Coproductive capacities: rethinking science-governance relations in a diverse world
Coproductive capacities: rethinking science-governance relations in a diverse world
复制标题
协同生产能力：重新思考多元化世界中的科学与治理关系
DOI：
10.5751/es-07188-200114
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
L. Lebel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Kerkhoff;L. Lebel
处理重大的环境变化问题需要在科学和治理之间建立有效的伙伴关系，但这一领域的工作很少审查可能或可能不产生这种伙伴关系的背景的多样性。在这个专题中，我们借鉴世界各地的经验，展示和调查不同能力和能力在将科学和治理结合在一起方面的后果。我们提出共同生产能力的概念，作为一个有用的新透镜，通过它来审查这些关系。协同生产能力是“科学资源和治理能力的结合，它决定了一个社会在各个层面上能够在多大程度上运作科学与公共、私营和民间社会机构和行为者之间的关系，以实现科学知情的社会变革”。这将科学与社会之间的关系从“差距”的概念重新塑造为相互联系和相互作用的概念（共同生产）;同时塑造这种动态联系中可能或不可能的社会基础（能力）。本特稿中的文章运用这一概念揭示了在特定地方解决全球问题时，支持和抑制高质量环境治理的社会、政治和制度条件。在这些文章中，我们认为五个主题对理解协同生产能力非常重要：历史，经验和感知;关系的质量（特别是在次优环境中）;跨尺度的分离;权力，利益和合法性;以及环境治理的替代途径。从共同生产能力的角度来看，可以帮助我们确定哪些干预措施最能促进采取科学知情但对当地敏感的环境治理办法。
Tackling major environmental change issues requires effective partnerships between science and governance, but relatively little work in this area has examined the diversity of settings from which such partnerships may, or may not, emerge. In this special feature we draw on experiences from around the world to demonstrate and investigate the consequences of diverse capacities and capabilities in bringing science and governance together. We propose the concept of coproductive capacities as a useful new lens through which to examine these relations. Coproductive capacity is “the combination of scientific resources and governance capability that shapes the extent to which a society, at various levels, can operationalize relationships between scientific and public, private, and civil society institutions and actors to effect scientifically-informed social change.” This recasts the relationships between science and society from notions of “gaps” to notions of interconnectedness and interplay (coproduction); alongside the societal foundations that shape what is or is not possible in that dynamic connection (capacities). The articles in this special feature apply this concept to reveal social, political, and institutional conditions that both support and inhibit high-quality environmental governance as global issues are tackled in particular places. Across these articles we suggest that five themes emerge as important to understanding coproductive capacity: history, experience, and perceptions; quality of relationships (especially in suboptimal settings); disjunct across scales; power, interests, and legitimacy; and alternative pathways for environmental governance. Taking a coproductive capacities perspective can help us identify which interventions may best enable scientifically informed, but locally sensitive approaches to environmental governance.