How is who: evidence as clues for action in participatory sustainability science and public health research.

Participatory and collaborative approaches in sustainability science and public health research contribute to co-producing evidence that can support interventions by involving diverse societal actors that range from individual citizens to entire communities. However, existing philosophical accounts of evidence are not adequate to deal with the kind of evidence generated and used in such approaches. In this paper, we present an account of evidence as clues for action through participatory and collaborative research inspired by philosopher Susan Haack's theory of evidence. Differently from most accounts of evidence for use in policies and interventions, our account combines action-oriented (the how) and actors-oriented (the who) considerations. We build on Haack's theory and on the analysis of examples of participatory and collaborative research in sustainability science and public health research to flesh out six procedural criteria for the generation and mobilization of evidence in and from participatory research. Action-oriented criteria invite to look at evidence from a (a) foundherentist, (b) gradational and (c) quasi-holistic perspective. Actors-oriented criteria point out that evidence generation and utilization are (d) social, (e) personal, and (f) embedded. We suggest that these criteria may reinforce participatory and collaborative approaches to evidence co-production when addressing complex problems in sustainability science and public health allowing for the generation of a kind of practical objectivity.

Determinants of trust in times of crises: A cross-sectional study of 3,065 German-speaking adults from the D-A-CH region.

Interpersonal trust declined worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic; strategies are needed to restore it. We surveyed 3,065 quota-sampled German-speaking adults residing in the D-A-CH region. Using multinomial logistic regression models and backward elimination for variable selection, we calculated multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) to appraise correlates of interpersonal trust using the Interpersonal Trust Short Scale (KUSIV3). Participants with high levels of interpersonal trust (top KUSIV3 tertile (T3)) tended to be older, male, residents of Switzerland, university degree holders, and workers with higher income and work satisfaction (all Pdiff<0.01) compared to those in the lowest KUSIV3 tertile (T1). Optimism was most strongly associated with high interpersonal trust (ORT3vsT1 = 5.75, 95%CI = 4.33-7.64). Also significantly associated with high interpersonal trust were: Having voted in the last national election (for the opposition, OR = 1.39, 95%CI = 1.02-1.89 or the governing party, OR = 1.61, 95%CI = 1.23-2.11) versus non-voters; perspective taking (ORT3vsT1 = 1.46, 95%CI = 1.11-1.91); being more extraverted (ORT3vsT1 = 1.99, 95%CI = 1.53-2.59) and more agreeable (ORT3vsT1 = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.46-2.61); and scoring higher on complexity thinking (ORT3vsT1 = 1.32, 95%CI = 1.01-1.72). Participants scoring significantly lower for interpersonal trust did not regularly participate in religious meetings (OR = 0.61, 95%CI = 0.44-0.84, versus participation at least monthly); were more conscientious (ORT3vsT1 = 0.68, 95%CI = 0.51-0.91) or current smokers (OR = 0.68; 95%CI = 0.53-0.87, versus never smoking); had sleep problems >5 times a week (OR = 0.48; 95%CI = 0.36-0.66, versus none); and scored high on conspiracy belief (ORT3vsT1 = 0.53; 95%CI = 0.41-0.69). Results differed minimally by gender and country. These findings may be helpful in devising targeted strategies to strengthen interpersonal trust and social engagement in European societies, especially during times of crises.

Willingness to receive an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine in the German-speaking D-A-CH region in Europe: A cross-sectional study.

Background: Emergence of new coronavirus variants and waning immunity may necessitate regular COVID-19 vaccine boosters, but empirical data on population willingness for regular vaccination are limited. Methods: In August 2021, we surveyed 3,067 quota-sampled German-speaking adults residing in the D-A-CH region (Germany, Austria, Switzerland). Using multivariable adjusted ordered logistic regression models we calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) to assess factors associated with willingness to vaccinate annually against COVID-19. Findings: Among 2,480 participants vaccinated or planning to get vaccinated, 82·4% indicated willingness to receive annual COVID-19 boosters. This willingness was higher in Austria (OR=1·47, 95% CI, 1·19-1·82; p < 0·001) and Germany (OR=1·98, 95% CI, 1·60-2·45; p < 0·001) versus Switzerland and increased with age. Having voted in the last national election (ORopposition party voters=1·51, 95% CI=1·18-1·92; p = 0·001 and ORgoverning party voters=1·57, 95% CI=1·28-1·93; p < 0·001, versus non-voters) and not regularly participating in religious meetings (OR=1·37, 95% CI=1·08-1·73; p = 0·009, versus participation at least monthly) were significantly associated with willingness to vaccinate, as was partial (OR=1·97, 95% CI=1·43-2·72; p < 0·001) or total (OR=5·20, 95% CI=3·76-7·19; p < 0·001) approval of COVID-19 mitigation measures (versus non-approval). By country, Austrians showed the strongest association of voting behavior and mitigation measure approval with willingness to vaccinate. Interpretation: Targeted promotion programs informed by political and religious engagement and mitigation measure approval are needed to increase willingness to receive regular COVID-19 boosters. Funding: Medical University of Vienna, Department of Epidemiology, Danube University Krems, Department for Knowledge and Communication Management; Austrian Society of Epidemiology.

