Inscrição para Workshops e Tracks

Event accreditation

Coordination: Annan Zuo (University of Oxford), Claudia Westermann (Curtin University), Frederick Steier (University of South Florida)

Across many cultural worlds, designing is a collective process emerging from reciprocal relations among humans, animals, plants, landscapes, materials, and spirits. Drawing on pluriversal and more-than-human design frameworks, this track explores how cybernetics can participate in world-making processes by engaging with ontologies in which agency is distributed and more-than-human beings are co-creators of living systems. We invite contributions that demonstrate how alternative cosmologies and relational practices inform systemic and ecological design projects across scales, from artefacts and installations to architecture and landscapes. Presenters are invited to speak from, narrate, or perform the perspectives of more-than-human agents, presenting their work through the lifeworlds, sensory capacities, and communicative features of their chosen more-than-human beings. This might include articulating Amazonian forestry practices through the view of a harpy eagle or reimagining Satoyama landscape recovery through the voice of a cypress tree. Through connecting performativity, situated knowledge, and multispecies attunement, this track aims to reveal shared relational ontologies embedded in cross-cultural more-than-human design practices while celebrating their distinct cosmologies.

Coordination: Arantzazu Saratxaga (Aix Marseille Université)

This proposal outlines a collaboration within the ASC framework to create a collective working space leading to a joint publication. The project explores the emancipatory potential of second-order cybernetics as a response to the epistemological foundations of contemporary algorithmic governance. Algorithmic governance rests on the assumption that reality is objectively given, fully modelable, and manageable through computation. This premise shifts epistemic authority to algorithmic systems, treated as neutral producers of comprehensive knowledge. The dominance of AI depends on the belief that algorithmic models generate objective truth. Consequently, power is delegated to systems that claim neutrality while concealing their selective operations. A “God’s eye” perspective emerges, legitimizing algorithmic authority not only through performance but through an attributed status of objectivity and omniscience. The track challenges this logic through second-order operative epistemology. Rather than presuming objectivity, second-order cybernetics observes observation itself. It emphasizes that every observation is selective and entails blind spots. Knowledge arises not from representing reality but from reflecting on how observations are constructed. This perspective questions the promises of transparency, automation, and total control. The track will address central epistemological tensions: observation versus representation; self-organization versus algorithmic determinism; transparency versus the blind spot of observation; communication versus control; reflexivity versus automation; and uncertainty versus the illusion of total calculability. Drawing on cybernetic operative knowledge, the track aims to critically examine the epistemological foundations of algorithmic power, expose their fragility, and open alternative spaces for thought and action, laying the groundwork for a subsequent joint publication.

Coordination: Art, Media, Cybernetics Working Group, American Society for Cybernetics

In his famous axiom – “the map is not the territory” – Alfred Korzybski articulates a disjunction: no representation exhausts the real. British statistician George E. P. Box’s pragmatic observation that “all models are wrong, but some are useful” redirects attention from questions of correspondence to questions of function. Cartography’s utility is always situated and partial: different models illuminate different aspects of the real while excluding others. The plurality of maps and models and their usefulness gestures towards a fundamental insight: reality possesses multitudes. What then of mapping and modeling? Historically, cartography functioned as a practice of territorial rationalization, operating between systems of power and governance. In modernity, the model has become a vessel for scientific and technological knowledge, projected onto our understanding and experience of the world. Today, we live in hyperrealities stitched together from hyperobjects, engulfed and immersed within invisible infrastructures. While the meaning of the map has changed, its essence – that of an epistemic and ontological apparatus for re-negotiating and re-constituting our relationship with the world – has remained the same. This track invites a cybernetic reframing of mapping and modeling of a different paradigm, grounded in intimacy rather than surveillance, in reciprocal conversation rather than unilateral observation.

Coordination: Clarissa Ribeiro (USP Brazil), Victoria Vesna (UCLA United States), Jill Scott (ZhdK Switzerland), Claudia Jacques (Technoetic Arts Journal, UK), Rewa Wright (QUT Australia), Tania Fraga (UnB Brazil), Rejane Spitz (PUC Rio Brazil)

Oficial opening of the 100 years of Staffor Beer exibition.

