal level challenges to Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, among which are the needs to reduce the levels of energy and environmental resources we use, reduce the levels of transport services we consume, to improve the overall quality of life of people living in Europe both now and into the future, and take on board the reality of an ageing population. In building this social platform we began by examining and extending the state-of-the-art in terms of key theories, practices and contexts that underpin what we might understand by sustainable lifestyles. We operate from a very broad transdisciplinary base, taking theories solutions, paradigms, models and concepts from across the social sciences and into the natural sciences dealing with economic,

societal,

legal,

cultural

and

governance

issues

around

social

sustainability. We have very deliberately grounded SEL 21 in ‘the real world’. We have done this is two key ways. Firstly through how we constructed the consortium and secondly in how we conceived the cooperation and engagement needed to address the challenges of sustainable lifestyles. In terms of the consortium we have a range of ten partners, who represent a diversity of approaches, a diversity of disciplinary backgrounds, and a good geographical spread within Europe. The partners brings with them networks of civil society actors, researchers, educational institutions, industry and a range of other stakeholders, citizens and residents of Europe. They bring with them levels of experience and expertise that will maximize the impact of this social platform. We have CSOs, research institutes and universities in key positions in the consortium to ensure as wide an impact as possible for SEL 21. We have constructed the consortium around six thematic pillars, which collectively deal with an extremely diverse range of challenges for sustainable lifestyles. We intend that these pillars will extend the state-of-the-art in their own thematic area, but also to very actively engage with all the other pillars, thus deepening our

understanding of the challenges of sustainable lifestyles. In short we see the challenges of sustainable lifestyles in holistic terms, we cannot for instance deal with this massive undertaking by tinkering with parts of the challenge, fixing one bit while possibly exacerbating the problems in another, solving issues in one part of Europe which may disadvantage another part, dealing with the issues from a single set of perspectives, imagining Europe in a context which does not take on board global and intergenerational concerns. We intend to pose these challenges in a deliberative and discursive context within SEL 21, bringing in as wide a range as possible of civil society actors, representing as diverse a set of stakeholders as possible (public, private and third sector), representative of all parts of Europe. It is our intention to touch every single country in the European Research Area, it is our intention to expand the network of engagement in waves, not just through formalistic invitations, but through real exchange of knowledge, ideas, discussions, debates and ways of mapping sustainable lifestyle futures. SEL 21 connects with a wide range of areas in FP7-SSH-2010 and in the FP7 SSH Indicative Strategic Roadmap. These include all the other topics and challenges in Activity 8.2 (Paths towards Sustainable Development), as well as topics and challenges envisaged for 2011 and beyond in Activity 8.3 (Major Trends in Society and their Implications), in particular around health and ageing, and also in Area 8.5.1 (The Citizen in the EU), in particular in relation to active citizenship. There are also strong links beyond the SSH programme to other thematic priorities, such as Health, Food/Agriculture, Transport, Energy and Environment (including Climate Change), as well as to the joint area of FP7-Ocean-2010 (The Ocean of Tomorrow), in particular in relation to climate change. SEL 21 will launch from a strong base in terms both of the state-of-the-art and the involvement of the European public (across all of civil society and inclusive of a broad coalition of stakeholders, citizens and residents). Its agenda will be driven by societal concerns around sustainable lifestyles, emerging from a very wide engagement with European society. It is will not only extend understandings around sustainable lifestyles, but it will make a significant contribution in defining future research under FP7 on sustainable lifestyles and the broader agenda under theme 8 Socio-Economic Sciences and Humanities and in considering future research and societal challenge in Europe.

3.1.2 MENTION THE STEPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED TO BRING ABOUT THESE IMPACTS.

EXPLAIN WHY THIS CONTRIBUTION REQUIRES A EUROPEAN (RATHER

THAN A NATIONAL OR LOCAL) APPROACH.