Diversity regained: Precautionary approaches to COVID-19 as a phenomenon of the total environment.

As COVID-19 emerged as a phenomenon of the total environment, and despite the intertwined and complex relationships that make humanity an organic part of the Bio- and Geospheres, the majority of our responses to it have been corrective in character, with few or no consideration for unintended consequences which bring about further vulnerability to unanticipated global events. Tackling COVID-19 entails a systemic and precautionary approach to human-nature relations, which we frame as regaining diversity in the Geo-, Bio-, and Anthropospheres. Its implementation requires nothing short of an overhaul in the way we interact with and build knowledge from natural and social environments. Hence, we discuss the urgency of shifting from current to precautionary approaches to COVID-19 and look, through the lens of diversity, at the anticipated benefits in four systems crucially affecting and affected by the pandemic: health, land, knowledge and innovation. Our reflections offer a glimpse of the sort of changes needed, from pursuing planetary health and creating more harmonious forms of land use to providing a multi-level platform for other ways of knowing/understanding and turning innovation into a source of global public goods. These exemplary initiatives introduce and solidify systemic thinking in policymaking and move priorities from reaction-based strategies to precautionary frameworks.

Correlates of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Austria: trust and the government.

BACKGROUND: With the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic surging and new mutations evolving, trust in vaccines is essential. METHODS: We explored correlates of vaccine hesitancy, considering political believes and psychosocial concepts, conducting a non-probability quota-sampled online survey with 1007 Austrians. RESULTS: We identified several important correlates of vaccine hesitancy, ranging from demographics to complex factors such as voting behavior or trust in the government. Among those with hesitancy towards a COVID-19 vaccine, having voted for opposition parties (opp) or not voted (novote) were (95% Confidence Intervall (CI)opp, 1.44-2.95) to 2.25-times (95%CInovote, 1.53-3.30) that of having voted for governing parties. Only 46.2% trusted the Austrian government to provide safe vaccines, and 80.7% requested independent scientific evaluations regarding vaccine safety to increase willingness to vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expected, psychosocial dimensions were only weakly correlated with vaccine hesitancy. However, the strong correlation between distrust in the vaccine and distrust in authorities suggests a common cause of disengagement from public discourse.

Working from home, quality of life, and perceived productivity during the first 50-day COVID-19 mitigation measures in Austria: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore changes in quality of life and perceived productivity, focusing on the effects of working from home during the first COVID-19 50-day mitigation period in Austria. METHODS: We conducted an Austrian-representative online survey (N = 1010) of self-reported life- and work-related changes during the first COVID-19 50-day mitigation period (March 16 through May 1 2020) compared to the situation before. We used multinominal logistic regression models to identify correlates of improved/decreased quality of life in the entire sample, and of improved/decreased productivity in a subsample of the working population (N = 686). We also calculated age- and multivariable-adjusted ORs and 95% CIs of an improved/decreased quality of life and an improved/decreased productivity by work from home status. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 mitigation period, quality of life improved in 17.5%, but decreased in 20.7% of the general Austrian population; perceived productivity at work increased in 12.7%, but decreased in 30.2% of the working population. Working from home during the mitigation period was associated with an increased quality of life (vs. none, partially: OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.09-3.91; all the time: 3.69, 1.86-7.29). In contrast, perceived productivity seemed to decrease when people worked from home (vs. none, partially: 1.42, 0.86-2.35; all the time: 1.48, 0.85-2.58). Working from home and related benefits were not equally distributed among gender, age, and educational attainment. CONCLUSIONS: A transition to more flexibility of workplace and working hours for employees could have important positive consequences for family and professional life, for stakeholders, for public health, and ultimately for the environment.

COVID-19 heralds a new epistemology of science for the public good.

COVID-19 has revealed that science needs to learn how to better deal with the irreducible uncertainty that comes with global systemic risks as well as with the social responsibility of science towards the public good. Further developing the epistemological principles of new theories and experimental practices, alternative investigative pathways and communication, and diverse voices can be an important contribution of history and philosophy of science and of science studies to ongoing transformations of the scientific enterprise.

Comment on Alley, S.J., et al. As the Pandemic Progresses, How Does Willingness to Vaccinate against COVID-19 Evolve? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 797.

We would like to extend on the article by Alley et al [...].

Diversity lost: COVID-19 as a phenomenon of the total environment.

