The science shop at Lumière-Lyon 2 University gives associations and social economy businesses access to research Florence Belaen is the director of the science shop at Lumière-Lyon 2 University What is the purpose of the science shop that you run? Florence Belaen: First and foremost, it is a way to bring the university closer to its environment. In France, since the 2010s, local authorities, of regions and cities like Lyon, have been increasingly supporting universities. This has led the elected representatives of these local authorities to demand that universities play a role in the development of the economy and the region, and that they assume their social responsibility by putting the production of academic knowledge to good use. We also have a strong and dynamic social economy, which is a major source of employment, and which the university has a duty to support. Does this rapprochement also meet the university’s needs? F. B.: There is a research trend, particularly in humanities and social sciences universities, that wants to be connected with the field. We are working on sustainable development and artificial intelligence, but we need to be in touch with the players in society: in major research programs, we sometimes forget about the end users. But we cannot have “thinking heads” on one side and the people who actually do the work on the other. Citizens have to “be in”. And there is also a pedagogical interest for the university: being able to offer students the opportunity to work on real situations, real societal demands. What initiatives have you set in place to meet these needs? F.B.: We collect social demands, and we assign students on masters courses, supervised by researchers, to answer to them through internships. How do you collect these requests? F.B.: We offer free academic expertise, which is attractive. But we need to get the word out: we communicate by traditional means, via social networks, and we work with networks of players, such as the Institut français du monde associatif. We currently receive around fifty requests a year. They come from associations, groups and cooperatives: the issues must be non-profit-making, of general interest, and the structure must be solid enough to take on a trainee. Do you receive any applications from more traditional companies? F. B.: The operation costs the university €4,500 for each intern. So we give priority to organizations that do not have a lot of resources. Requests from companies that can pay for academic expertise are redirected to the university’s research department. For the same reasons, we do not fund internships in local authorities, which have sufficient resources. This does not prevent us from sometimes supporting internships funded by these bodies. We also work a lot with Sciences Po’s Public Factory, which complements what we do: it responds to public commissions through student work. How does the selection process work? F. B.: We have a scientific committee, with whom we choose 13 internship projects: ten of which will be paid for by the Boutique des Sciences, and three by the host organizations. We also refer certain requests that we feel require a tutored project rather than a master’s-level placement to teacher-researchers. Are all the interested organizations capable of formulating relevant research questions? F. B.: No. First, they answer to a call for expressions of interest. We then offer them “emergence” workshops, where we get the applicants to work on what motivates them. This also enables us to check that the interest for the research is not just one person’s interest in the hosting organization, but that it is shared. Sometimes respondents come with too many questions, and we have to select the most important or urgent one. Sometimes they express a question that hides another one. When an association wants to work on the impact of its actions, for example, is it to prepare for lobbying, or to be accountable to their funders? Finally, we need to define the angle from which we are going to study the question, to determine the most appropriate speciality for the trainee. How do you go about this? F. B.: We draw up an internship offer for a student, and we recruit the students in conjunction with the concerned organization. We then look for an academic to provide scientific supervision. This sometimes makes it possible to introduce a multi-disciplinary approach: for example, the student might be doing a master in sociology, and the scientific manager might be in political science. We also need to involve the association in the research protocol: it has produced the question, but it needs to support the student in collecting data, analyzing the results, and so on. Two project managers accompany the placement, to train the intern and their supervisors in participatory research, introduce the models and pitfalls, and check that everyone has understood the framework. We also meet regularly with the association and, in general, we take part in the presentation and promotion of this work. What is the impact of this operation? F. B.: For the university, it is politically interesting, because it allows it to show that it works with social economy players, and that it devotes resources to it: the whole scheme costs 150,000 to 200,000 euros a year, which is significant. This gives visibility to master degrees, in anthropology or local development, for example. We also carried out an impact study with a consultancy firm. It showed that the associations were able to turn a corner, find reflective elements or decision-making aids, an economic model and arguments for their funders. When you involve local residents or end-users in a study, there is a transformation in power relations and negotiation. It is not so much the final report that will change things. But getting different stakeholders around the table, working together to develop an understanding of the situation, looking for solutions together, helps to mitigate some of the symbolic violence between them and to redress the balance of power: an association does not a priori have the same

