Or is it much too near? Welcome to part two of the two-part series on “Why is the GND in such a hurry?”. Last week, we established that, in fact, moving fast was kind of a good idea. Models prove it. But we were left a little dissatisfied, because the models didn’t really say much about whether moving fast was actually likely to happen. So, for inspiration, we looked to the past. We witnessed Sovacool’s (2016) examination of the historical evidence for rapid transitions and his subsequent appeal to the court of science to revise its earlier pessimistic verdict. Inspired, we (ok, I) then asked: couldn’t we use some of those insights from historical cases and infuse them into our models of the future? Couldn’t we, in other words, make our models be a little more social scientific?
Can I get there by model-ling?
Can I get there by model-ling?
Can I get there by model-ling?
Or is it much too near? Welcome to part two of the two-part series on “Why is the GND in such a hurry?”. Last week, we established that, in fact, moving fast was kind of a good idea. Models prove it. But we were left a little dissatisfied, because the models didn’t really say much about whether moving fast was actually likely to happen. So, for inspiration, we looked to the past. We witnessed Sovacool’s (2016) examination of the historical evidence for rapid transitions and his subsequent appeal to the court of science to revise its earlier pessimistic verdict. Inspired, we (ok, I) then asked: couldn’t we use some of those insights from historical cases and infuse them into our models of the future? Couldn’t we, in other words, make our models be a little more social scientific?