On the ground of facts.
With Socratic curiosity. In worldwide discourse with critical minds.
4π draws its knowledge from exchanges with experts in the international community. Another source of data are specialist publications. In the case of climate, for example, these are the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and individual publications from specialist journals such as Reviews of Geophysics or Nature Climate Change. A broader knowledge base is provided by interdisciplinary journals such as Nature, Science, or the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Statistical data are taken from reports of relevant research institutions (e.g. BGR, WEC, EMPA, NOAA, IEA, UNO).
Real problems can only be solved through collaboration between different disciplines. Climate protection, for example, requires physical technologies such as the solar cell, economic know-how for affordability, and engineering knowledge for security of supply. Questions of social acceptance, as addressed by sociology or political science, are also taken into account.
Most problems are not monocausal. That is, there is not just one cause whose control could solve the problem. Almost always, the interaction of many factors causes the problem. Only a holistic view that captures the interconnectedness of the causes has a chance of finding a solution. One example is the climate problem, which cannot be solved without taking into account global poverty and continuing population growth.
4π is dedicated to the factual, scientific, ideology-neutral analysis of problems. Particularly when it comes to climate, factual discussion is often hampered by the formation of camps in society. 4π strives for neutrality and communicates with both sides in case of controversy. 4π holds the postulate that natural science is not beholden to political or social goals, but must provide information and explanations to the best of its knowledge and belief.
4π collaborates with scientists and experts from all over the world. Problem analysis from a global perspective is indispensable today. For example, the EU's taxonomy regulation can only be understood from the international Paris climate protection agreement. Projects like Desertec may even fail if they misjudge the conditions in the countries concerned.