Deutsch
 
Datenschutzhinweis Impressum
  DetailsucheBrowse
  1. Start / 
  2. Datensatz Übersicht

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT
Zur Ablage hinzufügen
  Lokale TagsFreigabegeschichteDetailsÜbersicht

Freigegeben
Bericht

WP2 D2.5 Comparison of case study analysis with results of WP1

Urheber*innen
/persons/resource/1637

Trescher,  Dino
IASS Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies Potsdam;

Palsberg,  Aske
External Organizations;

Gram,  Søren
External Organizations;

Holm,  Niels-Kristian Tjelle
External Organizations;

Jensen,  Søren Mark
External Organizations;

Amargós,  Victoria Petersen
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/393

Schweizer,  Pia-Johanna
IASS Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies Potsdam;

Externe Ressourcen
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)

6001149.pdf
(Verlagsversion), 746KB

Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Trescher, D., Palsberg, A., Gram, S., Holm, N.-K.-T., Jensen, S. M., Amargós, V. P., Schweizer, P.-J. (2021): WP2 D2.5 Comparison of case study analysis with results of WP1, Potsdam, Hvidovre : Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS), The Danish Board of Technology (DBT), 45 p.


Zitierlink: https://publications.iass-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_6001149
Zusammenfassung
This report of the EU funded project entitled REconciling sCience, Innovation and Precaution through the Engagement of Stakeholders (RECIPES) will compare the results of the inter-case study analysis with the results of WP1. First, the results of the WP1 Taking stock as a basis for the effect of the precautionary principle since 2000 are synthesized and compared with the likewise synthesized results of the comparative multiple case study analysis2. Second, the report gives an account of the scenario development and the co-creation process. Third, inconsistencies and conflict categories identified in WP1 and the multiple case study analysis are discussed in the context of responsible governance of technologies. Finally, links between identified inconsistencies in WP1 and categories of conflicts in WP2 are discussed.