Interactions between local knowledge and scientific expertise about the use of Argan tree promote heritage resilience in a rural environment in Morocco Goats are grazing in an Argan tree in Morocco This project explores the uses of the Argan tree throughout the medieval period. Using archaeology, bioarchaeology, archaeometry, the history of texts, ethnobiology and local expertise it seeks to understand the management of the Argan grove, and the technique of making Argan oil in the village of Igîlîz. Context Igîlîz is the birthplace of the Almohad movement, initiated by Ibn Tûmart, a famous Moroccan historical figure. This religious reform movement, active in the 1120s, led to the creation of the largest empire to rule the Muslim West during the Middle Ages. For a variety of reasons, Igîlîz disappeared from historiography, throughout the 20th century. Today the memory of Igîlîz has been preserved locally and is now being recovered nationally with particular emphasis on the emblematic Argan tree and the oil it produces. Method The project uses a transdisciplinary framework that combines scientific expertise with local knowledge to produce a co-reconstruction of the past. By using archaeological reflections alongside the exceptional wealth of local knowledge regarding sustainable farming and animal husbandry, food, construction and ceramic production, the project has been able to produce a lively reconstruction of daily life for local resilience in the face of a changing climate. Benefit Igîlîz offers a case of resilience. This resilience is at the heart of a project which aims to rebuild and enhance a piece of history and an area, of Morocco’s Souss-Massa region. The memory of this site has been preserved locally and is now being recovered nationally. The project continues to be developed with local communities to create an educational tourist circuit on the site. Faysal Lemjidi, University Cadi Ayyad, Morocco This text has first been published by BRIDGES in a special brochure. BRIDGES in a member of The Earth-Humanity Coalition. SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER To stay up to date with our projects and the development of the EHC Read more articles

We released a video presentation of EHC in June 2024. Did you watch it?

Researchers from academic and non-academic communities explore together the many aspects of clam gardens constructed by coastal First Nations of British Columbia (Canada) and Native Americans of Washington State and Alaska (USA) Clam gardens are made by constructing rock walls at the low tide line along the edges of bays and inlets, transforming naturally sloping beaches or rocky shorelines into productive, level beach terraces. Image: Google Earth – Text: The Clam Garden Network Clam gardens are ancient intertidal features constructed by coastal First Nations of British Columbia (Canada) and Native Americans of Washington State and Alaska (USA). The Clam Garden Network is a diverse community of Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge holders including academics, community members, researchers, and resource managers from British Columbia, Washington State, and Alaska. Together, we celebrate, promote, and seek to uphold the cultural and ecological importance of clam gardens and traditional seafood management. Context Clam gardens enhance the production of culturally important seafoods and have been a part of Indigenous food systems for at least 4,000 years. Today, Indigenous Peoples throughout the Pacific Northwest are reclaiming clam garden construction, management, and related cultural practices to enhance food security and sovereignty, support and assert rights and title in coastal and ocean spaces, and revive ancestral teachings and practices. Clam gardens and other culturally important beaches have a legacy as places of learning. While out on the shoreline together, elders, youth, and other community members reflect on teachings, observations and stories about marine systems, cultural values, cosmology, economics, and the importance of family. Method The Clam Garden Network embraces different ways of knowing, shares ideas, and uses various research approaches, tools, and data to build knowledge about people and intertidal resources. We celebrate, promote and uphold clam gardens because they are a focal point to advance Indigenous rights and governance, intergenerational knowledge, and food security in the face of climate change. Benefits Our goals are to: build solidarity and cooperation across people, communities and disciplines; support clam garden restoration; stimulate conversation and learning that challenge predominantly Western ways of doing science and resource management; and work in ways that respect Indigenous community selfdetermination and resurgence. Nicole Smith, independent archaeologist, Victoria, B.C, and Jennifer Silver, University of GuelphThis text has first been published by BRIDGES in a special brochure. BRIDGES in a member of The Earth-Humanity Coalition. SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER To stay up to date with our projects and the development of the EHC Read more articles

