Bürger-Uni

A recent example illustrates just how urgent the topic of the evening is: on the very day of the Citizens' University event organized by TUM Campus Heilbronn, Heilbronner Stimme, and the Dieter Schwarz Foundation on the topic “Can the climate catastrophe still be prevented?”, a heat warning was issued in Heilbronn. And yet guest speaker Prof. Mojib Latif—introduced by host Luise Pufahl, professor of information systems at TUM Campus Heilbronn, as “one of Germany's most renowned climate researchers”—spreads optimism: “I could make it short, say ‘yes’ and leave,” says the meteorologist and oceanographer, anticipating the answer to the overarching question of the evening. Only to immediately qualify his statement at the event on Bildungscampus Heilbronn. "You can't negotiate with physics or make compromises. Physics—like the climate and nature as a whole—follows its own laws."

Dramatic effects

Global climate change is in full swing and its effects are also being felt in Germany: drought is causing crop failures, forest damage and forest fires, leaving burned landscapes in some regions of eastern Germany. Heavy rainfall leads to flooding disasters such as in the Ahr Valley, while at the same time sea levels are rising in the North Sea and Baltic Sea. Last but not least, extreme temperatures also have dramatic effects on health: in Germany alone, thousands of heat-related deaths are reported every year. Despite these obvious developments, climate change denial has a long history.

Favorable conditions

But why does Latif remain optimistic despite everything? He is convinced that it is possible to limit global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. The conditions are in place: renewable energy sources in abundance, as well as the technology, know-how, and financial resources to use these sources.
“Why should we do something, and why have we already done the world a great service?” he asks the audience, answering his own question: The German government's Renewable Energy Sources Act of 2000 set the development and use of sustainable energies in motion worldwide. Today, more than half of the electricity in Germany comes from sustainable energy sources. “If we hadn't started back then, renewable energies would not be booming worldwide today. This shows that even a small country like Germany can have an impact,” Latif is certain.

More courage and determination

Latif then outlined his wishes for politicians and the general public in a talk with moderator and Heilbronner Stimme editor Tobias Wieland: Politicians should finally abandon their wavering course and instead reach a consensus on climate issues and stick to it in the long term. More courage is needed: “You always have to start somewhere. With 80 million people, there is so much intelligence available that you can achieve anything.” And last but not least: “We should not become a nation of skeptics who reject every change. If we don't change, we will be changed—and to our disadvantage.”

Prof. Simone Linke presents alarming prospects to her audience at the Bürger-Uni (Citizens' University) on the Bildungscampus Heilbronn: “It is getting warmer and warmer,” says the professor of urban planning and landscape at the Weihenstephan-Triesdorf University of Applied Sciences at the event, which is jointly organized by TUM Campus Heilbronn, Heilbronner Stimme and Dieter Schwarz Foundation and moderated by Tobias Wieland. A map of Germany predicting the average number of hot days per year towards the end of the 21st century shows extensive red areas: “It will be insanely hot, especially in the south and southwest.” If the population increases at the same time, you are quickly caught in a vicious circle of increasing sealing of cities and even more rapidly rising temperatures.
The possible consequences: more and more people will die from heat, exposure to UV rays continues to increase, while air quality deteriorates and pollen allergies worsen. At the same time, heavy rainfall will become more frequent, alternating with extended dry periods.

Less gray, more green

But Linke is not there to upset the audience, but to present solutions. “These are all big challenges, but we can deal with them well,” she says, and explains how: under the motto “Green in the City”, the scientist presents the concept of “triple inner development”.

First of all, it is not about expanding cities further and further, but about making them compact and saving so-called grey energy, which is used to build houses. In doing so, it is important to use existing buildings and, if necessary, to renovate them instead of demolishing them. Linke recommends relying on renewable energies and renewable raw materials as much as possible.

The second dimension involves securing and developing green spaces. Plants are true all-rounders that have a positive effect on physical and mental health and biodiversity, and not least on climate regulation. 

