The conference is organised as a hybrid event in Turku and via Zoom.
This event will be the final conference of the PALO project. The project focuses on the problem of short-termism in representative democracies, and the role of citizen participation and deliberation in long-term policymaking.
The conference programme includes two keynote speeches, scientific presentations organised around the main findings of the project, and a panel discussion on the design of future-regarding institutions.
Programme
NB! Times are local Finnish time, time zone Eastern European Time EET (UTC+2).
Tuesday, 14 December
20.00 Dinner (Restaurant Mami, address: Linnankatu 3).
NB! Please note that the COVID-19 passport will be required. This dinner is for speakers and guests who arrive on Tuesday.
Wednesday, 15 December
09.30-09.45 Coffee and welcome
09.45-10.00 Opening remarks
10.00-11.00 Keynote I
Jonathan Boston (Victoria University of Wellington): Protecting long-term interests in a short-term world: issues and options
Discussant: Vesa Koskimaa (University of Tampere)
11.00-12.00 Individuals
Lauri Rapeli (Åbo Akademi): Future-oriented political thinking at the individual-level
Discussant: Sanna Ahvenharju (University of Turku)
Esa Palosaari (Tampere University): Effects of fear on donations to climate change mitigation
Discussant: Lala Muradova Huseynova (Dublin City University/University of Leuven)
12.00-13.30 Lunch
13.30-15.00 Interaction
Jonathan Kuyper (University of Oslo): Sustainability in asymmetric common-pool resource usage: Communication and the deliberative mindset
Discussant: Héctor Bahamonde (University of Turku)
Mikko Leino (University of Turku): Can democratic deliberation help thinking and caring about future generations?
Discussant: Daan Vermassen (Vrije Universiteit Brussel)
Erkki Mäntymaa (Natural Resources Institute Finland, Luke): Wind power as a landscape disturbance: Would landscape value trade help?
Discussant: Anna-Kaisa Kosenius (University of Helsinki)
15.00-15.30 Coffee
15.30-16.30 Keynote II
Anja Karnein (Binghamton University): What’s wrong with the presentist bias?
Discussant: Simo Kyllönen (University of Helsinki)
19.00 Conference dinner (Restaurant E.Ekblom, Neuvolansali).
NB! Please note that the COVID-19 passport will be required.
Thursday, 16 December
11.00 Coffee
11.30 Institutions
Maija Setälä (University of Turku): Possible roles of mini-publics in democratic systems
Discussant: Ian O’Flynn (Newcastle University)
Vesa Koskimaa (University of Tampere): Future-regarding decision-making in Finland: Institutions, actors and practices
Discussant: Didier Caluwaerts (Vrije Universiteit Brussel)
Juha Hiedanpää (Natural Resources Institute Finland, Luke): Ecosocial compensation of lost nature-based urban social values
Discussant: Teemu Haukioja (University of Turku)
13.00-14.30 Lunch
14.30-15.45 Panel discussion on institutional design
In conversation with Graham Smith (University of Westminster), Didier Caluwaerts (Vrije Universiteit Brussel), Lauri Rapeli (Åbo Akademi) & Maija Setälä (University of Turku). Chair: Kaisa Herne.
15.45-16.15 PALO results in brief and look ahead
Registration
The event is free of charge and open to all.
Online participants: No registation is required. To participate, please use the Zoom link above.
In-person participants: The registration for this event is closed.
NB! Information on Coronavirus
We follow the authorities’ and University’s instructions on Coronavirus situation. Events organised for the University community or partners can still be organised as long as the safety measures are observed.
– Wear a face mask (unless you are eating).
– Keep a safe distance (2 meters) from other participants.
– Stay home if you’re not feeling well.
– Wash your hands often, use hand sanitiser and cough or sneeze into your sleeve.
Read more about the University’s instructions on Coronavirus situation.
Conference dinner participants: Please note that the Covid-19 passport will be required.