If we want to learn how to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, we have to embrace the complexity of this global phenomenon and capture interdependencies across scales and contexts. Yet, we still lack systematic approaches that we can use to deal holistically with the pandemic and its effects. In this Discussion, we first introduce a framework that highlights the systemic nature of the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of the total environment as a self-regulating and evolving system comprising of three spheres, the Geosphere, the Biosphere, and the Anthroposphere. Then, we use this framework to explore and organize information from the rapidly growing number of scientific papers, preprints, preliminary scientific reports, and journalistic pieces that give insights into the pandemic crisis. With this work, we point out that the pandemic should be understood as the result of preconditions that led to depletion of human, biological, and geochemical diversity as well as of feedback that differentially impacted the three spheres. We contend that protecting and promoting diversity, is necessary to contribute to more effective decision-making processes and policy interventions to face the current and future pandemics.

Modeling normativity in sustainability: a comparison of the sustainable development goals, the Paris agreement, and the papal encyclical.

The idea of sustainability is intrinsically normative. Thus, understanding the role of normativity in sustainability discourses is crucial for further developing sustainability science. In this article, we analyze three important documents that aim to advance sustainability and explore how they organize norms in relation to sustainability. The three documents are: the Pope's Encyclical Laudato Si', the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement. We show that understanding the role of different types of norms in the three documents can help understand normative features of both scientific and non-scientific sustainability discourses. We present the diverse system of norms in a model that interrelates three different levels: macro, meso, and micro. Our model highlights how several processes affect the normative orientation of nations and societies at the meso-level in different ways. For instance, individual ethical norms at the micro-level, such as personal responsibility, may help decelerate unsustainable consumerism at the aggregate meso-level. We also show that techno-scientific norms at the macro-level representing global indicators for sustainability may accelerate innovations. We suggest that our model can help better organize normative features of sustainability discourses and, therefore, to contribute to the further development of sustainability science.

"How complex and even perverse the real world can be": W.D. Hamilton's early work on social wasps (1964-1968).

William D. Hamilton's name is often connected to important theoretical accomplishments, from the theory of inclusive fitness and kin selection to the so-called Hamilton's rule and the haplodiploidy hypothesis. This article asks: How did Hamilton attempt to test his theory and hypothesis against the complexity of the biological world? The article reconstructs Hamilton's empirical work with social wasps between 1963 and 1968, the years before and after the publication of the groundbreaking "The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior" in 1964. It points out the centrality of Hamilton's work on wasps and shows how the British scientist attempted to test theories and hypotheses with naturalistic, developmental, and physiological observations as well as, at times, with experimental manipulations. The article offers a new perspective on the history of the scientific understanding of the evolution of social behavior. In contrast to existing narratives, this perspective emphasizes the importance of empirical work-e.g. natural history, physiology, comparative anatomy-which is often obscured by a nearly exclusive focus on theoretical developments in this field.

Understanding Societies from Inside the Organisms. Leo Pardi's Work on Social Dominance in Polistes Wasps (1937-1952).

Leo Pardi (1915-1990) was the initiator of ethological research in Italy. During more than 50 years of active scientific career, he gave groundbreaking contributions to the understanding of social life in insects, especially in Polistes wasps, an important model organism in sociobiology. In the 1940s, Pardi showed that Polistes societies are organized in a linear social hierarchy that relies on reproductive dominance and on the physiological and developmental mechanisms that regulate it, i.e. on the status of ovarian development of single wasps. Pardi's work set the stage for further research on the regulatory mechanisms governing social life in primitively eusocial organisms both in wasps and in other insect species. This article reconstructs Pardi's investigative pathway between 1937 and 1952 in the context of European ethology and American animal sociology. This reconstruction focuses on the development of Pardi's physiological approach and presents a new perspective on the interacting development of these two fields at the origins of our current understanding of animal social behavior.

The dawn of chelonian research: turtles between comparative anatomy and embryology in the 19th century.

Many evo-devo studies of the turtle's shell draw hypotheses and support from historical sources. The groundbreaking works of Cuvier, Geoffroy St. Hilaire, Carus, Rathke, Owen, and others are being revived in modern research, and their centuries-old understanding of the turtle's shell reconsidered. In the works of these eminent biologists of the 19th century, comparative anatomy and embryology of turtle morphology set the stage for future studies in developmental biology, histology, and paleontology. Given the impact that these works still make on modern research, it is important to develop a thorough appreciation of previous authors, regarding how they arrived at their conclusions (i.e., what counted as evidence?), whether there was debate amongst these authors about shell development (i.e., what counted as an adequate explanation?), and even why these men, some of the most powerful and influential thinkers and anatomists of their day, were concerned with turtles. By tracing and exposing the context and content of turtle shell studies in history, our aim is to inform modern debates about the evolution and development of the turtle's shell.