Examining the Influence of Positionality in Evaluating Collaborative Progress in Natural Resource Management: Reflections of an Academic and a Practitioner
Examining the Influence of Positionality in Evaluating Collaborative Progress in Natural Resource Management: Reflections of an Academic and a Practitioner
复制标题
检验立场对评估自然资源管理合作进展的影响：学者和实践者的反思
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Tammy Randall
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Cheng;Tammy Randall
摘要 在本文中，我们对作为学者和实践者的我们如何以及为何对自然资源管理的协作进展得出不同的评估进行了反思性检验。我们将这次检查定位于我们长期参与设计、适应性管理和参与美国科罗拉多州西部安康帕格里高原合作森林恢复项目。借鉴定性社会科学研究中的“立场”概念，我们披露了我们各自在协作过程中的动机、假设、角色和权力。评估合作进展的差异源于我们各自的专业定位。对于学术界来说，指导兴趣是测试理论并促进其应用研究所的成功；对于从业者来说，动机是建立信任，让其现场工作人员能够灵活地实施管理行动并展示作为机构直线官员的有效性。这些认识论差异引起了人们对跨学科方法从共同实践中产生知识的重要性的关注，首先是努力明确披露和尊重源自各方个人和职业传记以及机构规范的不同利益、假设和参考框架。这种反身性对于推进自然资源管理合作的知识至关重要。
ABSTRACT In this paper, we present a reflexive examination of how and why we, an academic and a practitioner, arrive at different evaluations of collaborative progress in natural resource management. We situate this examination in our long-standing involvement in designing, adaptively managing, and participating in the Uncompahgre Plateau collaborative forest restoration project in western Colorado, USA. Drawing on the concept of “positionality” in qualitative social science research, we disclose our respective motivations, assumptions, roles, and power relative to the collaborative process. The differences in evaluating collaborative progress stem from our respective professional positionality. For the academic, the guiding interest was to test theory and promote success for his applied research institute; for the practitioner, the motivation was to build trust to allow her field staff the flexibility to implement management actions and demonstrate effectiveness as an agency line officer. These epistemological differences draw attention to the importance of transdisciplinary approaches to producing knowledge from shared practice, starting with efforts to explicitly disclose and honor differing interests, assumptions, and frames of reference stemming from each party’s personal and professional biographies and institutional norms. This reflexivity is essential to advancing knowledge about collaboration in natural resource management.