c olumn 2 At the end of last year, the international climate conference held in Denmark ended in disappointment. The conference delegates, who included some key world figures, were unable to reach agreement. This came as little surprise to me. Indeed, I was frankly astonished by the way in which the decision-making process was organised. It was based on the classic Dutch concept of 'maakbaarheid', or perfectibility: if we all agree that the earth must not be allowed to increase in temperature by more than 2°C, this will automatically reduce CO 2 emissions. This is an all-embracing target, determined centrally and imposed from the top down. The idea that you can become a kind of sorcerer's apprentice and use this two-degree target as a basis for achieving everything is already far-fetched. But there was something else amiss with the assumptions being made in Denmark. Rather than thinking in terms of checks and balances, conference delegates focused on control. CO 2 emissions will be bought off in the form of emissions rights. The climate will be reduced to the footprint each of us leaves behind. But this ignores the complexity and the true nature of the problem. Discussions about the climate involve much more than just CO 2 . They also encompass such issues as water policy, agriculture or the importance of Western Europe selling superior environmental technology to countries like China. The idea of setting concrete final targets and aiming to completely control complex issues is an administrative model that is obsolete before it has even begun. What the world needs, and the climate debate in particular, is a revolutionary approach rooted in the regions rather than in national states. An approach that takes account of multiple actors, a variety of scale levels, diverse perspectives, dynamism and uncertainty. An approach that is focused on the organisation and quality of the policy process rather than the imagined final outcome, which is no longer possible to predict in a complex world. This does not mean that it is impossible to tackle problems, but it does necessitate an alternative approach. Then you will no longer have politicians who 'refuse to accept any more errors by climate scientists' (Cramer) or who complain about the lack of salt to clear icy roads because the weather is so extremely unpredictable (Eurlings). Yet it is precisely this extreme unpredictability that is one of the few things on which there is a reasonable level of consensus among climate scientists. It is not the temperatures as such, but the increasing extremes and changes in the weather that matter. It is time to bring an end to this linear model-based thinking in which science provides the facts and politicians opt for a normative approach. It is time to bring an end to single, all-embracing targets and make room for adaptive policymaking. Time for a confident and independent government that cherishes complexity, embraces uncertainty and meets opposition head-on because it has knowledge and expertise at its disposal and is also aware of the limits of that knowledge. Some Dutch ministries are already considering pursuing this approach and TPM is standing by to offer the necessary expertise. The master classes we are organising about the physical living environment for staff from the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management and other ministries, including Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality and Economic Affairs are a good first step towards achieving this. This year will see civil servants providing practical tutorials for our students. In all of this, we are working together to develop new educational concepts and new ways of working. This in the hope that any future climate conference will prove more successful and that we will be able to realise a Delta programme which has mobilisation, not centralisation, at its heart. Prof. Theo Toonen, Dean reflects a widely-held distaste in society for a patronising approach, it is quite possible to find something patronising every week. After all, any government measure could be seen as being patronising. Think of the smoking ban in pubs and restaurants, the ban on pornographic posters in Kamp Holland in Afghanistan or the government's introduction of Youth and Family Centres. The idea that the Cabinet hankers after the old days in which the priest used to ask when you are expecting your next child can soon gain momentum. A CDA or PvdA politician tasked with defending Cabinet policy faces an extremely difficult job. He or she needs to start by deconstructing all kinds of images before moving on to his or her own arguments. 