Outdoor heaters against the backdrop of climate change

Ulrike Bechtold holds a masters degree and a PhD in Human Ecology. In 2007, she joined the ITA where she is currently working in the area of sustainability and technology. The main topics of her work embrace ambient and active assisted living (AAL), participatory approaches and climate technologies. Central to her methodology are the development of sustainability options, requirements for sustainability processes, and participatory approaches to investigate the crossroads between man, nature and technology.
Bechtold studied biology and anthropology with a special focus on human ecology at the University of Vienna and at the Freije Universiteit of Brussels (Belgium). Her thesis focused on the evaluation of an Austrian DA-Project dealing with sustainable freshwater use in Quetzaltenango, the second largest city of Guatemala. In 2007 she completed her PhD which was about societal transitions towards sustainability in a peruvian village. In addition, she is a certified mediator.
From 2003 to 2007 Bechtold was a PhD research assistant for the Human Ecology working group of the University of Vienna, with special attention on transition studies, societal transition and local sustainability. Bechtold teaches Human Ecology at the University of Vienna (since 2004) and at the MODUL University, Vienna (since 2010).
Further experience: In 2012 worked with Innova, SPA in Rome in the course of the Marie Curie project Value Ageing. From 10/2015 to 3/2016 Bechtold was working for the Danish Board of Technology (DBT) on a citizen consultation for the Human Brain Project. At the same time she worked for Innovendo in Vienna.
Her publicaton list encompasses numerous articles on participation and autonomous ageing.
New book "DiaLogbuch Altern" published in June 2016!
Cities face an evident demographic change, making assistive technologies (AAL) an interesting choice to support older adults to autonomously age in place. Yet, supportive technologies are not as widely spread as one would expect. Hence, we investigate the surroundings of older adults living in Vienna and analyse their “socio relational setup”, considering their social integration and psychophysical state compared to others (health, fitness, activeness, contentedness). Method: Our data included 245 older adults (age: M = 74, SD = 6654) living in their own homes (2018–2020 with different grades of needing support). We calculated univariate and multivariate models regressing the socio-relational setup on the change of routines, technology attitude, mobility aid use, internet use, subjective age, openness to move to an institutional care facility in the future, and other confounding variables. Results: We found a strong correlation between all categories (health, fitness, activeness, contentedness) of older adults comparing themselves to their peers. Among others, they are significantly related to institutional care openness, which implies that participants who felt fitter and more active than their peers were less clear in visualising their future: unpleasant circumstances of ageing are suppressed if the current life circumstances are perceived as good. This is an example of cognitive dissonance.
Traditionally, expert-based forward looking has been applied to anticipate future challenges, solutions and strategic decisions, but limitations to this approach have become obvious – especially when considering long term perspectives – e.g. failing to include a comprehensive array of opinions. Aiming at producing sustainable strategies for responsible socio-technical change, research funding can benefit from combining forward looking and public participation to elicit socially robust knowledge from consulting with multi-actors, including citizens. In this paper, we give insights into the EU project CIMULACT – Citizen and Multi-Actor Consultation on Horizon 2020. In CIMULACT, more than 4500 citizens, stakeholders and experts from 30 European countries engaged online and offline to co-create research topics. These are supposed to serve as input for the next round of calls in Horizon 2020, national research agendas as well as the ninth framework programme in the making. We investigate key results of this transdisciplinary process focussing on the topic “democratic education” with regard to two levels: What issues concerning the topic were raised? Can we find a common European imaginary for “democratic education”? Our analysis shows that the results contribute to defining and describing challenges for the currently prevailing imaginary of democratic education in Europe.
Ambient and assistive technologies (AT) have the potential to increase individual autonomy, social participation and quality of life for ageing populations. In seeking to implement these technologies, national and supranational funding schemes have strongly supported primarily market-driven research activities. This means that other societally relevant aspects, such as specific social and cultural contexts, are likely to be underestimated if not neglected. In view of the development of RI, this would be a serious misconception. We examine three recent participatory forward-looking technology assessment studies that involved experts, stakeholders and laypersons in discussions about the future of ageing and AT, and identify the diverse futures they imagine. We show different ways an ageing society of the future can be pictured, and contribute to the discourse on European demographic change as a Grand Challenge. In the light of RI, this diversity of imagined futures underlines the finding that answers to societal challenges connected to an ageing population cannot only be found by means of technological solutions, societal aspects will also play an important role.