Coordination: Annan Zuo (University of Oxford), Claudia Westermann (Curtin University), Frederick Steier (University of South Florida)

Across many cultural worlds, designing is a collective process emerging from reciprocal relations among humans, animals, plants, landscapes, materials, and spirits. Drawing on pluriversal and more-than-human design frameworks, this track explores how cybernetics can participate in world-making processes by engaging with ontologies in which agency is distributed and more-than-human beings are co-creators of living systems. We invite contributions that demonstrate how alternative cosmologies and relational practices inform systemic and ecological design projects across scales, from artefacts and installations to architecture and landscapes. Presenters are invited to speak from, narrate, or perform the perspectives of more-than-human agents, presenting their work through the lifeworlds, sensory capacities, and communicative features of their chosen more-than-human beings. This might include articulating Amazonian forestry practices through the view of a harpy eagle or reimagining Satoyama landscape recovery through the voice of a cypress tree. Through connecting performativity, situated knowledge, and multispecies attunement, this track aims to reveal shared relational ontologies embedded in cross-cultural more-than-human design practices while celebrating their distinct cosmologies.

Coordination: Arantzazu Saratxaga (Aix Marseille Université)

This proposal outlines a collaboration within the ASC framework to create a collective working space leading to a joint publication. The project explores the emancipatory potential of second-order cybernetics as a response to the epistemological foundations of contemporary algorithmic governance. Algorithmic governance rests on the assumption that reality is objectively given, fully modelable, and manageable through computation. This premise shifts epistemic authority to algorithmic systems, treated as neutral producers of comprehensive knowledge. The dominance of AI depends on the belief that algorithmic models generate objective truth. Consequently, power is delegated to systems that claim neutrality while concealing their selective operations. A “God’s eye” perspective emerges, legitimizing algorithmic authority not only through performance but through an attributed status of objectivity and omniscience. The track challenges this logic through second-order operative epistemology. Rather than presuming objectivity, second-order cybernetics observes observation itself. It emphasizes that every observation is selective and entails blind spots. Knowledge arises not from representing reality but from reflecting on how observations are constructed. This perspective questions the promises of transparency, automation, and total control. The track will address central epistemological tensions: observation versus representation; self-organization versus algorithmic determinism; transparency versus the blind spot of observation; communication versus control; reflexivity versus automation; and uncertainty versus the illusion of total calculability. Drawing on cybernetic operative knowledge, the track aims to critically examine the epistemological foundations of algorithmic power, expose their fragility, and open alternative spaces for thought and action, laying the groundwork for a subsequent joint publication.

Coordination: Art, Media, Cybernetics Working Group, American Society for Cybernetics

In his famous axiom – “the map is not the territory” – Alfred Korzybski articulates a disjunction: no representation exhausts the real. British statistician George E. P. Box’s pragmatic observation that “all models are wrong, but some are useful” redirects attention from questions of correspondence to questions of function. Cartography’s utility is always situated and partial: different models illuminate different aspects of the real while excluding others. The plurality of maps and models and their usefulness gestures towards a fundamental insight: reality possesses multitudes. What then of mapping and modeling? Historically, cartography functioned as a practice of territorial rationalization, operating between systems of power and governance. In modernity, the model has become a vessel for scientific and technological knowledge, projected onto our understanding and experience of the world. Today, we live in hyperrealities stitched together from hyperobjects, engulfed and immersed within invisible infrastructures. While the meaning of the map has changed, its essence – that of an epistemic and ontological apparatus for re-negotiating and re-constituting our relationship with the world – has remained the same. This track invites a cybernetic reframing of mapping and modeling of a different paradigm, grounded in intimacy rather than surveillance, in reciprocal conversation rather than unilateral observation.

Coordination: Clarissa Ribeiro (USP Brazil), Victoria Vesna (UCLA United States), Jill Scott (ZhdK Switzerland), Claudia Jacques (Technoetic Arts Journal, UK), Rewa Wright (QUT Australia), Tania Fraga (UnB Brazil), Rejane Spitz (PUC Rio Brazil)

Coordination: Allenna Leonard, Jon Walker, Angela Espinosa, Pedro Pablo Cardoso, Camilo Osejo, Ayham Fattoum, Stephen Harwood, Juliana Mariano Alves

Celebrating the centenary of Stafford Beer’s birth, this track explores how his vision of freedom, viability, and autonomy continues to resonate within Latin American experiences of social, ecological, and institutional transformation. The track invites participants to examine how Beer’s cybernetics aligns with confluence as mutual amplification, where diverse currents strengthen each other without assimilation. Through poster presentations, participatory marketplace discussions, and a Syntegration demonstration, participants will explore governance, complexity, and the design of viable institutions across different cultural and territorial contexts. Selected abstracts from this track will be invited for publication in a special issue in a cyber-systemic journal.

