SHOCK (not) horror

项目团队提出，通过重新评估基础设施需求和供给之间的关系，系统冲击构成了从根本上“转变思想”的机会。随着我们进入一个资源稀缺的时代，冲击提供了重新构想资源使用规模的动力，特别是在提供核心公用事业方面。震惊（不是）恐怖项目通过医疗创伤的寓言，独特地揭示了激进变革的潜力，挑战基础设施利益相关者走出他们的舒适区，挑战目前孤岛式基础设施的组织，重新思考冲击的本质，并设计出新的和变革的方式来思考基础设施。具体来说，它将开发一个新的基础设施弹性概念，既利用冲击作为强调现有基础设施系统相互依赖的一种方式（识别弱点），又通过在冲击后将基础设施恢复到更好的状态（而不是恢复冲击前的状态）来改善基础设施。项目团队的共同信念是，对基础设施冲击的研究有助于开发新的基础设施整体模型。我们从非常不同的学科角度（土木工程、可持续性设计和社会技术系统研究）来处理基础设施问题，但我们的目标是在这种多样性的基础上产生新的、有洞察力的产出，这些产出将综合这些不同研究领域的知识。我们的方法是基于使用创伤叙事作为一种手段来解放对基础设施“创伤”的思考，以及它们为基础设施的彻底重塑提供的机会。这些将与创伤发生的案例研究组合一起使用，以探索变革的“机会之窗”在多大程度上被认识和/或利用，以及我们是否可以设想在未来类似情况下最大限度地利用方法。该方法将使用系统的社会技术基础设施系统的地图和干预点叙述的发展。它将分为五个阶段：1)医疗创伤作为基础设施系统冲击的寓言；我们将使用一系列定性方法来发展医学寓言，包括文件分析和对来自不同文化方法（如西医和中医）和不同形式的医疗实践（如全科医生咨询与急诊）的医疗专业人员的访谈。2)构建基础设施系统的社会技术配置图谱：我们将绘制基础设施系统的社会技术配置图谱，并参照系统创新和可持续性转型的文献，绘制变化的动态图谱。我们将通过系统冲击的故事线进一步研究这个框架，从而扩展这个框架。3)在真实的基础设施系统中测试寓言并定义系统干预点：我们将组织为期两天的利益相关者活动，邀请利益相关者评估我们的基础设施系统地图的准确性，并讨论根据层次尺度定义的系统干预点的干预可行性。4)制定框架，最大限度地从基础设施系统冲击中学习：我们将设计一系列实验，以了解最大限度地利用冲击提供的机会窗口所需的决策，以了解基础设施系统的整合。5)将综合产出综合为长期变革议程：我们将利用研究的综合产出来制定综合基础设施的变革研究、教育和实践议程。我们将重点发展“冲击战术实验室”。

The project team propose that system shocks constitute opportunities to radically 'shift minds' by reevaluating the relationship between demand and provision of infrastructure. Shocks provide drivers to re-imagining the scale of resource use, particularly in terms of delivering core utilities, as we move into an era of resource scarcity. The SHOCK (not) HORROR project uniquely unpicks the potential for radical change through the allegory of medical trauma to challenge infrastructure stakeholders to move out of their comfort zone, challenge the current organization of infrastructure in silos, rethink the nature of shocks and devise new and transformative ways of thinking about infrastructure. Specifically it will develop a new concept of infrastructure resilience, both by using shocks as a way of both highlighting the interdependencies of existing infrastructure systems (identifying the weak points), and improving infrastructure by restoring it to a better state after the shock (rather than re-instating what was there before the shock). The project team is connected by the belief that the study of infrastructure shocks can help develop new holistic models of infrastructure. We approach infrastructure problems from very different discipline perspectives (civil engineering, design for sustainability and socio-technical systems research) but aim to build on this diversity to generate new and insightful outputs which will synthesise knowledge across these different fields of study.Our methodology is based on the use of narratives of trauma as a means to free up thinking about infrastructure 'traumas' and the opportunities they provide for radical re-shaping of the infrastructure. These will be used, together with a portfolio of case studies where trauma has occurred, to explore to what extent the 'window of opportunity' for change was recognised and/or utilised, and whether we can envisage methods to take the maximum advantage of similar situations in the future. The methodology is will use maps of socio-technical infrastructure systems of systems and develop of narratives of intervention points. It will have 5 stages: 1) Medical trauma as an allegory of infrastructure system shocks: We are going to develop the medical allegory using a range of qualitative methods, including document analysis and interviews with medical professionals from different cultural approaches (e.g. Western and Chinese medicine) and different forms of medical practice (e.g. GP consulting vs emergencies), to compile trauma storylines that have led to radical re-evaluations of either medical practice and/or personal ways of living2) Construction of maps of the socio-technological configuration of infrastructure systems: We are going to map the socio-technical configurations of infrastructure systems and the dynamics of change with reference to the literature of systems innovations and sustainability transitions. We will extend this framework by investigating it further through our storylines of systems shocks.3) Testing the allegory in real infrastructure systems and defining system intervention points: We are going to organize two day-long stakeholder events in which stakeholders will be invited to evaluate the accuracy of our infrastructure systems maps and debate the feasibility of intervention in the system intervention points defined according to a hierarchical scale.4) Development of a Framework to Maximise Learning from Infrastructure Systems Shocks: We are going to devise a series of experiments to understand the decisions required to maximize the window of opportunity provided by shocks to learn about the integration of infrastructure systems.5) Synthesis of the combined outputs into a long-term transformative agenda: We will use the combined outputs of the research to develop an agenda for transformative research, education and practice on integrated infrastructure. We will focus on developing a "shock tactics laboratory".