An increasing orientation of technology assessment (TA) and adjacent fields toward future socio-technological developments is leading scholars to examine, assess and adapt different approaches of future studies on various levels. In this special issue of the Journal of Responsible Innovation, a number of members of the extended TA community in Europe seek to advance different approaches to handling the unpredictable, to consider various possible socio-technical futures and to explore a more active role in technology design and shaping of the future as required by concepts such as responsible innovation (RI) or responsible research and innovation (RRI). The three German words ‘Zukunft Macht Technik’ (the title of a TA conference in Vienna in 2015) make a nice little pun in German: they can either be interpreted as the short sentence ‘Future shapes technology’ or as the assembly of the three nouns ‘future power technology.’ Both readings are borne in mind in this special issue. A main insight of this special issue is that we need to explore how the debate on imagined socio-technical futures is enriched by concepts such as R(R)I, taking into account that no future can exist without an awareness of the present setting of innovation processes and technology development.
Looking back on the many prophets who tried to predict the future as if it were predetermined, at first sight any forward-looking activity is reminiscent of making predictions with a crystal ball. In contrast to fortune tellers, today’s exercises do not predict, but try to show different paths that an open future could take. A key motivation to undertake forward-looking activities is broadening the information basis for decision-makers to help them actively shape the future in a desired way. Experts, laypeople, or stakeholders may have different sets of values and priorities with regard to pending decisions on any issue related to the future. Therefore, considering and incorporating their views can, in the best case scenario, lead to more robust decisions and strategies. However, transferring this plurality into a form that decision-makers can consider is a challenge in terms of both design and facilitation of participatory processes. In this paper, we will introduce and critically assess a new qualitative method for forward-looking activities, namely CIVISTI (Citizen Visions on Science, Technology and Innovation; www.civisti.org), which was developed during an EU project of the same name. Focussing strongly on participation, with clear roles for citizens and experts, the method combines expert, stakeholder and lay knowledge to elaborate recommendations for decision-making in issues related to today’s and tomorrow’s science, technology and innovation. Consisting of three steps, the process starts with citizens’ visions of a future 30–40 years from now. Experts then translate these visions into practical recommendations which the same citizens then validate and prioritise to produce a final product. The following paper will highlight the added value as well as limits of the CIVISTI method and will illustrate potential for the improvement of future processes.
The establishment of new interdisciplinary fields such as ecological economics, human ecology or technology assessment can be interpreted as a logical consequence of striving for new sustainability sciences that address current global, multi-dimensional and multi-scale challenges. They set out to bridge the gap between the natural and the social sphere, between scientific analysis and societal action. This papers aims at re-assessing the contribution of established inter-disciplines to sustainable development. Journal articles of ecological economics, technology assessment and science and technology studies are analysed and compared along several proposed features of sustainability science. The results converge in two crucial aspects. (1) Concise societal or political recommendations are not part of present day 'normal science', be it a disciplinary or an explicitly interdisciplinary research context. (2) Participatory exercises are rarely applied as a socio-politically embedded practice, despite a high interest in such exercises as an object of study and discussion.
Active and Assisted Living (AAL) bezieht sich auf den Einsatz von Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologien in den Bereichen Gesundheit, Mobilität, Kommunikation, Arbeit und Pflege mit besonderer Beachtung der Bedürfnisse älterer Menschen. Dabei zielt AAL darauf ab, Dienstleistungen und Technologien zur Verfügung zu stellen, die das Wohlbefinden, die Autonomie und die Sicherheit älterer Menschen, sowie deren Gesundheit und soziale Integration, erhalten und verbessern.
The study aims to identify important actor groups and the relevant topics according to their perceptions. Thereby a focus was put on the identification of topics which define the social and organisational context of innovative technical solutions for autonomous living of older adults. In the context of the study also potential pitfalls that should be prevented in the course of the programme were identified.
-> The world’s population is ageing rapidly: in 2050, there will be three times as many people over the age of eighty than today.
-> Consequently, the demand for care and social services will rise. Meanwhile, disposable resourceswill decrease: social and healthcare budgets are shrinking as is the number of skilled personnel.
-> Great hope is projected on technology to support solutions for these challenges. But how do we need to shape technology in order to really support the elderly and meet their needs?
-> Die Weltbevölkerung altert rapide: Bis 2050 wird es drei Mal so viele Menschen über achtzig geben wie heute.
-> Der Bedarf an Gesundheits- und Sozialleistungen wird als Folge steigen. Die dafür verfügbaren Ressourcen werden gleichzeitig knapper: Sozial- und Gesundheitsbudgets schrumpfen ebenso wie die Zahl qualifizierter Arbeitskräfte.
-> In der Auseinandersetzung mit diesen Herausforderungen gilt Technik als große Hoffnungsträgerin. Wie müssen wir Technik aber gestalten, damit sie älteren Menschen tatsächlich nützt und ihren Bedürfnissen gerecht wird?
Tel.: +43 (0)1 515 81-6593
Fax: (+43-1-) 515 81-6570
Bäckerstraße 13, 1010 Wien
ubecht(at)oeaw.ac.at
vCard