Fewer cars, more car sharing

The third dimension is about climate-friendly mobility concepts with fewer cars and more public transport, footpaths and cycle paths, as well as car and bike sharing services. Since trees often only develop a noticeable cooling effect after 50 years, other solutions are more effective in the short and medium term: “We must try to make our cities less car-dependent”. It is crucial to reduce the number of parking spaces.

Finally, the researcher gives her audience the concise “3 - 30 - 300” formula: from every location in the city, you should be able to see at least three trees. 30 percent of the city's surface should be covered by treetops. And finally: the nearest park or green space should be no further than 300 meters away.

The timing could not have been better: In the USA, a right-wing populist wins the presidential election. In Berlin, the Traffic Light Coalition (the so called “Ampelkoalition”) breaks down due to disputes between the parties. And at the Heilbronn Bürger-Uni, a risk expert warns of the dangers of populism and calls on politicians to work together across party lines. Ortwin Renn is a professor of risk management and communication at the Research Institute for Sustainability (RIFS) at the Helmholtz Center in Potsdam. He is speaking at the 25th edition of the event, jointly organized by TUM Campus Heilbronn, Heilbronner Stimme and Dieter Schwarz Foundation, on “The Psychology of Risk”. Not all risks are the same—the audience quickly learns this at the event on the Bildungscampus Heilbronn, moderated by

Tobias Wieland, editor at the “Heilbronner Stimme” newspaper. First of all, there are differences between rich and poorer countries: While smoking, alcohol, lack of exercise and an unbalanced diet have long since become major risk factors in rich countries, infections, malnutrition and accidents at work continue to pose major threats in low-income countries.

Imminent and subtle dangers

Risks differ not only from country to country, but also in the way they occur. There is the imminent danger, for example in the form of a nuclear power plant: this carries a high potential for disaster—but it is highly unlikely that the worst case scenario will occur. There are subtle dangers, which develop slowly and unnoticeablybut are nonetheless threatening such as climate and environmental changes. Repressed dangers in form of a constant threat can be blocked out to a point where they are no longer perceived as such—e.g. the risk of a flood disaster in regions with frequent flooding. And there are imagined dangers that don't actually exist but are repeatedly portrayed as a threat by certain actors.

People perceive risks differently and react to them in individual ways. Renn distinguishes between three types: the first type generally tends to trust other people. The second type, on the other hand, believes no one, tries to avoid every risk and sticks to the status quo—a way of thinking that right-wing extremist parties exploit. The third type wants to form an opinion based on certain—often superficial—characteristics of the actors involved. Generally speaking, some risks—such as the consequences of an unhealthy lifestyle—are suppressed, while others are overestimated or underestimated. Risks that are overestimated include artificial additives in food and cosmetics, crime and accidents at work. By contrast, the dangers posed by microorganisms, political upheaval and various interrelated crises are often underestimated.

Complex and conflictual

Renn focuses on the latter, the so-called systemic risks: they are characterized by their high complexity, do not stop at borders between countries or fields of expertise, and trigger insecurity and conflicts. Examples include ecological hazards such as climate change and the decline in biodiversity, economical and social threats such as corruption, political polarization and resurgent imperialism, as well as sociocultural modernization risks such as increasing inequality or the threat to cultural identities.

But what are the solutions to these enormous challenges? We need to use fewer resources and reconcile the goals of effectiveness, efficiency, resilience and social justice, Renn demands. He explains: “We can only solve these conflicting goals if the various ministries work together to find a solution that is not optimal for anyone, but is the best for everyone.” This is precisely why the traffic light coalition failed. Last but not least, we have to realize that life quality also depends on cultural identity and on our ability to shape politics, the environment and the future.

From the regulars' table to the round table

In concrete terms, this means that formats must be created to educate people about probability theory so that they better understand that “nothing is just black and white, good or bad, true or false.” Learning forums must be set up to enable people to deal productively with uncertainty and conflict. And perhaps most importantly, “we need political and social counseling that gives us all the opportunity to help shape our environment. We have to move from the regulars' table to the round table.” Renn has had good experiences with precisely these types of formats: ”When people are given the opportunity to participate in environmental planning, they often change their behavior and try to work out constructive solutions.” The recording of the event can be found here. The next Bürger-Uni event will be on March 19, 2025, with Prof. Simone Linke. She will be talking about “The green city of the future”.