Even before the beginning of the International Decade of Sciences for Sustainable Development, the World Academy of Art and Science adopted a program of sciences for sustainable development. The World Academy of Art and Science organizes a series of webinars under the title WAAS Talks The EHC-WAAS Program includes two series of webinars, six conferences, a number of articles and reports, and four platforms in science and technology for cooperation between the Global North and the Global South. Its implementation is based on a transdisciplinary science model. Webinars The first series of webinars within the EHC-WAAS Program started in June 2023 and two events were held by the end of 2023. In 2024, three additional webinars within this series have been held: WAAS Talks on Science for Human Security: Natural Geoengineering Methods for Cooling the Planet, on February 28, 2024; WAAS Talks on Science for Human Security: Artificial Intelligence, on October 17, 2024; WAAS Talks on Science for Human Security: Measuring Sustainability, on December 4, 2024. The series will be continued with the webinars focused on: Big Science with Accelerators; Nanomaterials; Climate Change; Critical Zone Science; Fission Nuclear Energy; Fusion Nuclear Energy; Radiation Therapy; Multilateralism; Multiculturalism; Well-Being Economy; Doughnut Economics; Sustainable Cities; Cultural Architecture. Conferences Three conferences are already planned. The World Conference on Sustainable Cities, to be held on June 26–27, 2025 in Athens, Greece. The primary objectives of the event are: to discuss the importance of urban sustainability and the concept of sustainable cities; to highlight the current financing gaps in the transition to sustainable cities; to explore the innovative financing mechanisms and strategies to bridge these gaps; to share the relevant best successful case studies and practices in the field from around the world; to facilitate dialogues among the interested stakeholders, including researchers, urban planners, community leaders, policy-makers, and investors. The target audience of the event comprises these stakeholders as well as governments and international institutions involved in solving the environment and sustainability problems. A result of the Conference should be the Athens Declaration on Sustainable Cities. The World Conference on Science and Art for Sustainability, to be held on September 22–25, 2025 in Belgrade, Serbia. The objectives of the event are: to listen to the distinguished speakers; to induce fruitful interactions among them; to deduce from all that some conclusions on sustainable, secure, and peaceful development to be presented to various policy-makers and other science and art stakeholders at the local, national, regional, and global scales. A result of the Conference should be the Belgrade Declaration on Science and Art for Sustainability, Security, and Peace. The World Conference on Big Science with Accelerators: Basic Sciences and High Technologies, to be organized in the second quarter of 2026 or 2027 in Beijing, China, by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). The speakers at the event would come from large global, regional, and national scientific and educational organizations operating in the fields of science with charged particle accelerators and accelerator technologies. The event would include a section on education in these fields, and a large industrial exhibition involving companies from all around the world experienced in development and application of accelerator technologies. All future events will be announced here. Nebojša Nešković, Vice President for Science and Technology, World Academy of Art and Science (WAAS); Full Member, The Club of Rome; Member, Steering Committee, The Earth-Humanity Coalition SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER To stay up to date with our projects and the development of the EHC Read more articles

Food systems transformations in South America: insights from a transdisciplinary process rooted in Uruguay Cover of the final report of the “Knowledge on the table” research Between 2019-21, the South American Resilience and Sustainability Studies Institute (SARAS) in Uruguay, gathered a transdisciplinary international community of natural and social scientists, humanities scholars, artists and multiple stakeholders to codesign food systems transformation. Saberes sobre la mesa (knowledge on the table) engaged Uruguayan policymakers, government officials, food producers, the service sector (chefs), soup kitchens, other civil organizations, and consumers. Context Latin America is the largest net food exporting region in the world. The continent’s food systems significantly contribute to global climate change and are at the core of many crucial global issues such as food security, nutrition, endemic poverty, land use change, loss of biological and cultural diversity and national identities. Uruguay shares many of the socialecological challenges and risks that are characteristic of the larger region. Method The project organised transdisciplinary working groups to represent and reflect on the prominent problems in the region: fisheries, the farming export industry, and the emergence of agroecology. It then developed nine projects. Four transdisciplinary projects focused on bottom-up processes of innovation in the sustainable production, distribution and/or consumption of food. Four interdisciplinary projects which targeted decision makers, researchers and scholars. Each communicated information on the social-ecological footprints of Uruguay’s global trade flow of food, and on the feasibility of circular economy. The last project was a book on the history of local recipes and the place of local food culture in national identity. Benefit Saberes sobre la mesa built a collaborative network comprised of academics, several ministries and municipal governments, the media, agricultural producers’ organisations, and civil society groups to produce the knowledge necessary to help address the significant challenges in Uruguay listed above. The final report of this project can be downloaded from the Zenodo virtual repository platform. Jorge Marcone, Rutgers University-New Brunswick, Chair of Advisory Board of SARAS This text has first been published by BRIDGES in a special brochure. BRIDGES in a member of The Earth-Humanity Coalition. SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER To stay up to date with our projects and the development of the EHC Read more articles