'No, we are not harking back to the past'; 'No, we do respect people's personal lives; 'No, our intention is not to moralise'. He or she is not only placed on the defensive, but also faces the problem that if you continually need to issue denials in order to put your own perspective in the spotlight, you are actually highlighting your opponent's frame. He or she feeds the suspicion that the government is harking back to the past, does not respect people's private lives and is in fact moralising. Crook This example shows that denying a frame can ultimately prove counter-productive because the frame is merely confirmed. Another example of this phenomenon is the statement made by Richard Nixon, 'I am not a crook' when stories about the Watergate affair first emerged. For many people, this was proof that he was indeed a crook. The key lesson to be learned from this is that anyone who steps into another person's frame is almost certain to lose. In this context, American cognitive linguist George Lakoff says: 'Do not use the language of your opponents, because it draws you into their worldview'. The solution therefore is not to enter into your opponent's frame, but to use your own and to reframe the debate. A CDA or PvdA politician who wishes to defend him or herself against the patronising frame can counter it with an 'indifference frame'. 'We do not respond with indifference when people encounter problems raising children or when the easy availability of credit leaves them saddled with debt'. This frame creates difficulties for his or her liberal counterparts because they are forced to deny that the liberal value of tolerance has degenerated into indifference. And anyone who denies a frame, often does little more than confirm it Reframing the debate A party like the CDA could respond in a similar way to the frame used by Geert Wilders that we are losing the Netherlands to Islamic immigrants. For example, they could use the frame 'We are losing the Netherlands by souring the political debate, insulting people whose opinions differ from our own and no longer listening to each other and searching for joint solutions'. De Bruijn continues: Of course, not everyone needs to reframe. Parties such as GroenLinks and D66 can quite happily seek confrontation with a politician like Wilders because their electorate is very different from that of Wilders. But reframing is important for those centre parties aiming to capture the same votes as the PVV. If you do choose to reframe, it is important that the new frame matches your party policies and the target group at which it is aimed. It is also important to realise that reframing should never be used as a cheap trick. Take Wilders, for example. The comments and statements he makes are based on genuine personal conviction. Political emotions The fact that I have focused so intensively in recent times on the political game of framing and reframing is largely because of my own personal interest. I find political rhetoric exciting and I'm fascinated by the way in which Wilders is able to dominate political debates. This is why I started to analyse his debating methods and wrote a book about it. It also fits in well with my work. Our work in academia is very much focused on society. It therefore needs to responds to trends within that society. I also think that framing and reframing is an important subject for our students. We are educating engineers who spent 30% of their programme studying economics, law and policy administration. In their work, they will be continually confronted with both technical and social reality. This means that they need to be capable of moving successfully in both worlds and combining technical understanding with an awareness of stakeholders, the interests at play and the associated political emotions. The problem with targets TAKE PART IN THE READERS' SuRVEY AND WIN A STORM uMBRELLA!! WWW.quARTERLY.TBM.TuDELFT.NL Geert Wilders in debate Geert Wilders is skilled at dominating the political debate. His opponents in the centre parties seem incapable of getting the better of him. Intrigued by this phenomenon, Hans de Bruijn analysed Wilder's debating techniques. He has published the results in the book 'Geert Wilders in debat'. In it, De Bruijn also examines the political game of framing and reframing. He discusses the frames used by Wilders and shows what makes them so effective. De Bruijn makes it clear that Wilders' opponents must not allow themselves to be drawn into his frames. If they do so, they are almost certain to be at a disadvantage. A much more effective approach is to develop alternative frames because this forces the opponent onto the defensive. He provides some examples and shows that there are also all kinds of options for reframing available to the PVV. He also demonstrates how Wilders capitalises on his position as a newcomer. For example, Wilders refuses to follow the rules of the established order and is able to evoke an image of actually being a politician with a backbone. 'Geert Wilders in debat, over de framing en reframing van een politieke boodschap', ISBN-13 978-90-5931-544-0 is published by Lemna. continuation of page 1 It's all about the message and how you put it across