Coordination: José dos Santos Cabral Filho, Sandro Luis Schlindwein, Mateus van Stralen

Drawing on Vilém Flusser’s insight that the challenge of contemporary technological culture is bringing together the dispersed and refocusing the distracted, this track proposes an inquiry into traditions of cyber-systemic thinking. It seeks confluences understood as processes of refining attention, cultivating unexpected encounters, exploring modelling possibilities, and moving toward action under conditions of uncertainty and complexity. Rather than approaching technology as an apparatus of restrictive control or strict problem-solving, it invites participants to engage cyber-systemic practices as a way of touching the unknown: welcoming problems before attempting to resolve them through modes of attunement that remain with what resists immediate comprehension. Central to the track is the cultivation of reflexive dialogues: encounters with others, human and other-than-human, in which mutual perturbations become opportunities for learning and transformation. Understanding may emerge through subtle and provisional modelling of intricacies rather than closed and unambiguous representation. Action is approached through the logic of doing and undoing knots: engaging constraints topologically rather than instrumentally, without reinstating totalising control, and recognising when undoing—or even not acting—may itself constitute a cybernetic response. Contributions are encouraged to engage cyber-systemic confluences as living processes that gather attention and refocus distracted agencies, while keeping uncertainty, plurality, and reflexivity in play. The track welcomes proposals that may take the form of papers, artistic works, performative experiments, or speculative practices operating across disciplines and scales, as well as contributions more closely aligned with traditions of systems thinking.

Coordination: R. Eva King and Frederick Steier (Fielding Graduate University)

This track fosters a living dialogue among three domains: Indigenous land-based relationality, quantum systems thinking, and AI reflexivity, treating them as tributaries of a single river of systemic meaning-making. Through provocative talks and interactive workshops (including “The Shadow Conversations Lab,” which explores AI and observer-dependence, and “Confluence Mapping,” which visualizes plural ontologies), participants will explore how distinct ways of knowing can coexist without collapsing into sameness. The track centers on mutual amplification, examining how system designers can work with emergent meaning, relational accountability, and non-binary logic.

Coordination: Graziele Lautenschlaeger (USTP Austria), Merve Keskin (University of Salzburg), Thibaud Chassin (University of Graz)

With the track Hybrid Matters, we aim to juxtapose the cybernetic principles with the contemporary theoretical frameworks of posthumanism and new materialism, unfolding and articulating material-discursive practices that address, for instance, Donna Haraway´s (1944-) natureculture concept (2003) and Karen Barad´s (1956-) agential realism (2012). The guided conversations and activities envision the deconstruction of dichotomies that impoverish discussions and simplify our understanding of the world; envisioning a circular, continuous, and mutual influence between organic and machinic elements. Throughout hybrid gardening as a meeting point for discussing biodigital convergence, the garden operates as both an experiential laboratory and a metaphor for exploring hybrid systems that integrate biological, digital, and cultural dimensions. Participants are invited to engage in participatory mapping, co-design of a hybrid garden, prototyping with plants and sensors, and collective documentation, materializing conversations through making and exploring how hybrid materialities shape new models of coexistence and cybernetic exchange.

Coordination: Allenna Leonard, Jon Walker, Angela Espinosa, Pedro Pablo Cardoso, Camilo Osejo, Ayham Fattoum, Stephen Harwood, Juliana Mariano Alves

Celebrating the centenary of Stafford Beer’s birth, this track explores how his vision of freedom, viability, and autonomy continues to resonate within Latin American experiences of social, ecological, and institutional transformation. The track invites participants to examine how Beer’s cybernetics aligns with confluence as mutual amplification, where diverse currents strengthen each other without assimilation. Through poster presentations, participatory marketplace discussions, and a Syntegration demonstration, participants will explore governance, complexity, and the design of viable institutions across different cultural and territorial contexts. Selected abstracts from this track will be invited for publication in a special issue in a cyber-systemic journal.