Paris Sciences et Lettres University, in collaboration with the company SoScience, has launched an innovative initiative to foster research projects that unite researchers, civil society, public authorities, and companies Olivier Dauchot, Research Director at CNRS, heads Gulliver, a joint laboratory of École Supérieure de Physique et de Chimie Industrielles – PSL and CNRS. He also coordinates PSL’s Partage des Savoirs, the outreach program of PSL University, within the broader action of the Communication Department You coordinate the Partage des Savoirs (Knowledge Sharing) action at Paris Sciences et Lettres University (PSL). What is your mission? Olivier Dauchot: Four years ago, PSL received structural funding for nine years, allocating around €100,000 annually for knowledge dissemination and scientific outreach. Given my experience in these areas, I was asked to take on this mission. With the approval of PSL’s Board of Presidents, we devised a strategy based on two key pillars: interdisciplinarity and engagement with civil society organizations, associations, businesses, and public authorities. Why focus on interdisciplinarity? O.D.: PSL encompasses a broad spectrum of disciplines across its schools and faculties — from dramatic arts at the Conservatoire National Supérieur d’Art Dramatique to cold atom physics, and including law, economics, philosophy, and more. To leverage this diversity, we organize initiatives where representatives from different disciplines share their perspectives on a common word or theme. This cross-disciplinary approach is incredibly stimulating. How does interaction with civil society fit into this approach? O.D.: When we think of science outreach, we typically picture children, students, or families participating in events like the Physics Olympiads, the Fête de la Science, or European Researchers’ Night. However, we also aim to engage decision-makers and influencers — those who shape society through their actions. It is important for them to understand what is happening within universities. Many civil society organizations are now highly competent, and with the Internet granting access to information, a well-informed NGO manager may know more about a specific topic than a non-specialist researcher. However, researchers and NGO leaders often speak different languages, follow different schedules, and address distinct challenges. Bringing them together can bridge these divides. How do you facilitate these discussions? O.D.: We partnered with SoScience, a company that runs a multi-stakeholder project ideation program called The Future Of. Over the course of a year, this program identifies three or four projects involving participants from three sectors: academia, civil society, and business. Ideally, each project includes several members from each category. What are the steps in this process? O.D.: First, we select a broad theme, which is refined by a scientific committee composed of researchers, civil society representatives, and business leaders. The question posed must be specific enough to guide discussion but open enough to allow for creativity. For instance, the first year’s theme was Urban Water, with a focus on short-cycle management in large cities. The committee drafts a pitch, and we issue a call for expressions of interest. Do you receive many applications? O.D.: Around 150 each time. The committee, with SoScience’s initial screening, filters out proposals lacking a collaborative approach or those promoting pre-existing products. Ultimately, about 50 individuals are selected. Does this result in 50 projects? O.D.: No, it results in 50 individuals with 50 ideas. However, we ask them to set aside their initial ideas and collaborate to develop new ones. We also reach out to additional participants to ensure the group is balanced. These 50 people are invited to a fully funded workshop in Paris, where, by the end of the day, about 15 project concepts are drafted. Are project groups formed during this workshop? O.D.: Yes, groups of five to ten participants are created. Some people are involved in multiple projects, while others may not join any. From there, SoScience follows up with the groups for six weeks, helping to refine their projects into detailed ten-page proposals. This process typically narrows the field to seven or eight projects. Finally, the committee selects three projects based on criteria like maturity, feasibility, and funding potential. Does PSL fund these projects? O.D.: No, PSL doesn’t fund them directly. SoScience supports the selected projects for six additional months, helping participants apply for funding from sources such as European grants, the French National Research Agency (ANR), or ministerial funds. The diversity of project leaders expands the range of potential funding options, and sometimes a participating company will decide to invest. What is PSL’s return on investment in this initiative? O.D.: It is similar to public science outreach during an event like a science fair: you don’t know exactly what outcomes to expect. However, we are the only university collaborating with SoScience on The Future Of. The former French Minister of Higher Education and Research personally came to