The technique is never neutral. How methodological choices condition the generation of narratives for sustainability
Autor: | Jeroen P. van der Sluijs, Lorenzo Benini, Mario Giampietro, Silvio Funtowicz, Matthias Kaiser, Andrea Saltelli, Erik S. Reinert |
---|---|
Přispěvatelé: | Environmental Sciences |
Jazyk: | angličtina |
Rok vydání: | 2020 |
Předmět: |
narrative
010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences Controversy studies Circular economy Green growth European environment agency media_common.quotation_subject Geography Planning and Development 010501 environmental sciences Management Monitoring Policy and Law honeybee 01 natural sciences Insectageddon Bioeconomics human experiment Ethical matrices Honeybees Reflexivity Quality (business) Narrative Integrated assessment Sociology human Post normal science Set (psychology) Heterodox economics 0105 earth and related environmental sciences media_common Ethics language nonhuman Sensitivity auditing Nexus water-energy-food article Transitions economics Post-normal science Decarbonization Relational ecology Epistemology hydropower Sustainability Food ethics ecology Non-ricardian economics |
Zdroj: | Environmental Science and Policy Environmental Science and Policy, 106, 87. Elsevier Ltd Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
ISSN: | 1462-9011 |
Popis: | Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu CEX2019-000940-M How to tackle uncertainties and ensure quality in integrated assessment for sustainability? To what extent does the choice of the methodology condition the narrative produced by the analysis? The present work argues that the two questions are tightly coupled. The technique is never neutral. If we are the tools of our tools, as suggested by Thoreau, then it can also be said that language is not only a vehicle for communication, it is the driver as well. For this reason, in sustainability assessment it is not unusual to discern a close relationship between arguments made and methods adopted. In the present work a set of six reflexive analytical tools - we call them lenses - is suggested which could be pooled to the effect to appraise and improve the quality of integrated assessment and the resulting sustainability narratives, and to alleviate the constraints of the method-argument dependency. None of the lenses is new and each has been used before. Never have they been used together. The lenses are (i) Post-normal science (PNS), (ii) Controversy studies, (iii) Sensitivity auditing, (iv) Bioeconomics, (v) Ethics of science for governance, and (vi) Non-Ricardian economics. The six lenses are illustrated together with a set of case/narratives/arguments. The lenses allow some narratives - or methodologies - to be shown as either implausible or inadequate, and new narratives to be developed to tackle pressing sustainability issues, which expand the horizon of possible strategies for a solution. |
Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
Externí odkaz: |
Pro tento záznam nejsou dostupné žádné jednotky.