Community science: A typology and its implications for governance of social-ecological systems
Community science: A typology and its implications for governance of social-ecological systems
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.envsci.2020.01.019
复制
发表时间：
2020-04-01
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
Armitage, Derek
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Charles, Anthony;Loucks, Laura;Armitage, Derek
全球日益认识到社区科学的作用-由地方社区驱动和控制的科学研究和监测，其特点是基于地方的知识、社会学习、集体行动和赋权。特别是，社区科学可以支持社会生态系统的转型，并帮助实现更好的生态系统和治理之间的“配合”，在地方和更高层次的决策。本文借鉴了三个例子的社区作为核心的行为者在知识共同生产的过程中，提出了一个类型学的社区科学，并推导出一套关键的原则/成功的条件。这种类型涉及三种社会学习模式，其中社区通过以下方式获得科学知识：（1）与外部机构合作，（2）利用内部志愿者科学专长，和/或（3）雇用（或承包）内部专业科学专长。所有这些模式都有一个共同的关键特征，即当地社区决定他们希望与谁合作，在每种情况下，社会学习都是根本。促进社区科学的一些条件包括：社区驱动和社区控制;各种领导模式的灵活性;与地方和集体价值观的联系;赋权、机构和集体行动;可信的信任;当地知识;以及与治理的联系。社区科学不是在地方一级实现变革的灵丹妙药，需要对社区科学如何帮助填补治理空白进行严格评估。尽管如此，全球范围内大量的经验表明，地方社区如何有效地利用社区科学，以符合基于生态系统的管理和地方管理的更广泛趋势的方式，实现更好的保护和生计成果。
There is an increasing recognition globally of the role to be played by community science-scientific research and monitoring driven and controlled by local communities, and characterized by place-based knowledge, social learning, collective action and empowerment. In particular, community science can support social-ecological system transformation, and help in achieving better 'fit' between ecological systems and governance, at local and higher levels of decision making. This paper draws on three examples of communities as central actors in the process of knowledge co-production to present a typology of community science, and to deduce a set of key principles/conditions for success. The typology involves three social learning models in which the community acquires scientific knowledge by (1) engaging with external bodies, (2) drawing on internal volunteer scientific expertise, and/or (3) hiring (or contracting) in-house professional scientific expertise. All of these models share the key characteristic that the local community decides with whom they wish to engage, and in each case, social learning is fundamental. Some conditions that facilitate community science include: community-driven and community-control; flexibility across leadership models; connection to place and collective values; empowerment, agency and collective action; credible trust; local knowledge; and links to governance. Community science is not a panacea for effecting change at the local level, and there is need for critical assessment of how it can help to fill governance gaps. Nevertheless, a considerable body of experience globally illustrates how local communities are drawing effectively on community science for better conservation and livelihood outcomes, in a manner compatible with broader trends toward ecosystem-based management and local stewardship.