announce our first selected projects. Additionally, PSL researchers can benefit directly: for example, one of our academics is involved in a Future Of urban water project that received initial funding from ADEME and is likely to secure ANR support. Are three new projects per year sufficient? O.D.: Three are formally selected, but the process creates a network of connections and lays the groundwork for many more collaborations. Even if some ideas take years to materialize, this cross-sector interaction is invaluable. How often have you run this process? O.D.: We are currently in the third cycle. The first year focused on urban water, the second on active health during the Olympic Games, and this year’s theme is metamaterials for sustainable development. How will you ensure the program’s sustainability? O.D.: Initial funding from the Ministry of Higher Education and Research supported us for three years. We have secured funding to continue our action for another four to five years, but long-term sustainability will require sponsorship. Thankfully, this initiative’s prestige should attract sponsors. Has your approach inspired transdisciplinary research within PSL? O.D.: Yes, though not all projects are directly related. For example, a PSL economist studying the 19th-century industrialization of agriculture has expanded his work into participatory research with farmers, involving them in data analysis and interpretation. We provided additional

New Zealand’s body mass index threshold for publicly funded fertility treatment is outdated and unethical. Here’s why it should go Pregnancy exam (Mart Production – Pexels) Women seeking publicly funded fertility treatment in New Zealand must have a body mass index (BMI) under 32, according to clinical priority assessment criteria for access to assisted reproductive technology. But as our in-depth interviews and a growing body of evidence show, this approach is outdated and unethical. One of our study participants described the system as “completely rigged if you’re a fat person”. Nina, a 37-year-old dance teacher, was denied public funding support to help her conceive because her BMI was above 32 – even though the cause of infertility was her husband’s sperm count. Age limit Nina is not alone. Paratta, who moved to Aotearoa from Sri Lanka in 2009, was also denied because of her BMI. She raced to lose the required weight in spite of a medical condition, but was then denied again because she had reached 40, the age limit for access to public funding. Both women’s experiences highlight New Zealand’s obsolete and discriminating BMI limit. The United Kingdom does not include BMI as a criterion for public funding, and international cutoffs are generally between 35 and 45. We argue New Zealand’s BMI threshold must be scrapped to reflect impactful research and respond ethically to New Zealand’s diverse population. BMI and fertility One in six people worldwide are affected by infertility, according to the World Health Organization’s most recent estimate. They suffer severe social and psychological consequences. There are numerous factors that can affect fertility, and obesity is certainly one of them, impacting 6% of women who have never been pregnant. But the BMI is an outdated method of assessing this risk. It doesn’t measure body fat percentage, distribution or differences across populations. Our study participants have raised concerns about the BMI limit. International and local studies concur with them. Research shows Polynesians are much leaner than Europeans at significantly higher BMIs, meaning Māori and Pacific women are disadvantaged before they even step into the clinic. Quick weight loss unlikely to help In New Zealand, people seeking public support are told that “making lifestyle changes like quitting smoking or losing weight” could help them become eligible. They are given a stand-down period wherein they must lose the requisite weight before referrals. As in Paratta’s case, this can lead to a race to lose weight before the inflexible age limit of 40 is reached. Evidence-based research advises that fertility care should balance the risk of age-related fertility decline with weight-loss advice. Nina rejected the advice to lose weight. She was concerned that quick weight loss would require unhealthy practices that could affect her success rate during the embryo transfer. Interventions may cause harm At the Australia and New Zealand Fertility Association’s annual conference last month, US obstetrician Kurt Barnhart confirmed that lifestyle interventions made weeks or months before conception are unlikely to improve outcomes. They may even cause harm. He discussed the FIT—PLESE randomised control study, which compared two groups of infertile women. One underwent a targeted weight-loss program and another exercised but did not lose weight. The results showed no statistically significant difference between the groups’ fertility and live-birth rates. These findings suggest the stand-down period should be revised. Barnhart also highlighted that weight loss through lifestyle changes can be practically impossible given obesity is often linked to endocrine issues that have nothing to do with choice. He observed signals that the medical community is changing its views on obesity as a “lifestyle” choice – a welcome shift. BMI, lifestyle and ethics Social science research has long challenged a colonial and biomedical habit of imposing standards on women whose bodies do not conform to Western ideas of a healthy or ideal body. Historically, the emphasis on weight as a criterion for reproductive health echoes harmful eugenicist beliefs. As US science historian Arleen Tuchman writes, the discovery of insulin prompted some groups to recommended banning