Prof. Dr. Klaus Eisenack

Klaus Eisenack erforscht aktuell die sozialen und institutionellen Mechanismen, die notwendig sind, um Klimaanpassung und nachhaltige Transformationen in Städten, ländlichen Räumen und Energiesystemen umzusetzen. Für Unternehmen und die öffentliche Hand liefert er Methoden, um komplexe Wechselwirkungen zwischen Technologie, Politik und Gesellschaft zu verstehen und so robuste Strategien für langfristige Investitionen und Governance-Strukturen zu entwickeln. Seine Arbeit ist besonders relevant für die Energiebranche, die Stadt- und Regionalplanung sowie die Agrarwirtschaft, wo es um die Bewältigung von Unsicherheiten durch den Klimawandel geht. Er hat insbesondere die Archetypen-Analyse als Methode zur Strukturierung komplexer Nachhaltigkeitsprobleme weiterentwickelt und setzt partizipative Ansätze wie Planspiele ein, um Akzeptanz und Wissenstransfer zu fördern.

🔒 Das System hat 698 mögliche Industrie-Partner gefunden — Firmen, Scores und Begründungen sind nur für eingeloggte Nutzer:innen sichtbar. Anmelden

• Berlin Workshop in Institutional Analysis of Social-Ecological Systems (WINS)

  Quelle ↗

  Sustainability of interlinked social, ecological and technical systems crucially depends on whether they are regularized by appropriate institutions and governance structures. It is, therefore, important to shed light on the complexity and diversity which characterize such interlinked systems. This is urgent in view of persistent global food problems, increasing scarcity of natural resources, growing degradation of the environment and the future challenges societies face due to climate change and energy insecurity. However, such a study of sustainable social-ecological systems will not gain momentum unless there is an intense exchange and mutual learning between scholars of different disciplines. The mission of The Berlin Workshop in Institutional Analysis of Social-Ecological Systems (WINS) is to advance communication between academic communities (economists, political scientists, geographers, sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists, and others) that study the role of institutions and governance structures in social-ecological systems and their transformation. It is an open platform for both advanced and young scholars to work symbiotically. WINS is based at Humboldt University's Integrative Research Institute on Transformations of Human-Environment Systems (IRI THESys). The overarching scholarly aim is to facilitate the accumulation of knowledge and the development of new, interdisciplinary and problem-oriented analytical theories and methods, bridging the multiplicity of approaches that have been established over time. Integrative discourses, interdisciplinary research and an advanced studies program will serve as conduits towards this goal. The ultimate purpose is to strengthen policy making through enhanced dialogue with practitioners and stakeholders.

• Institutionell und technologisch konsistente Energiestrategien für eine zentral oder dezentral ausgerichtete Energiewende in Deutschland (de.zentral)

  Quelle ↗

• Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making

  2019

  Ecology and Society · DOI

  Oberlack, C., D. Sietz, E. Bürgi Bonanomi, A. De Bremond, J. Dell'Angelo, K. Eisenack, E. C. Ellis, G. Epstein, M. Giger, A. Heinimann, C. Kimmich, M. T. J. Kok, D. Manuel-Navarrete, P. Messerli, P. Meyfroidt, T. Václavík, and S. Villamayor-Tomas. 2019. Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making. Ecology and Society 24(2):26. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10747-240226

• Effectiveness of gaming for communicating and teaching climate change

  2018

  Climatic Change · DOI

• Rethinking resilience: A cross-epistemic resilience framework for interdisciplinary energy research

  2019

  Energy Research & Social Science · DOI

  The transformation of critical infrastructure such as energy systems toward sustainability imposes a multitude of challenges that are social-technical in nature and require interdisciplinary collaboration. Resilience has received growing attention as a concept to bridge different scientific disciplines in research on energy systems, given their social, ecological, and technical elements. However, a resilience framework that is suitable for merging notions of resilience as a measurable property with notions of resilience as a social construction or an observatory scheme is still a desideratum. Against this backdrop, we present a cross-epistemic resilience (CER) framework for interdisciplinary research on energy and other social-ecological-technical systems. In particular, we introduce the distinction between positivist first-order and constructivist second-order observations and identify four modes of inquiry in resilience research. Our CER framework contributes to interdisciplinary resilience research by pointing out how assumedly incompatible perspectives are able to inform and constructively irritate each other and, hence, enhance the overall understanding of energy systems. The framework has been tested in a radically interdisciplinary research project. We draw on electricity systems as our prime example to illustrate the application of our arguments and concepts.