How cognitive links and decision-making capacity shape sectoral experts’ recognition of climate knowledge for adaptation
How cognitive links and decision-making capacity shape sectoral experts’ recognition of climate knowledge for adaptation
复制标题
认知联系和决策能力如何影响部门专家对适应气候知识的认识
作者：
M. Skelton
科学的气候知识往往被认为是适应气候变化的一个关键因素。研究人员以个别部门和机构为重点，就如何根据机构文化和优先事项重新构建气候知识提出了见解。本研究通过比较四个部门-绿地管理，建筑技术，空间规划和健康-如何感知，判断，转移和适当的城市热浪知识，以及提出了什么样的适应方案，扩展了这种奖学金。基于半结构化的采访，文献资料和观察的两个研讨会收集在两个瑞士城市，我借鉴Eviatar Zerubavel和他的“文化认知社会学”的工作，强调如何集体共享模式的识别和思维的指导和促进人类的判断。我发现两个因素影响知识占用。一方面，知识的形成层面强调，当一个部门与气候科学分享关键概念时，专家们对气候知识的理解是相似的。如果缺少这种“认知联系”，那么关于热浪如何影响专家工作的答案就会更加多样化。另一方面，知识的行为维度突出表明，专家对适应的渴望受到不同的技术、法律的和社会可能性的影响。当专家的决策范围很大时，气候知识的吸收就更具有流动性。通过更明确地了解各部门在将气候知识纳入其工作方面的差异，本研究报告提醒人们，只有适当的知识才对部门专家有价值。
Scientific climate knowledge is often argued to be a key ingredient in climate adaptation. Focusing on individual sectors and institutions, researchers have given insights as to how climate knowledge is reframed according to institutional cultures and priorities. This study extends such scholarship by comparing how four sectors—greenspace management, building technology, spatial planning, and health—perceive, judge, transfer, and appropriate knowledge on urban heatwaves, and what adaptation options are proposed. Based on semi-structured interviews, documentary materials and observations of two workshops collected in two Swiss cities, I draw on Eviatar Zerubavel and his ‘cultural cognitive sociology’ whose work emphasises how collectively shared patterns of recognition and thinking guide and facilitate human judgement. I find two factors to influence knowledge appropriation. On the one hand, the formative dimension of knowledge underscores that experts understand climate knowledge similarly when a sector shares key concepts with climate science. If such ‘cognitive links’ are missing, the answers on how heatwaves impact experts’ work are more varied. On the other hand, the performative dimension of knowledge highlights that experts’ eagerness to adapt is influenced by diverging technical, legal, and social possibilities. When experts’ decision scope is large, then uptake of climate knowledge is more fluid. With a more explicit understanding of why sectors differ in their appropriation and integration of climate knowledge into their work, this study is a reminder that only fitting knowledge is of value to sectoral experts.
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Leitner, Helga;Sheppard, Eric;Colven, Emma
通讯作者：
Colven, Emma