marriages for people with diabetes to prevent the “unfit” from reproducing. New Zealand’s BMI criteria similarly suggest only those who fit specific physical standards deserve access to fertility care. The idea that lifestyle and health are straightforward individual choices is also challenged by research in epigenetics and philosophy. Obesity is often linked with poverty, which in turn is linked to broader social and living environments, including access and income. The high economic burden of obesity has led biomedical experts to recommended obese people should be considered for particular support, given the prohibitive cost of assisted reproductive technologies. Nina exercises more than eight hours a week and Paratta leads an active lifestyle. For both women, behavioural advice – and the stigma and assumptions it underscores – is offensive. Weight-loss advice can be particularly culturally offensive for Māori and Pacific peoples, who may be stigmatised in clinic settings for being too “fat” but considered “skinny” in their communities if they lose the required weight. Transdisciplinary approach to manage risks New Zealand’s assessment criteria for publicly funded fertility treatment have not been updated in 27 years. While infertility and health risks associated with obesity during pregnancy and at birth should not be ignored, research shows these risks can be managed effectively and with empathy through a transdisciplinary approach. The Australian state of Victoria now offers two free cycles of fertility treatment to any Medicare-holding woman, regardless of BMI, up to the age of 42. The program deliberately reaches out to specific groups whose ethnicity, sexuality and environment limit their access. It has been highly successful and should inspire New Zealand to approach fertility funding with fresh perspectives. Carina Truyts, Monash University; Nelly Martin-Anatias, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University, and Sharyn Graham Davies, Monash University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER To stay up to date with our projects and the development of the EHC Read more articles

As EHC is entering its second calendar year, the last General Assembly of 2024 discussed accomplishments and projects to come, some of which are already engaged The Earth-Humanity Coalition produced communication materials and initiated projects in 2024 The first year of the International Decade of Sciences for Sustainable Development has been busy for the incoming EHC. The second one that is starting soon will undoubtedly be even more interesting. On 13th December 2024, 37 people, representing 29 members of EHC attended the last General Assembly meeting of the year (six other members were excused because of schedule conflicts, especially for representatives based in Australia and Eastern Asia). They were joined by five participants to the working groups that had been working since the September meeting of the General Assembly. A lot of achievements This meeting has been the opportunity to give an updated account of what has been accomplished by EHC since its first General Assembly meeting in April: 50 registered members; a full communication suite, with a logo, a presentation video, a website, a flyer and a brand guide; a new version of the charter; participation to several meetings and conferences, online and in person, especially: 6th African Regional Science, Technology & Innovation Forum (Addis Ababa, April), co-organized by UNESCO, IDSSD program at Zhongguancun Forum (Beijing, April), Sustainability Research & Innovation 2024 (Helsinki and Espoo, June), International Congress of the International Union of Psychological Science, Prague, CBD COP16 (Cali, October), CILAC 2024, Forum of Open Science for Latin America and the Caribbean (Isla San Andrés, Colombia, December), UNCCD COP16 (Riyadh, December); participation to the Executive Committee of the International Decade of Sciences for Sustainable Development. And many projects On the projects side, several working threads have been initiated, mainly through discussions. A webinar series about Linking Emerging Transdisciplinary Fields and Concepts is in the making. Several webinars have also been held by the World Academy of Arts and Sciences, a member of EHC, and the series will continue. The same organization is preparing two international conferences for 2025. To share transdisciplinary work, an initiative has emerged, based on the Zenodo open platform, developped at CERN. With this platform, any kind of digital file can be uploaded to a searchable digital repository. It is organized into communities, that organize as they wish to. The community “Transdisciplinary research for sustainable development” has been created. A Memorandum of Understanding has been signed between IUPAP, on behalf of EHC, and Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, on behalf of the Belmont Forum: the aim is to develop the uploading of publications and data produced by the projects funded by the Belmont Forum. Several initiatives are planned in 2025 to co-construct the relevant community and adapt the tool to their needs. Luc Allemand SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER To stay up to date with our projects and the development of the EHC Read more articles

