Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1186/s42055-020-00030-5 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1186/s42055-020-00030-5 C7341699!7341699!C7341699     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 213.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       ä-/-ä 2020 ; 3 (1): ä Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=C7341699|t=2020. Excluded futures: the continuity bias in scenario assessments |pdf=|usr=}}{{C7341699}} gab.com Text Excluded futures: the continuity bias in scenario assessments JO: ä-/-ä http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=C7341699 #FOAvip Global scenario assessments in support of climate, biodiversity, energy and other international policy deliberations tend to focus on a narrow bandwidth of possibilities: futures that unfold gradually from current patterns and trends. This ?continuity bias? downplays the real risks (and opportunities) of structural discontinuity in the evolution of the global social-ecological system. The inclination to focus on mathematically tractable representations and conventional futures preferred by decision-makers is understandable, but constrains the scientific imagination and the scope of policy guidance. Earlier studies spotlighted discontinuous global futures, thereby revealing a broader spectrum of possibilities and repertoire of actions than found in contemporary scenario analysis. The paper revisits three types of futures introduced 25?years ago; examines three truths they convey about the contemporary moment; and points to three courses of action they suggest. Contemporary assessments centre on incrementally changing Conventional Worlds, yet varieties of global disruption (Barbarization) and progressive transformation (Great Transition) remain plausible alternatives. Corresponding to this triad, three synergistic action prongs?reform (incremental policies), remediation (emergency preparedness and prevention), and redesign (deep cultural and institutional change)?come into focus. Recovering a comprehensive perspective on the global possible would reinvigorate debate on the kind of transformation needed, broaden the action agenda, and stimulate innovative research for illuminating our indeterminate future. The COVID-19 pandemic, a concrete illustration of historical discontinuity, underscores the critical importance of emphasizing nonconventional futures in policy assessments. Twit Text FOAVip Excluded futures: the continuity bias in scenario assessments ????ä-/-ä http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=C7341699 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=C7341699 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|C7341699}}</ref> Excluded futures: the continuity bias in scenario assessments #MMPMIDC7341699 Raskin P; Swart R ä-/-ä 2020[]; 3 (1): ä PMIDC7341699show ga Global scenario assessments in support of climate, biodiversity, energy and other international policy deliberations tend to focus on a narrow bandwidth of possibilities: futures that unfold gradually from current patterns and trends. This ?continuity bias? downplays the real risks (and opportunities) of structural discontinuity in the evolution of the global social-ecological system. The inclination to focus on mathematically tractable representations and conventional futures preferred by decision-makers is understandable, but constrains the scientific imagination and the scope of policy guidance. Earlier studies spotlighted discontinuous global futures, thereby revealing a broader spectrum of possibilities and repertoire of actions than found in contemporary scenario analysis. The paper revisits three types of futures introduced 25?years ago; examines three truths they convey about the contemporary moment; and points to three courses of action they suggest. Contemporary assessments centre on incrementally changing Conventional Worlds, yet varieties of global disruption (Barbarization) and progressive transformation (Great Transition) remain plausible alternatives. Corresponding to this triad, three synergistic action prongs?reform (incremental policies), remediation (emergency preparedness and prevention), and redesign (deep cultural and institutional change)?come into focus. Recovering a comprehensive perspective on the global possible would reinvigorate debate on the kind of transformation needed, broaden the action agenda, and stimulate innovative research for illuminating our indeterminate future. The COVID-19 pandemic, a concrete illustration of historical discontinuity, underscores the critical importance of emphasizing nonconventional futures in policy assessments. äExcluded futures: the continuity bias in scenario assessments (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing