Emotional conflicts in rational forestry: Towards a research agenda for understanding emotions in environmental conflicts
Emotional conflicts in rational forestry: Towards a research agenda for understanding emotions in environmental conflicts
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.forpol.2012.09.002
复制
发表时间：
2013-08-01
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Lawrence, Anna
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Buijs, Arjen;Lawrence, Anna
在审视森林周围的社会冲突时，林务工作者和研究人员都倾向于将冲突视为与不同的知识、价值观和利益相关的理性差异。在过去的几个世纪里，在森林具有直接生计重要性的地区，这一直是解释争端的有力方法。然而，对于许多利益相关者来说，包括当地社区、环保人士和林务人员本身，感受和情绪也是冲突的相关组成部分。在本文中，我们认为，自然和森林“合理化”的总体趋势已将情感排除在视线之外，并使其失去合法性。通过我们自己在荷兰和英国的研究中的例子，我们认为，感情需要是可见的和合法的，才能解决冲突的根本原因。我们首先研究研究人员、管理者和政治家如何将冲突视为理性的。我们寻求对情感的“隐藏”本质及其在森林科学和管理因更广泛的现代化进程而实现的合理化过程中被贴上“非理性”标签的解释。我们建议重新引入情感，以表明冲突不仅是基于不同的观点，而且实际上是参与的一个维度。我们建议将情感纳入研究的森林冲突的四个方面，所有这些都与林业以外的文献相关：森林管理不同观点的情感来源、情感对信息处理的影响、情感对社会运动的推动力以及情感在抗议升级中的作用。 (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. 保留所有权利。
When looking at social conflicts around forests, both foresters and researchers tend to frame conflicts as rational differences related to diverging knowledge, values, and interests. In past centuries, and in areas where the forests are of immediate livelihood importance, this has been a powerful approach to explaining disputes. However for many stakeholders, including local communities, environmental campaigners and foresters themselves, feelings and emotions are also relevant components of a conflict. In this paper we argue that an overall tendency to 'rationalise' nature and forests has pushed emotion out of sight, and delegitimised it. Using examples from our own research in-The Netherlands and the UK, we argue that feelings need to be visible and legitimate, in order to address the underlying causes of conflict. We begin the paper by examining how conflicts have been framed as rational, by researchers, managers and politicians. We seek explanations for both the 'hidden' nature of emotions and their labelling as 'irrational' in the rationalisation of forest science and management as a result of wider modernisation processes. We propose bringing emotions back in, to show how conflict is not merely based in diverging views, but is in fact a dimension of engagement. We suggest four aspects of forest conflicts in which emotions should be incorporated in research, all connected to literature from outside forestry: emotional sources of diverging views on forest management, emotional influences on the processing of information, the motivating power of emotions for social movements and the role of emotions in the escalation of protests. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.