With a collaborative research platform, ATD Fourth World association, Conservatoire national des arts et métiers and Centre national de la recherche scientifique, in France, are developing knowledge on participatory research into poverty. Bruno Tardieu (right), a full-time volunteer at ATD Fourth World, is one of the moderators of the merging knowledge workshops Why is ATD Fourth World involved in collaborations with scientific researchers? Bruno Tardieu: ATD Fourth World was founded in 1957 by Joseph Wresinski, a catholic priest, in an emergency housing camp built by the public authorities following Abbé Pierre’s call in 1954. The camp had become a slum, inhabited by desperate families. Wresinski was there as chaplain. The first people in charge of ATD realized that reality was being denied: officially, there was no longer any misery in France, there were only social cases, people not suited to progress. To get this reality recognized, a sociologist, Jean Labbens, and a psychologist agreed to carry out in-depth studies in the camp. From the outset, they took seriously the participatory observation reports drawn up by the association’s “permanent volunteer” staff: as they still do today, they wrote down every evening that had happened during the day. They worked from these as well as with open interviews.  What happened next? B. T.: With the support of the French Commission for UNESCO, ATD Fourth World organized two symposia at UNESCO headquarters in Paris, in 1961 and 1964, on what were then known as “misfit families”. They helped to establish the notion of social exclusion, to contradict the notion that people were ill adapted to their situation: it was really that outsiders did not understand how they intelligently adapted to impossible situation. The association was also involved in work with historians, writing the family histories of very poor families over several generations, and in research into children’s language development. Researchers at the Columbia University School of Social Work in New York (USA) were soon intrigued by these methods, community organizing that included priority to the poorest and invited ATD to collaborate with them on community development programs in the USA. Let’s jump ahead in time: in 2023, ATD Fourth World France shared the Participatory Research Prize for the “Croiser les savoirs avec tou.te.s” (merging knowledge with all) project. What was this project? B. T.: It has to be seen in the context of what I have just explained. Many academics disputed the scientific nature of the work carried out with ATD in the 1960s and 1970s. In 1980, at a conference held at UNESCO, Wresinski countered this view by asserting that, as far as poverty was concerned, academic knowledge was not superior to the knowledge that people themselves had of their condition, or to the knowledge of action acquired by social workers and permanent volunteers. And that people living in poverty must be allowed to formulate their questions and work on them: they can be the driving force behind other forms of research. These ideas led to the development of the merging of knowledge method: we invited academics, people living in poverty and people in action to co-construct knowledge. The work we carried out in this way brought to light epistemological questions, which were formulated in 2015 during a seminar in collaboration with a laboratory at the Conservatoire national des arts et métiers (CNAM). This led in 2017 to the creation of the collaborative space “Croisement des savoirs avec toutes et tou.te.s”, through an agreement between CNAM, CNRS and ATD Fourth World, with the support of the Groupement d’intérêt scientifique “Démocratie et participation” (group of scientific interest “Democracy and participation”). It was the work of this collaborative space that was awarded the prize in 2023. What was at stake in this work? B. T.: In France, or in Europe, politicians were interested in the knowledge we were producing together with people living poverty who were themselves members of ATD, because they could see that they could use it practically. But before using it as a basis for policy, they would check with university experts in the field. And there, they didn’t hear the same point of view at all: our knowledge was dismissed as non scientific. This is what forced us to formalize the terms of an alliance. So, you wanted to forge an alliance with these experts to produce a common knowledge, rather than fight for legitimacy? B. T.: Yes. And what’s more, this cooperation produces a better quality of knowledge. Academics help us to understand our knowledge using concepts from other fields. For example, the notion of epistemic injustice, which was identified in feminist philosophy by Miranda Fricker, from New-York University, is relevant to poverty studies: what people say is interpreted by concepts that go against what they mean. That is what happened when the poor were called inadapted, and we changed that into socially excluded. Another more recent example, the notion of non-recourse: in France, 30% of those entitled to social benefits do not receive them, and this is called non-recourse (or non take up). But what very poor people who have thought about it say is that it is non-access, rather than non-recourse: in practice, it is very difficult for them to apply for these benefits. And non-recourse imply that people do not even ask for their rights. We need to deconstruct some notions produced by academics alone, who have been blinded by their environment. And it is also necessary to deconstruct notions created by an association like ours, and beliefs that circulate among very poor people. Doing so, we are building new knowledge and ways of thinking together: the various participants in the research realize that they can indeed work together, despite their social, economic or educational differences. What was the collaborative space’s work program? B. T.: We explored three issues. First, separation in peer groups: should the different categories of participants to the merging of knowledge always work together, or is it preferable to keep some separate meetings in peer groups as safe spaces? The collaborative