the challenging task of deployment of scalable low carbon technologies by
2050–2100 cannot be denied. This task itself calls for innovative energy-technology
research and development (Galiana and Green 3 Dec. 2009, pp. 570–571). In order
to rethink knowledge, science, discovery, innovation and entrepreneurship and to
rebuild their optimal linkages for meeting the twenty-first century global and
regional challenges, the rationalities of convergence and knowledge resources
dynamics warrant a fresh look at the STS including the philosophy and methodology of science. Rebuilding the just alluded linkages in their role in addressing the
global challenges is bound to result in the breakdown of traditional disciplinary
boundaries across the sciences (Bigirimana 2011; Srinivasan 2010; Pandit 1989,
2014a, b; Pandit and Dosch 2013). In this context, it is imperative to accelerate the
convergence of different sciences on common frontiers for achieving the goals of
innovation-driven KBCE, on the one hand, and management of knowledge
resources within the institutions that are engaged in the task of addressing the
challenging frontiers at the society-political economy-industry interface, on the
other. But how do the two models, convergence and knowledge resources
dynamics, then compete with each other? Or, are they in some sense complimentary
to each other?
In deciding how rational and wise it is to move, first, from the life sciences’ first
and second revolutions to convergence and, then, from there to the knowledge
resources dynamics-driven KBCE, the steps indicated here, if considered at many
levels of complexity, warrant a closer and critical attention. Where regional climate
change projections are derivable from the GCM projections of future climate
change profiles, using the appropriate techniques (Hall 19 Dec. 2014), this is all the
more necessary at a more empirical level. One of the biggest challenges that the
reintegrated sciences must address is the rethinking of ecosystem resilience in the
context of KBCE. Quite explicitly, the KBCE accepts climate change as the single
dominant driver of social-ecological-economical change. As a result, it is imperative to take into account global and regional climate change impact on natural
resources, biodiversity and ecosystem services (Côté and Darling 2010, pp. 1–5).
In its Preface, the 2009 National Academy of Sciences 112 pages Report entitled
“A New Biology for the 21st Century: Ensuring the United States Leads the
Coming Biology Revolution (http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12764.html)” declares
that
‘Biological research is in the midst of a revolutionary change due to the integration of
powerful technologies along with new concepts and methods derived from inclusion of
physical sciences, mathematics, computational sciences, and engineering. As never before,
advances in biological sciences hold tremendous promise for surmounting many of the
major challenges confronting the United States and the world. Historically, major advances
in science have provided solutions to economic and social challenges. At the same time,
those challenges have inspired science to focus its attention on critical needs. Scientific
efforts based on meeting societal needs have laid the foundation for countless new products,
industries, even entire economic sectors that were unimagined when the work began (http://
www.nap.edu/catalog/12764.html, vii)’.
‘The lessons of history led the Committee on a New Biology for the 21st Century to
recommend that a New Biology Initiative be put in place and charged with finding solutions
Knowledge-Based Climate Economy …
151
2050–2100 cannot be denied. This task itself calls for innovative energy-technology
research and development (Galiana and Green 3 Dec. 2009, pp. 570–571). In order
to rethink knowledge, science, discovery, innovation and entrepreneurship and to
rebuild their optimal linkages for meeting the twenty-first century global and
regional challenges, the rationalities of convergence and knowledge resources
dynamics warrant a fresh look at the STS including the philosophy and methodology of science. Rebuilding the just alluded linkages in their role in addressing the
global challenges is bound to result in the breakdown of traditional disciplinary
boundaries across the sciences (Bigirimana 2011; Srinivasan 2010; Pandit 1989,
2014a, b; Pandit and Dosch 2013). In this context, it is imperative to accelerate the
convergence of different sciences on common frontiers for achieving the goals of
innovation-driven KBCE, on the one hand, and management of knowledge
resources within the institutions that are engaged in the task of addressing the
challenging frontiers at the society-political economy-industry interface, on the
other. But how do the two models, convergence and knowledge resources
dynamics, then compete with each other? Or, are they in some sense complimentary
to each other?
In deciding how rational and wise it is to move, first, from the life sciences’ first
and second revolutions to convergence and, then, from there to the knowledge
resources dynamics-driven KBCE, the steps indicated here, if considered at many
levels of complexity, warrant a closer and critical attention. Where regional climate
change projections are derivable from the GCM projections of future climate
change profiles, using the appropriate techniques (Hall 19 Dec. 2014), this is all the
more necessary at a more empirical level. One of the biggest challenges that the
reintegrated sciences must address is the rethinking of ecosystem resilience in the
context of KBCE. Quite explicitly, the KBCE accepts climate change as the single
dominant driver of social-ecological-economical change. As a result, it is imperative to take into account global and regional climate change impact on natural
resources, biodiversity and ecosystem services (Côté and Darling 2010, pp. 1–5).
In its Preface, the 2009 National Academy of Sciences 112 pages Report entitled
“A New Biology for the 21st Century: Ensuring the United States Leads the
Coming Biology Revolution (http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12764.html)” declares
that
‘Biological research is in the midst of a revolutionary change due to the integration of
powerful technologies along with new concepts and methods derived from inclusion of
physical sciences, mathematics, computational sciences, and engineering. As never before,
advances in biological sciences hold tremendous promise for surmounting many of the
major challenges confronting the United States and the world. Historically, major advances
in science have provided solutions to economic and social challenges. At the same time,
those challenges have inspired science to focus its attention on critical needs. Scientific
efforts based on meeting societal needs have laid the foundation for countless new products,
industries, even entire economic sectors that were unimagined when the work began (http://
www.nap.edu/catalog/12764.html, vii)’.
‘The lessons of history led the Committee on a New Biology for the 21st Century to
recommend that a New Biology Initiative be put in place and charged with finding solutions
Knowledge-Based Climate Economy …
151