3 TPM ALuMNuS JOINS THE DEBATE ON THE EARTH'S FuTuRE Nicolò Wojewoda represented the Netherlands at One Young World how do young people envisage the future of our planet? this was the subject discussed by more than 700 young people from over 100 countries during one young World from 8 to 10 february in london. tpm nicolò Wojewoda was there too, representing the netherlands. he called for increased input from young people in decision- making. Nicolò (25) was born and raised in Italy. After graduating in Information Science, he successfully studied Engineering & Policy Analysis at TPM: EPA was just what I was looking for: the perfect balance between technology, policy administration, management and socio-cultural issues, with a strong international flavour. On the subject of international issues, Nicolò won the Rector's Student Prize for Internationalisation in 2008. Taking part in One Young World was a unique opportunity. You are in the company of hundreds of like-minded young people, the ideal scenario for creating a strong youth network for social reform. As a co-founder of the Student Platform for Engineering Education Development (SPEED), Nicolò was the perfect candidate. Sufficient votes on Facebook and sponsorship money ('with great thanks to TPM!') secured him his entrance ticket. The forum's discussions covered health, the environment, the influence of the media, the role of money and governance. Nicolò was a speaker during the session on 'Politics for a positive future'. I called for young people to be more involved in the decision-making process, both on issues that directly affect them (education) and on long-term concerns (the environment). My work for SPEED has shown me that this happens all too rarely. But youth participation is actually a right for young people, and also a human right. Delft plays an exemplary role in this: young people have a real vote, thanks to their own political party, STIP. One Young World proved to be a highly enriching experience. The organisation was impressive, with more media coverage than ever. There were also guests of the highest calibre, including world leaders such as Desmond Tutu and Kofi Annan, Nobel Prize winner Yunus, CEOs from major organisations (EMI) and even the Prince of Norway. I also met some extraordinary people, including Nelson Mandela's former defence lawyer, who introduced my speech. Nicolò is still unsure of what the future holds for him. I can't decide between finding permanent employment and working full-time on social reform on my own initiative. My studies at TPM certainly equipped me with the tools I need: I learned not to approach my interest in the common good from an ideological perspective, but purely scientifically. I also gained knowledge of management, cross-cultural communication and economic and political issues. All the core skills I need in order to become a modern-day social entrepreneur. TPM alumnus Arthur Tolsma singled out for entrepreneur's award 'hello, mr Smith, thank you for calling. i am currently unavailable, but will call you back as soon as possible.' last december saw arthur tolsma (29) win an award for entrepreneurs on Jort Kelder's tV business programme 'Bij ons in de BV'. the tpm alumnus pitched his innovative voicemail service that links a personal voicemail greeting to the number of every caller. this secured nationwide publicity for arthur's greetinq company. Arthur studied Technical Policy Management, specialising in Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management (SEPAM). He graduated in 2009 with his work on innovation management and entrepreneurship. Two years before that, he put the theory he had learned into practice by setting up his own business. This is still running and based in the YES!Delft Business Centre. Initially, I opted for the Aerospace Engineering Programme but soon realised that technology alone was too restrictive for me. I found Tu Delft to be hugely appealing. The atmosphere suits my personality: down-to-earth and ambitious, and with some great clubs and associations. At TPM, I found the combination of technology and application that I wanted. Looking back, it was just the right move to make. The right mix For Arthur, what makes TPM special is the mixture of technical and social aspects. You learn to understand the whole process, including all the actors involved. A key learning experience for me was realising that it is not about searching for solutions that you personally find attractive, but ones that are useful for other people. That is something that is also crucial for an entrepreneur. It is essential to always focus on what the customer actually wants. Greetinq now employs seven full-time staff, including students on the point of graduation, interns and other students. His colleagues Richard Stronkman and Ruben van Eijnatten provide the software; investor Tobias Walraven supplies the knowledge and networks. Having the right mix of disciplines within the company is essential. It helps shift the focus of our organisation increasingly from product development to sales. What Arthur finds so exciting is the sheer variety of activities he encounters on a daily basis, ranging from finances and websites to PR and HR issues. Fortunately, TPM taught me how to be versatile. Being responsible for everything in the company can be quite a challenge. It sometimes keeps me awake at night but the achievements you make also provide a great deal of satisfaction. His ambitions are high: We are planning for international growth and constantly focusing on innovation. Of course, I also want to continue to work on my own personal development. I may take an MBA or start teaching and coaching. The world is my oyster. Small photo: Arthur Tolsma Large photo: Nicolo Wojewoda