Through a series of six coalitions of themes, what we designate as Vertical Pillars and simultaneously engage in a series of dialogues across and between theses pillars to appreciate the interconnectedness of the concept of sustainable lifestyles. Sustainability in terms of European civil society must be understood in the context of a communicative community or public in which all people are understood to have a point of view and have the right to express that point of view or voice. This is an essential element in fostering sustainable lifestyles in Europe for the 21st century, which will require the continued vibrancy of civil society through processes of learning, knowledge generation, opinion formation and the shaping of future orientations and actions. Each pillar will develop a discourse with its genesis in its own thematic area, but recognizing that sustainable lifestyles rely on interdependencies and viability and thus the discourse must inform the other themes, bring learning from and to the other themes and address the bigger question of what is meant by sustainable lifestyles in the context of a whole range of challenges. This is achieved through three steps: •

the initial phase which leads to ten Roundtables, where a small cohort of stakeholders engage in a concerted deliberative process around sustainable lifestyles, which is leads upwards and outwards;

•

the second step leads to the European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles, which engages a wider coalition of actors in both real time and virtually and brings each of the themes forward, then together in cross-cutting discussion, which leads upwards and outwards;

•

the third phase emerges from here and proceeds through an very large networking phase which both disseminates and garners opinion and knowledge leading to the Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe, which draws an even larger cohort of voices together, and progresses knowledge and debate in each thematic pillar but also extends in a very significant way a holistic understanding of sustainable lifestyles in Europe.

The transversal module of SEL 21 will be based on the principles of democratic engagement, which assumes that everyone has a voice and the equal right to express that voice. It will engage as broad a community of actors as possible in open

deliberative and discursive terms both in real time and online. In the online context it will adopt the open innovation principles that have been endorsed by the European Commission, in practical terms this will consist of three levels of user-interaction which will be interconnected through the same interface and a common set of functionalities, which are designed to engage citizens (residents) on their terms rather than in the top-down approach, which characterized both early Internet communication and the more advanced Web 2 systems. 3.1.3 INDICATE HOW ACCOUNT IS TAKEN OF OTHER NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH ACTIVITIES.

Each vertical pillar already has a coalition of actors which is familiar with the research in their specific area at both national and international levels. This said it is anticipated that in WP1 Vertical Scoping Exercise, this knowledge will be considerably extended and will also lead to a better overview of the totality of the research agenda under the umbrella of sustainable lifestyles. 3.1.4 MENTION ANY ASSUMPTIONS AND EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT MAY DETERMINE WHETHER THE IMPACTS WILL BE ACHIEVED.

Given the experience of the consortium and the extent of the overall network of actors involved the probability of success is very high, however some specific issues which SEL 21 may have to address are also considered in 1.2.5 Risk and Contingency Plan. 3.2. DISSEMINATION AND/OR EXPLOITATION OF PROJECT RESULTS, AND MANAGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. 3.2.1 ELABORATE A COMPREHENSIVE DISSEMINATION PLAN. SEL 21 is a social platform, which is constructed to maximize the dissemination of its effort. Throughout all stages of the workprogramme it will engage in dissemination activities, the acivities and objectives of each of the following workpackages is significantly oriented towards disseminationWP2 The Roundtables; WP3 European Forum

on

Socially

Sustainable

Lifestyles;

WP6

Social

Platform

Network

Dissemination and Inclusion Wave; WP7 Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe; WP9 Social Platform Transition; and WP12 Virtual Platform 3.2.2 DESCRIBE THE MEASURES YOU PROPOSE AND HOW THESE WILL INCREASE THE IMPACT OF THE PROJECT.

From the commencement of SEL 21 we will engage in deepening our knowledge and networks in WP1 Vertical Scoping Exercise, we will reach out, recruit and engage stakeholders in WP2 The Roundtables; WP3 European Forum on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles; and WP7 Congress on Socially Sustainable Lifestyles in Europe. Each of these will be linked to the public though WP12 Virtual Platform and will also be publicized via the mass media. In WP6 Social Platform Network Dissemination and Inclusion Wave, we will engage in a huge pan-European dissemination and recruitment drive, which will raise the profile and the impact of SEL 21. In WP9 Social Platform, we will create and disseminate materials, which will raise the impact of SEL 21 and create direct links to the other Social Platforms thus further enhancing its impact. 3.2.3. DESCRIBE ALSO YOUR PLANS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE (INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY) ACQUIRED IN THE COURSE OF THE PROJECT. SEL 21 is not a research project, but it will of course enhance the state-of-the-art. It is intended that this will be made publicly available and accessible through the platform developed under WP12. 4. ETHICS SEL 21 will be conducted according to the Ethical policy laid down by University College Cork (http://www.ucc.ie/en/ResearchandIndustry/OfficeoftheVPforResearch/Research/Doc umentFile,38010,en.pdf) in the case of P1 and any other partner which does not have a formal research ethics policy, ensuring that it complies with national and EU research ethics policies and law. All other partners will be asked to verify that the ethics policies pertaining in their institutions are in line with national and EU research ethics policies and law. 5. REFERENCES Agyeman, J., R. D. Bullard and B. Evans (2003). Just Sustainabilities: Development in an Unequal World. London, Earthscan. Arendt, H. (1973) The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Birzer, M. L. and Birzer, G. H. (2006) ‘Race matters: A critical look at racial profiling, it's a matter for the courts’ Journal of Criminal Justice 34 (6), 643-651. Brown, G. (2007) Speech to the United Nations, 31 July. Brunkhorst, H. (2005) Solidarity: from civic friendship to a global legal community (trans J. Flynn). Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