Keynote speakers
Keynote I | Jonathan Boston (Victoria University of Wellington): Protecting long-term interests in a short-term world: issues and options
Abstract
There is broad agreement that democratic political systems, when faced with intertemporal conflicts, tend to favour short-term interests over long-term interests. Such phenomena, variously described as political short-termism, democratic myopia and a presentist bias in policy-making, threaten the interests of future generations. But while there is broad agreement on the nature and seriousness of the problem, along with its many causes, there is much less agreement on how political short-termism can best be countered, or at least modestly mitigated. Large numbers of proposed ’solutions’ have been advanced over recent decades. Such proposals tend to reflect the disciplinary and/or ideological orientation of their advocates. For instance, constitutional experts focus on constitutional solutions; economists focus on incentive structures, discount rates, and economic instruments; political theorists focus on democratic processes and institutions; and accountants focus on such things as national wealth accounting, natural capital accounting, and national reporting frameworks. But how might the desirability, effectiveness, and relevance of these multiple contending approaches be assessed? Is there a universally best strategy for countering political short-termism (i.e. regardless of context, policy domain or jurisdiction) or should reformers seek to tailor their responses depending on the circumstances and the particular windows of opportunity for reform? This presentation reflects on these and related questions in the light of my research and policy-related roles over recent decades.
Bio
Jonathan Boston ONZM, is Professor of Public Policy in the Wellington School of Business and Government at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. During 2021 he has also served as a principal adviser to the Ministry for the Environment in New Zealand.
His research interests include: climate change policy (both mitigation and adaptation); child poverty; governance (especially anticipatory governance); public management; tertiary education funding (especially research funding); and welfare state design.
He has served at various times as the Director of the Institute of Policy Studies and the Director of the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies at Victoria University of Wellington. In the early 2000’s he was a member of the Tertiary Education Advisory Committee and helped design and implement the Performance-Based Research Fund in New Zealand’s tertiary education sector. During 2012-13 he co-chaired the Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty in New Zealand.
Recent books and major reports include: Child Poverty in New Zealand (with Simon Chapple) (2014); Governing for the Future: Designing Democratic Institutions for a Better Tomorrow (2017); Safeguarding the Future: Governing in an Uncertain World (2017); Foresight, Insight, and Oversight: Enhancing Long-Term Governance through Better Parliamentary Scrutiny (with David Bagnall and Anna Barry) (2019); and Transforming the Welfare State (2019). He has served since 2005 as the editor of Policy Quarterly.
Keynote II | Anja Karnein (Binghamton University): What’s wrong with the presentist bias?
Abstract
In response to what is increasingly criticized as the presentist bias of democracies, the idea of giving future generations a voice via political representation is gaining significant traction. But it remains to be determined on which issues exactly future generations should be given a say: on all issues that potentially affect them, on only those that potentially affect them negatively or on an even narrower set of issues? In this paper I argue for the third option. I show that due to the difficulties involved in representing non-existing future generations, who can neither authorize nor hold their representatives to account, and to the risk that thereby arises for the democratic practices among contemporaries, there is reason to represent them not on all matters that affect them or even that affect them negatively. Rather, the focus ought to be on including them only on issues that may lead to their domination. I identify such issues as those that may end up being purpose-determining for future generations: that may subject them to previous generations’ will by forcing them to exert a substantial amount of their energies on dealing with a problem caused by their predecessors.
Bio
Anja Karnein is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University (SUNY). She holds a PhD from Brandeis University. After completing her Ph.D. she was a Visiting Fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics at Harvard University and, following that, Post-doctoral Research Fellow at the Institute for Society and Genetics at the University of California, Los Angeles. She spent several years at Goethe University in Frankfurt, first as a post-doctoral fellow in the Cluster of Excellence ”The Formation of Normative Orders” and then as wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin (comparable to untenured assistant professor) for political theory and philosophy (Lehrstuhl Forst). During her time in Frankfurt she was also Visiting Scholar at the Bioethics Center at New York University and in the Law and Philosophy Program at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Inquiries
For any further questions please contact Project Coordinator Mari Taskinen (mjtask@utu.fi).
Add new comment