Coordination: José dos Santos Cabral Filho, Sandro Luis Schlindwein, Mateus van Stralen

Drawing on Vilém Flusser’s insight that the challenge of contemporary technological culture is bringing together the dispersed and refocusing the distracted, this track proposes an inquiry into traditions of cyber-systemic thinking. It seeks confluences understood as processes of refining attention, cultivating unexpected encounters, exploring modelling possibilities, and moving toward action under conditions of uncertainty and complexity. Rather than approaching technology as an apparatus of restrictive control or strict problem-solving, it invites participants to engage cyber-systemic practices as a way of touching the unknown: welcoming problems before attempting to resolve them through modes of attunement that remain with what resists immediate comprehension. Central to the track is the cultivation of reflexive dialogues: encounters with others, human and other-than-human, in which mutual perturbations become opportunities for learning and transformation. Understanding may emerge through subtle and provisional modelling of intricacies rather than closed and unambiguous representation. Action is approached through the logic of doing and undoing knots: engaging constraints topologically rather than instrumentally, without reinstating totalising control, and recognising when undoing—or even not acting—may itself constitute a cybernetic response. Contributions are encouraged to engage cyber-systemic confluences as living processes that gather attention and refocus distracted agencies, while keeping uncertainty, plurality, and reflexivity in play. The track welcomes proposals that may take the form of papers, artistic works, performative experiments, or speculative practices operating across disciplines and scales, as well as contributions more closely aligned with traditions of systems thinking.

Coordination: Graziele Lautenschlaeger (USTP Austria), Merve Keskin (University of Salzburg), Thibaud Chassin (University of Graz)

With the track Hybrid Matters, we aim to juxtapose the cybernetic principles with the contemporary theoretical frameworks of posthumanism and new materialism, unfolding and articulating material-discursive practices that address, for instance, Donna Haraway´s (1944-) natureculture concept (2003) and Karen Barad´s (1956-) agential realism (2012). The guided conversations and activities envision the deconstruction of dichotomies that impoverish discussions and simplify our understanding of the world; envisioning a circular, continuous, and mutual influence between organic and machinic elements. Throughout hybrid gardening as a meeting point for discussing biodigital convergence, the garden operates as both an experiential laboratory and a metaphor for exploring hybrid systems that integrate biological, digital, and cultural dimensions. Participants are invited to engage in participatory mapping, co-design of a hybrid garden, prototyping with plants and sensors, and collective documentation, materializing conversations through making and exploring how hybrid materialities shape new models of coexistence and cybernetic exchange.

Coordination: Larry Richards

After some introductory comments, and depending on the number of attendees, this #NewMacy café-style session will divide into smaller salon-style groups to discuss one or more of four potentially controversial issues in current cybernetics. These are conceptual issues, conversations on which could contribute to a confluence of new ideas in, approaches to, or perspectives on our joint field of inquiry. The four issues proposed for conversation include: (1) treating desires as constraints and intention as an awareness of those constraints as an alternative to desires as goals and intention as a planned trajectory toward those goals (as an approach to the cybernetics of design and the design of society); (2) treating the domains of relations and dynamics (explanations/descriptions and experience/action) as non-intersecting (i.e., of different logical type) as an alternative to the search for a grand theory of everything (as a cybernetic approach to knowledge, understanding and wisdom); (3) treating a consciousness of presence as an alternative to a consciousness of purpose (as an approach to self, democracy and time); and (4) treating the cybernetician as a craftsperson in and with time as an alternative to the cybernetician as a scientist, with time as given, external and unchangeable (as an approach to cybernetics as a process involving science, art and craft). After about a half an hour, the groups will reconvene to explore implications. Larry Richards, Professor Emeritus of Management and Informatics, Indiana University East, with other #NewMacy participants

Coordination: Justin Hunt

In this workshop, we will stage an interactive table read of Lionel Britton’s 1930 play, Brain: A play of the whole earth. In Brain, humans participate in a collective knowledge project that is global, collaborative, and targeted at what one might call “social good.” Social good encompasses physical and mental health, relational and social wellbeing, economic justice and the resolution of broader environmental concerns. For us, Brain functions in multiple ways. It connects to our wider interests in computing, technology, and social science more generally in times of rising fascism. Brain is a resistance narrative that explores how people might otherwise engage in a collective knowledge system based on other imperatives than capitalism. Brain, in our formulation, is a playground for dialogue between humans and the technologies they create. Brain will feature as a key focus in the next iteration of our collaborate research project, exploring the text as a tool for AI education more broadly. In staging this table read we are asking the attendees at the conference to perform with us a crucial “pre-production” stage in our research development. In a table read all members of a production read through the core text and begin to understand the world they will create together. We aim to perform a theory of Brain and consider what such a performance enables.