Bulkeley, H. and M. M. Betsill (2003). Cities and Climate Change: Urban sustainability and global environmental governance. London, Routledge. Casti, J. L. (2005) Dynamical Systems and their Applications. Linear Theory. Academic Press, 1977; Luenberger D.G., Introduction to dynamic systems. Wiley, 1979; Murray, J. D., Mathematical Biology, 2nd ed. Springer Clapson, M. (2002) 'Suburban paradox? Planners' intentions and residents' preferences in two new towns of the 1960s: Reston, Virginia and Milton Keynes, England', Planning Perspectives 17 (2), April, pp145 Copenhagen Economics and The IPR Company (2009) ‚Are IPR a Barrier to the Transfer of Climate Change Technology?’, a report commissioned by DG Trade, 19 Jan., 2009 Darley, G. (2007) Villages of Vision: A Study of Strange Utopias (2nd rev. ed., Five Leaves Publications) Davoudi, S., J. Crawford and A. Mehmood (2009). Planning for Climate Change: Strategies for Mitigation and Adaptation for Spatial Planners. London, Earthscan. Delanty, G. and Beck, U. (2006) ‘Europe from a Cosmopolitan Perspective’, in G. Delanty (ed.), Europe and Asia Beyond East and West. London: Routledge. Donnelly, J. (1984) ‘Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights’, Human Rights Quarterly, 6 (4), 400-419. Duić, N. et al., (2008) RenewIslands methodology for sustainable energy and resource planning for islands, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews Volume 12, Issue 4, May 2008, Pages 1032-1062 European Environment Agency (EEA) (2005) Household Consumption and the Environment. EEA Report 11/2005, Copenhagen, DK. Glendon, M. A. (2001) A World Made New. Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. New York: Random House. Goodey, J. (2001) ‘The Criminalization of British Asian Youth: Research from Bradford and Sheffield’, Journal of Youth Studies, 4 (4), 429-450. Habermas, J. (1990) Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: Polity. Hardy, D. ,Ward, C. (2003) Arcadia for All: The legacy of a makeshift landscape (new ed., Five Leaves Publications). Hardy, D. (2000) Utopian England: Community Experiments 1900-45 (Routledge)

Hayek, F. A. von (1960) The Constitution of Liberty. New York: John Wiley. Hayek, F. A. von (1978) New studies in philosophy, politics, economics and the history of ideas. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Hayek, F. A. von (1991) The Road to Serfdom. London: Routledge. Henrard, K. (2000) ‘Language and the Administration of Justice: The International Framework’, International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, 7, 75-108. Honneth, A. (1995) The Fragmented World of the Social. New York: SUNY Press. Honneth, A. (2002) ‘Grounding Recognition: A Rejoinder to Critical Questions’, Inquiry, 45, 499-520. Honneth, A. (2004) ‘Organized Self-Realization: Some Paradoxes of Individualization’, European Journal of Social Theory, 7(4), 463-478. Honneth, A. (2007) Disrespect. Cambridge: Polity Press. Ibanez, M. (2008) “Nation Building Within the European Union: Reframing Bulgarian Identity from Abroad”, in Elena Marushiakova (Ed.) Dynamics of National Identity and Transnational Identities in the Process of European Integration: 154-188 Ibanez, M. (2008) “Procesos migratorios desde Europa Central y del Este en España: Estatus jurídico, identidad social e inserción laboral”, Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internationals, N. 84: 105-152 Ibanez, M. (forthcoming 2009) ‘From National Identity to Transnational Citizenship: Citizens’ Rights and Transnational Migration, in Jones, Terry Ann & Mielants, Eric (Eds), Mass Migration in the World System: Past, Present and Future, Paradigm Publishers. Ikäheimo, H. (2002) ‘On the Genus and Species of Recognition’, Inquiry, 45, 447– 462. Ives, N. (2007) ‘Guess who's not getting any fatter! Celeb mags max out’, Advertising Age, 78 (15), 1-44. Jileva, E. (2002) ‘Visa and free movement of labour: the uneven imposition of the EU acquis on the accession states’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 28 (4), 683700. Johansson, H & Hvinden, B (ED) (2007) Citizenship in Nordic welfare states: dynamics of choice, duties and participation in a changing Europe. London: Routledge

