changing the physics of the inhomogeneous cosmological model. More ambitious and physically different in motivation are averaging strategies that effectively replace the inhomogeneous hypersurfaces and inhomogeneous tensor fields on these hypersurfaces by another, smoothed universe model [@klingon], [@zala05]. These latter techniques lead to further ‘intrinsic backreaction’ effects by, e.g. flowing averages on a bumpy geometry to averages on a constant–curvature ‘template universe’ as a fitting device. This can be nicely put into practice using the Ricci–Hamilton flow that renormalizes the averaged variables and leads to a ‘dressing’ of cosmological parameters by those additional ‘backreaction’ terms [@klingon],[@buchertcarfora:PRL].

With kinematical averaging we aim at an effective description of the kinematics of the inhomogeneous Universe, and we still encounter a number of scalar contributions that add up to the averaged matter sources in an inhomogeneous model (‘kinematical backreaction terms’) as a result of the fact that spatial averaging and time–evolution are non–commuting operations (not necessarily to be attributed to the nonlinearity of Einstein’s equations). Employing a perfect fluid source in the energy momentum tensor, those ‘backreaction terms’ comprise a contribution from averaged expansion and shear fluctuations (i.e., terms encoding extrinsic curvature of the hypersurfaces), the averaged 3–Ricci curvature (i.e, a term that encodes 