1. Risk management: Facilitation of (open) risk management Mikko Pohjola, THL

2. Contents Collective knowledge creation Pragmatic knowledge services Exercise: Argument analysis, discussion, commenting and formal argumentation in Opasnet

3. Open risk management A collaborative game of questions and answers Experts PublicStakeholders Decision makers Other influence Outcome

4. Collective knowledge creation Manuscript: “Pragmatic knowledge services” ”Importance of converging knowledge, innovation, and practice is identified, but the means for its implementation are lacking.” Supporting knowledge services are needed: Trialogical framework -> requirements? Three examples -> practical implications?

5. Collective knowledge creation Pragmatism: “an ideology or proposition can be said to be true if and only if it works satisfactorily” ”the meaning of a proposition is to be found in the practical consequences of accepting it” ”impractical ideas are to be rejected” E.g. Brunner (2006) calls for a pragmatic paradigm for policy practice that: i) considers knowledge as intertwined with action ii) develops context-sensitive practical knowledge iii) evaluates knowledge and actions according to their purposes

6. Collective knowledge creation Innovation Knowledge integrated into action as systematically developed means for practice The outcomes of innovation can be realized in many ways, not only in terms of economical benefits the common definition of innovations as commercialized inventions is too narrow and technology-centred

7. Collective knowledge creation Knowledge is social: Creation of new knowledge is rarely a cognitive process of a single individual. Typically, cognitive tasks are physically, socially and temporally distributed and the new ideas and hypotheses are often materialized as external artefacts (Paavola, 2006). Argumentative processes of producing new hypotheses and ideas (i.e. abductive search for hypotheses) can be considered collaborative rather than happening only in individuals' heads (Paavola, 2006). Abductive inference produces tentative solutions to be worked collaboratively. They can be either applied in practice until better solutions are formulated or as intermediate steps that guide and promote the search for better solutions.

8. Collective knowledge creation Trialogical approach to knowledge creation and learning Suggested and applied especially in the context of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) Emphasizes the role of collaborative development and reconstruction of concrete, shared artefacts in mediating knowledge creation

9. Collective knowledge creation Trialogical approach to knowledge creation and learning A basis for the trialogical approach is an epistemological distinction between three basic metaphors of learning and human cognition: Monological processes of information sharing and knowledge acquisition, and dialogical processes of learning through communication and participation, are supplemented with knowledge creation as a trialogical process of collaborative development of epistemic artefacts and practices. E.g. text documents, web pages, models, prototypes… why not hammers as well?

10. Three metaphors of learning

11. Collective knowledge creation Innovative activity from the trialogical perspective means that all relevant parties should become involved in the processes of learning and production of knowledge artefacts The trialogical processes extend to the organization of work around concrete artefacts and practices in addition to mere information sharing or communication

12. Collective knowledge creation Some examples: Monologue: A researcher does a literature review and writes an article about it for others to read (by themselves). Dialogue: Local citizens are invited to a hearing to discuss their opinions on the results of an environmental impact assessment. All those present (might, probably) learn more about the assessed development plan. The increased understanding may show in later decision making, public views on the development etc. Trialogue: Researchers, policy makers, NGO representatives, and citizens engage in contributing to an open assessment in Opasnet. Decisions and actions are taken (by all) according to the shared knowledge and understanding about the issue considered.

13. Pragmatic knowledge services Socio-technical hybrids Not merely a knowledge exchange medium, but an active knowledge system that supports human interaction and accomplishment of knowledge tasks (Delugach, 2006). Should be conceived as a hybrid network constituted by both the users and the technology (Pohjola, 2010).

14. Pragmatic knowledge services Requirements: Enable collaborative knowledge creation Support development and application of collaborative knowledge practices Support practical implementation of knowledge Adapt to changing contexts, situations, and purposes Three examples of pragmatic knowledge services: Opasnet KPE Innovillage

15. Framework for analysis Purpose Method System OutcomeUse

16. Opasnet A web-workspace for producing and providing science- based support for policy making in the field of environment and health. It provides a virtual arena for open collaboration on generating practical solutions to problems of societal relevance. Opasnet aims to improve increased awareness and understanding among both those who make decisions and those who are affected by those decisions. It welcomes decision makers in public policy, industry and commerce, experts of different kinds, as well as civil society organization representatives, consumers, and citizens as active participants in open assessments. Developed by THL (http://en.opasnet.org)http://en.opasnet.org

17. Opasnet Assessment Participant’s knowledge Participant’s updated knowledge Updated assessment Participant’s updated knowledge Decision Decision making Perception Contribution Pohjola et al. State of the art in benefit- risk analysis: Environmental health. Manuscript.

18. Innovillage Innovillage is an environment for the development, assimilation and evaluation of technology and services in the social and health sector. Its central idea is to support open participation in the development processes of social and health care services and to provide a method for evaluating the effectiveness and outcomes of these development processes. It promotes a multifaceted perspective to innovations where all the relevant participants should have a possibility to engage in the innovation process. Developed by THL (http://www.innokyla.fi)http://www.innokyla.fi

19. Innovillage

20. KPE Knowledge Practices Environment (KPE) is a virtual environment with a set of integrated tools and functionalities for working with knowledge artefacts, and for planning, organizing and reflecting on related tasks, artefacts and user networks (Markkanen, 2008), (Lakkala, 2009). It is developed in a large, five-year (2006-2011) EU-funded Knowledge-Practices laboratory (KP- Lab) project (http://www.kp-lab.org/).http://www.kp-lab.org/ An explicit goal of the KP-Lab project has been to develop and investigate tools, practices, and models that support collaborative knowledge creation processes and trialogical learning.

21. KPE

22. Summary All examples challenge the prevailing paradigms in their contexts Trialogical approach provides a good framework for converging knowledge, innovation, and practice, and developing pragmatic knowledge services experiences highlight needs for conceptual and technical improvement, but also broader cultural changes regarding knowledge work is needed Shift from individualistic learning and knowledge creation towards trialogical collaboration ~ shift from an information society towards a knowledge society

23. Exercise Exercise: Discussion and formal argumentation in Opasnet Content evaluation Argument analysis