D5.2.1 HERA 2006 Conference Report

HERA website: www.heranet.info Deliverable number HERA D 5.2.1 Title Conference Report 2006 Work Package WP5 Actual submission date March 26 2007 (month 23) – final version (contractual date) Organisation name(s) of lead Academy of Finland (AKA) contractor for this deliverable Author(s) Kustaa Multamäki With the help of Nature Report Status Final version Dissemination level public Abstract This is the formal deliverable report of the 2006 HERA Conference. It contains a short description of the contents of the conference, the final programme and the guest list. In the course of 2007 a full report will be made available. Contract no: ERAC-CT-2005-016179 2006 HERA Conference Present into Future: The Role of the Humanities in Foresight Exercises 23 November 2006 Finlandia Hall, Helsinki In his introductory remarks Professor Arto Mustajoki, Chair of the Research Council for Culture and Society at the Academy of Finland, referred to a wider context in science policy discussion in which the theme of this year’s conference, The Role of the Humanities in Foresight Exercises, can be seen. To clarify his point on this matter, Mustajoki described isolation policy on the one hand, and integration policy on the other. Isolation policy can be seen as a tendency to emphasise the special nature of the Humanities in comparison to other fields of science. An inevitable consequence of this attitude is the inability to cooperate with “the others”. On the other hand, the supporters of integration policy are also fully aware of the special nature of the Humanities, but they feel that underlining this issue leads to a situation where the voice of the researchers within the Humanities is not heard in decision-making on European or national research funding policy. That is why integration policy supporters think that it is wiser and more useful for the Humanities to try to cooperate with other fields. This means that, in some cases, it is necessary to accept principles widely used in other fields, but it is also possible to bring one’s own views and values into the discussion. According to Professor Mustajoki, the theme of the conference is an example of the latter kind of thinking, but there is a host of other examples of this thinking as well. The FinnSight 2015 report completely differs form the common way to do foresight exercises. Although a joint effort of the Academy of Finland and Tekes – Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation, it represents a very broad understanding of the important research topics of the future covering many questions directly connected to humanistic and social science research. Another example of a new role of the Humanities is the attitude to the socio-economic impact and relevance of research. As a new way of thinking gradually emerged, it occurred that the concept itself is acceptable and even useful for the Humanities, but its content should be redefined. Most importantly, Mustajoki points out, one has to bear in mind the significance of the human factor. Briefly put, both the private and public sectors are run by human beings. It is also necessary to bear in mind that a much longer time span needs to be applied if we really want to get an impression of the influence of research to society. HERA Conference 2006 Report – March 26 2007 – p. 2/8 Despite the fact that foresight exercises have typically been dominated by the Natural Sciences, Mustajoki stressed that there are already a number of examples of the new way of thinking. For example, The European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) was an initiative of the Standing Committee of Humanities at the ESF, but recently it has proceeded as a task of the HERA consortium. The new interpretation of the concept of research infrastructure is another example. According to the new understanding, not only physical equipment but also libraries, archives and electronic databases belong to research infrastructure. A concrete example is the fresh roadmap produced by ESFRI. The fact that the Humanities has been almost totally neglected in the European framework programmes, Mustajoki concluded, makes us not only accuse the decision-makers but also look at ourselves in the mirror. This has largely been due to the inability to get hints for prioritised research topics. However, a new kind of thinking is emerging also in this respect. Within the HERA consortium, five thematic reports about topical research areas have been compiled. Of these five reports, two will be chosen to form a basis for a pan-European call for research appropriations within the Humanities. Maurice Biriotti, CEO of the London-based SHM Company, stressed in his keynote speech that – perhaps to the surprise of the sceptics – the Humanities has a lot to give to business life. SHM specialises in understanding people’s motivations and combines approaches from the Humanities, Social Sciences and Creative Arts with a range of strategic questions. Professor Biriotti has managed to turn his interests in the Humanities – he has written extensively on Literature, Philosophy, Anthropology and the dynamics of cultural change – into a flourishing business. His clients include some of the world’s most prominent companies in search of new solution regarding customer and public relations as well as personnel. As a fascinating example, Biriotti described how literary criticism can be used to enhance customer satisfaction in Internet merchandising. In her keynote speech Professor Liisa Salo-Lee gave a concise picture of the multifaceted FinnSight 2015 project and its Humanities viewpoint in particular. The project comprised 120 leading Finnish experts in research and industry. The experts formed ten panels each and wrote a combined foresight report on their subject areas. The aim of the project was to identify areas of competence needed in science, technology, society, business and industry as well as to establish priorities among them. Particularly acute was also the need to foster multidisciplinary debate and discussion. FinnSight 2015 was a particularly fruitful exercise in the latter respect since projects of such magnitude are, as Professor Salo-Lee pointed out, inherently interdisciplinary. The panel Understanding and Human Interaction, which was co-chaired by Professor Salo-Lee, consisted of HERA Conference 2006 Report – March 26 2007 – p. 3/8 experts from various fields, such as Social Psychology, Philosophy, History, Linguistics, Communication Sciences, Cultural Studies, Psychiatry and Brain Research. Within the Humanities, the panel identified several major issues for further investigation. These included several approaches to language, such as speech technology, language industry, plurilingualism and lingua franca. Another worthwhile field of study could be human interaction and dialogue. On the other hand, multicultural competence, History and, above all, the human being itself could also be important themes for further study. Assistant Director Karl Cunion from the UK Office of Science and Innovation presented the theme of his keynote speech, the use of the UK Foresight exercise in national policy-making, within the context of ForSociety, an ERA-NET project focused on the development of European research and innovation systems. ForSociety is a sustainable and dynamic network where national foresight programme managers coordinate their activities and regularly develop and implement efficient transnational foresight programmes. In addition to networking, its activities include benchmarking, exchange visits, policy conferences and future dialogue on strategic themes such as nutrition, energy, transport and innovation systems. Evaluation mechanisms and toolkits, dialogue between science and society, and pilot transnational programmes are also touched upon. Based on the highly interdisciplinary UK experience of foresight programmes within the Humanities, Cunion concluded by stating that key stakeholders have been unanimously positive about their success and the necessity for the project. According to Cunion, it could even be questioned whether the same kind of resource mobilisation could have been achieved by conventional ministerial or research council programmes. The keynote speeches were concluded after the lunch break by Dr Pascal Dissard, National Expert to the European Commission, Directorate-General for Research (DG RTD), where his main task is to promote the integration of the Humanities in the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7, 2007– 2013). In a most helpful manner, Dr Dissard shed light on the opportunities for the Humanities in the forthcoming framework programme. According to Dissard, there is a lot to be discovered for researchers within the Humanities, provided that sufficient attention is paid to cooperation and networking. With regard to the ERA-NET Plus scheme in particular, it is also worth bearing in mind that these opportunities may emerge between traditional disciplinary boundaries. HERA Conference 2006 Report – March 26 2007 – p. 4/8 The concluding session of the conference was a panel discussion on the theme Future visions for and from the Humanities: the use of foresight exercises for national policy-making and European cooperation. The discussion was moderated by Professor Philip Esler, Chief Executive of the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council, whereas the panel was formed by Mr Cunion, Dr Dissard, Poul Holm, Professor of Maritime and Regional History at the University of Southern Denmark and Rector of Roskilde University Center, as well as Gretty Mirdal, Professor of

Load more