Alena Buyx, Professor of Ethics in Medicine and Health Technology at the Technical University of Munich (TUM), delivered a lecture as part of the “Bürger Uni” series titled "Horror or Savior? Medical Ethical Considerations on AI." She emphasized that the discussion around Artificial Intelligence (AI) is often hysterical and swings between extremes: "Some say AI is the best and will do everything for us... Others say it is the greatest threat to humanity." According to her, AI is "a genuine dual-use technology, like nuclear power. It enables fantastic things and has simultaneously destructive potential."

Buyx explained that AI cannot develop consciousness, surpass human intelligence, or act morally responsible: "They will remain machines. Our intelligence is much more than data processing." Additionally, the use of AI should enhance human development and not replace humans.

Using four areas of application—medicine, education, administration, and public discourse—Buyx highlighted both the opportunities and risks of AI. In medicine, AI can make significant progress in drug development or diagnosis: "It used to take years... Now it takes six hours." However, she warned against blind trust and emphasized the need for fair datasets.

In education, Buyx spoke about intelligent tutoring systems that can personalize learning for children and criticized invasive surveillance in Asian classrooms. In the field of administration, she sees much potential for AI applications that could support vital decision-making.

Buyx called for transparency and mandatory labeling of AI but rejected outright bans: "The technology itself is neither good nor bad." She stressed the importance of global minimum standards and human responsibility in using this technology ethically: "The final responsibility must lie with humans."

The next “Bürger Uni” is on 7 November. The evening's expert, Prof Ortwin Renn, will talk about "The psychology of risk: how people deal with uncertainty".

Lars Steinmetz, Professor of Genetics at Stanford University, on the podium of the Heilbronn Bürger-Uni

What would it be like if we could detect dangerous changes in our genetic make-up before we become ill? If we could cure them right at the cause, the genes? Or if we could immediately recognize when our blood values enter a critical range?

Much of this is already possible today, said Professor Lars Steinmetz at the Heilbronn Citizens' University at the Bildungscampus. At the event organized by the TUM Campus Heilbronn in cooperation with the Heilbronner Stimme and the Dieter Schwarz Foundation the Professor of Genetics at Stanford University presented three technologies that could prevent diseases.

Whole Genome Sequencing makes it possible to decode the human genome in order to identify risk variants in genes. Today it is used, for example, in the diagnosis of monogenetic diseases, in forensic analysis or in cancer medicine.

The second technology, known as Gene Scissors, makes it possible to cut out certain parts of the DNA and replace them with a healthy sequence. In this way, previously incurable diseases can be treated. Targeted therapy at the direct cause becomes possible and thus a permanent cure.

Biosensor Technology could intervene in advance. Sensors are implanted under the skin that measure certain blood values and send them to a smartphone. This allows dangerous deviations to be detected at an early stage. "In the future, we will certainly be wearing many sensors on, in and around our bodies," predicts Steinmetz.

Why is our society drifting apart? Ulrich Schnabel, business editor of the German newspaper Die Zeit, addressed this question at the last Bürger-Uni. In a well-filled auditorium on the Heilbronn educational campus, he showed how self-perception and the perception of others contribute to the division of society, because "egoists are always the others, never ourselves. Is solution hopeless? No, with the help of statistics, the expert appealed for the courage to be considerate and to be kind. Each individual influences a larger social circle than we suspect. Thus, one good deed can, directly and indirectly, motivate up to a million people to do the same. Ulrich Schnabel has hope for a return of the togetherness and every single visitor of this event now probably also. The next Citizens' Uni with the topic "Staying healthy: How Modern Technologies and Research Prevent Disease" will be held on November 9, 2023. The auditorium opens at 6 p.m., with the event beginning at 6:30 p.m. The speaker that evening will be genetics professor Lars Steinmetz from Stanford University School of Medicine.