MEDEA is a research project financed by the ANR and focused on the visualization of the controversies around climate change adaptation in France. Controversy Mapping is a method for analyzing socio-technical controversies and making the legible for a larger public. While the basis of controversy mapping have been set by Bruno Latour some twenty years ago as an application of the Actor-Network Theory approach, most of the techniques employed have been developed recently drawing on digital methods and information visualization. To map the debate on adaptation MEDEA gathers a heterogeneous set of competences spanning from social sciences (Sciences Po médialab), to information design (ENSADlab), to climatology (LSCE).
In this paper we will discuss the first results of the project, presenting three classic controversy maps:
• The actor-network diagram. This map portrays the most important actors influencing the debate on adaptation in France and the ways they are connected by alliance or opposition. The representation includes all types of actors, not just individuals (scientists, decision makers, journalists…), but also collective actors (institutions, enterprises, NGOs…) and non-human actors (instruments, laws, geographic features…).
• The tree of disagreement. As most controversies, the quarrels on adaptation cannot be reduced to a binary opposition. Their proliferation resembles instead to a rhizome ramifying in many different direction. This map follows this branching, spanning from most general principles to the most specific details.
• The timeline. Controversies are, by definition, among the most dynamic phenomena of collective life as their emergence indicates a possible change in the balance of collective forces. The debate on climate adaptation is particularly lively as its boundaries are still scarcely formalized and ill defined. As such, this controversy needs to be explored in time, showing not only the most important events but also the different periods of acceleration and stabilization.