Coordination: Johannes Herwig-Lempp

Let\\\'s think together about what “biointeraction” and “(conversational) confluences” could mean for us in our everyday lives in practical terms – and how we can use our cybernetic concepts, methods, and experiences to achieve this. We will consider where we may already be doing quite well in this regard, and where we would like to improve. And which of our cybernetic and constructivist concepts can be helpful in this endeavor. As a scientist, I am interested in theoretical concepts; as a social worker, I am concerned with putting them into practice; as a citizen, I am interested in constructively contributing to political processes. So, in my own actions and in the actions of the people around me, it is about how we can tolerate and even use the coexistence of different worldviews, political beliefs, practices, and epistemologies—and how we can still live together constructively with people who think and act differently from us, or precisely because of this: How can we put this into practice, how can we behave, what can we ourselves contribute to successful conversational confluences? Conversational confluences are undoubtedly possible for each of us. In the workshop, we will find this out for ourselves by working on the following questions, among others: In which situations do confluences already emerge for us, and how do we enact them? When do they remain difficult—and still succeed? In which areas of our life would we like to become more capable of confluence? If we had a well-developed concept or “practice guide” for conversational confluence, where would we apply it? How might such a guide look? How does cybernetics help us articulate it?

Coordination: Abbie VanMeter & Eve C. Pinsker

Before meaningful change can occur in our social worlds, we must ask whether individuals understand themselves as active participants with real choices about how they communicate. Without a sense of agency, people perceive themselves as powerless in a random or unjust world. This workshop intervenes at that root story of inefficacy. Drawing on Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM), second-order cybernetics, and improvisational practice, it equips participants to see communication not as transmission but as co-creation. CMM holds that persons-in-conversation co-construct their social realities and are simultaneously shaped by the worlds they create, a claim resonant with Bateson, Pask, and Nachmanovitch\'s cybernetic attention to embodiment, reflexivity, and play. Beyond verbal exchange, this workshop engages multiple modalities: movement, sound, and embodied non-verbal communication as vehicles for generating \"differences that make a difference.\" Through exercises drawn from Interplay and Spolin theater games, participants will experience and reflect on the critical moments of uncertainty and possibility within communication. Playful, participatory, and theoretically grounded, this workshop explores how improvisation and coordination open new ways of human-being-in-the-world.

Coordination: Káritas de Toledo Ribas

In this practice, we propose a conceptual-experiential inquiry inspired by the understanding that the central question of human living is not that of progress, technology, or information in themselves, but rather what we wish to conserve in our manner of living together, and whether or not we are willing to take responsibility for its consequences. In dialogue with Humberto Maturana, we understand that we do not act from an abstract rationality separated from living, but within emotional configurations that open and close the domains in which acting, thinking, listening, and living together become possible. From this perspective, emotions are not a private addition to action; they specify the relational domain in which an action arises as possible, legitimate, and intelligible. The proposal relates to the conference theme, Conversational Confluences, by arguing that conversations do not take place in a vacuum. Every conversation arises from the interweaving of language and emotion, and it is this interweaving that configures worlds of action and coexistence. If distinct conversations can come into confluence without losing their singularity, this also depends on the emotional dispositions that make possible the presence of the other as a legitimate other in coexistence. To investigate the emotional configurations of a group is therefore also to investigate the conditions of possibility for conversational confluence. This formulation resonates with Maturana’s understanding that we human beings live in conversations, and that the worlds we live in arise as particular domains of coordinations of actions and emotions conserved in living. In this sense, the workshop engages directly with Track 8 by proposing a device for attending to the relational present, for reflective observation, and for the provisional formulation of hypotheses about complex processes of coexistence. The central contribution of this proposal lies in understanding emotions as the relational ground of action and reason. We seek to make visible that what we call reason, action, and coexistence does not exist outside emotioning, but arises with it and, with it, is either conserved or transformed. As Maturana states, it is emotions that guide our actions at every moment and determine the rational domain in which we operate. Workshop content and structure In a single 2.5-hour session, the workshop will be organized into four articulated moments. First, we will offer a brief conceptual opening to situate the central question and make explicit the relation between emotion, action, language, conversation, and coexistence, without anticipating causal explanations. Next, participants will observe, in a circle, the group’s unfolding in the present, attending to gestures, silences, rhythms of speech, movements of closeness and distance, and shifts in listening, with minimal facilitation intervention. In the third moment, the group will formulate provisional hypotheses about how different emotional dispositions orient possible actions and reconfigure participation, trust, defensiveness, collaboration, or withdrawal. Finally, we will revisit the main insights and gather brief formulations of what became visible in the experience, in the encounter shared by all participants. The workshop thus proposes a reflective space for observing conversation and coexistence as living processes in which emotioning participates in the constitution and transformation of the relational worlds we inhabit.