Kant, I. (1996) The Metaphysics of Morals, M. Gregor (trans/ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Knox, P. and Mayer, H. (2009) Small Town Sustainability. Economic, Social, and Environmental Innovation. Basel/Boston/Berlin: Birkhäuser. Laitinen, A. (2002) ‘Interpersonal Recognition: A Response to Value or a Precondition of Personhood?’, Inquiry, 45, 463–478. Laslett, P (1989) A Fresh Map of Life: The emergence of the third age. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson Lincoln, A. (1863) The Gettysburg Address, 19 November. (http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/gadd/gadrft.html) Lock, D. (2002) 'The Neglected Laboratory' (on the House of Commons inquiry into new towns), Town and Country Planning, September 71 (9), p214 Locke, J. (1690) Two Treaties of Government. (http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtreat.htm last accessed 21 August, 2007) Long, D. (2007) ‘Women’s Weeklies’, Campaign (UK), 8 (23 February), 28. Luhmann, N. (1995) Social Systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Marshall, T. H. (1973) Class, citizenship, and social development. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. McCarthy, T. (1990) ‘Introduction’, in J. Habermas (1990) Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: Polity. McKay, G. et al. (2009) Subcultures and New Religious Movements in Russia and East-Central Europe, Cultural Identity Studies vol. 15 (Peter Lang Publishers) Miller, D. T. (2001) ‘Disrespect and the experience of injustice’, Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 527-553. Ó Tuama, S. (2009) Critical Turns in Critical Theory: New Directions in Social and Political Thought. London: Tauris. Oxford Brooks University (The Oxford Institute for Sustainable Development - Andrea Colantonio and Tim Dixon) (2009) Measuring Socially Sustainable Urban Regeneration in Europe. Research for the European Investment Bank. Pajnik, M. (2007) ‘Integration Policies in Migration between Nationalising States and Transnational Citizenship, with reference to the Slovenian Case’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 33 (5), 849-865.

Parra, C. (2010) Sustainability and multi-level governance of territories classified as protected areas: the Morvan park case. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, in press. Parsons, T. (1951) The Social System. New York: The Free Press. Parsons, T. & Shils, E. A. (eds) (1951) Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press. Pelling, M. and C. High (2005). "Understanding adaptation: What can social capital offer assessments of adaptive capacity?" Global Environmental Change 15(4): 308319. Pritchard, M. S. (1972) ‘Human Dignity and Justice’, Ethics, 82 (4), 299-313. Strydom, P. (1999) ‘Triple contingency: the theoretical problem of the public in communication societies’, Philosophy & Social Criticism, 25 (1), 1-25. Taslitz, A. E. (2003) ‘Respect and the Fourth Amendment’, The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 94 (1) 1, 15-102. Thompson, J. (2006) ‘Citizens' vulnerability to rights grabs exposed at Reuters debate’, Online Journalism News, 2 February (http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/story1704.shtml last accessed 21 August, 2007). Tukker, A., Huppes, G., et al. (2006) Environmental Impact of Products (EIPRO): Analysis of the life cycle environmental impacts related to the final consumption of the EU-25. European Commission Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Technical Report. Tyler, T. R. and Wakslak, C. J. (2004) ‘Profiling and Police Legitimacy: Procedural Justice. Attributions of Justice, Attributions of Motive, and Acceptance of Police Authority’, Criminology ,42 (2), 253-281. UN-HABITAT (2011) Global Report on Human Settlements 2011: Climate Change. London, Earthscan (forthcoming). Vanderstraeten, R. (2002) ‘Parsons, Luhmann and the Theorem of Double Contingency’, Journal of Classical Sociology, 2 (1), 77-92. Weinstein, E. (2002) ‘Migration for the benefit of all: Towards a new paradigm for economic immigration’, International Labour Review, 141 (3), 225-252. Wilson, E. (2006) Adapting to climate change at the local level: The spatial planning response, Local Environment 11(6): 609-625.