Coordination: Ignacio Muñoz Cristi

Em contextos de alta complexidade social, ecológica e tecnológica, a capacidade de refletir sobre nossos próprios modos de observar e agir torna-se uma competência fundamental. No entanto, a reflexão frequentemente é compreendida de maneira limitada, como introspecção individual ou como análise conceitual abstrata. Este workshop propõe explorar uma abordagem diferente: a reflexão como prática recursiva que permite examinar os modos pelos quais produzimos mundos de convivência. A proposta, fundada no Pensamento Ontológico-Constitutivo de Humberto Maturana[1], parte da ideia de que processos de design — seja no campo tecnológico, organizacional, pedagógico ou terapêutico — nunca ocorrem em um vazio conceitual. Todo design opera dentro de marcos implícitos de distinção: modos de definir problemas, critérios de sucesso, concepções de mudança e formas de validar conhecimento. Quando esses marcos permanecem invisíveis, o design tende a reproduzir automaticamente as mesmas ontologias instrumentais que estruturam a cultura tecnológica contemporânea. Para lidar com essa situação, o workshop introduz uma arquitetura recursiva de reflexão e design, composta por seis níveis interligados: - reflexão - meta-reflexão - meta-meta-reflexão - design - meta-design - meta-meta-design Nos três primeiros níveis, os participantes exploram progressivamente diferentes camadas de observação. A reflexão consiste em distinguir as coerências do próprio operar: que perguntas fazemos, que distinções utilizamos e que mundos aparecem a partir dessas distinções. A meta-reflexão desloca a atenção para os critérios que orientam essas observações, revelando pressupostos frequentemente invisíveis. A meta-meta-reflexão examina o risco de que esses critérios se rigidizem e se transformem em novas ortodoxias. Nos três níveis seguintes, o foco se desloca para o design. Primeiro, os participantes exploram possíveis configurações de condições relacionais que poderiam sustentar formas alternativas de convivência. Em seguida, o meta-design examina os marcos desde os quais essas propostas são elaboradas: como definimos problemas, como avaliamos mudanças e que ética orienta nossas intervenções. Finalmente, o meta-meta-design introduz uma dimensão de custódia reflexiva, examinando como evitar que os próprios marcos de design se tornem rígidos ou dogmáticos. A dinâmica do workshop será organizada em conversações estruturadas em pequenos grupos, alternadas com momentos de compartilhamento coletivo. O objetivo não é produzir soluções técnicas imediatas, mas permitir que os participantes experimentem diretamente como mudanças nas perguntas que orientam uma conversa podem transformar os mundos que se tornam possíveis. Essa prática Ontológico-Constitutiva, dialoga com tradições do pensamento cibersistêmico que enfatizam reflexividade, observação de segunda ordem e aprendizagem em contextos de complexidade. Ao mesmo tempo, busca oferecer uma ferramenta prática para pesquisadores, designers e profissionais interessados em explorar formas mais responsáveis e conscientes de intervenção em sistemas humanos. Ao final da sessão, os participantes terão experimentado um processo recursivo de reflexão e design que pode ser aplicado em diversos contextos — desde projetos tecnológicos até práticas pedagógicas e processos organizacionais — ampliando a capacidade coletiva de imaginar e sustentar futuros mais viáveis.

Coordination: Flávio Mesquita da Silva

The final session of the conference brings together participants from all eight tracks in a World Café format. The aim is to articulate the conversations developed throughout the week and begin the process of converging the week\\\'s dialogues toward publication. In successive rounds of small groups, participants move between thematic tables, bringing the questions raised in their respective tracks. The structure favors the cross pollination of perspectives across areas, allowing ideas from one track to resonate in another.