Framing the frame: Cause and effect in climate-related migration

Framing the frame: Cause and effect in climate-related migration
复制标题

构建框架:气候相关移民的因果关系

DOI:
10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106016
复制
发表时间:
2022
期刊:
影响因子:
6.9
通讯作者:
Ssekajja, Godfreyb
Ssekajja, Godfreyb
中科院分区:
经济学1区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Cottier, Fabien;Flahaux, Marie-Laurence;Ribot, Jesse;Seager, Richard;Ssekajja, Godfreyb

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

分析框架塑造了我们在气候相关危机中识别的因果关系。在这里,我们对比的例子从两个主要类别的分析框架,我们标记为“环境驱动器”和“社会因果关系”,以提请注意每个框架的因果关系的影响。我们通过“气候相关”移民的案例来探索每个框架。文章说明,每个分析框架进行隐含的因果假设,预示因果关系的调查结果。分析可以在任何一类框架内进行;然而,无论结果多么严格,仍然取决于所选择的框架及其假设。一个环境驱动力模型将保持社会背景为固定的,并量化气候变化措施的增量损害,而一个社会因果关系模型将显示损害是如何产生的社会脆弱性及其前因。后者可能表明,某个特定的气候事件可能对安全的人口没有影响,但对脆弱群体造成了巨大损害,因此,损害不能完全归咎于气候事件。框架选择是规范性的,因为框架预示着原因、潜在的解决方案、责任所在地和建议的政策干预。本文提出的问题是如何在这两个框架之间进行富有成效的对话,并建议明确模型的因果倾向,以便它们所表明的结果可以被理解为部分模型的选择。由于因果结论意味着政策选择,在探讨其他模型将指出的方向时明确假设,将有助于扩大可能的政策应对措施的范围。
Analytic frames shape thecausalitywe identify in climate-related crises. Here we contrast examples from two primary categories of analytic frames, which we label ‘Environmental-Drivers’ and ‘Social-Causal’to draw attention to the implications of each frame with regards to causality. We explore each frame via cases of ‘climate-related’ migration. The article illustrates that each analytic frame carries implicit causal assumptions that prefigure causal findings. Analysis can be done within either category of frame; yet the findings, however rigorous, remain contingent on the chosen frame and its assumptions. AnEnvironmental-Driversmodel will hold the social context as fixed and quantify the incremental damages of a measure of climate change, while aSocial-Causalmodel will show how damages are generated by social vulnerability and its antecedents. The latter may show that a given climate event may have no effect on a secure population but lead to massive damages among the vulnerable – and thus that the damage cannot be solely attributed to the climate event. Frame choice is normative as frames prefigure causes, potential solutions, the locus of responsibility, and suggested policy interventions. The article poses the question of how a productive dialogue between these two frames can be generated and recommends that causal predisposition of models be made explicit so that the findings they indicate can be understood as partial to the choice of models. As causal findings imply policy options, making the assumptions explicit while exploring the directions that other models would point in, will help broaden the range of possible policy responses.
过程追踪与因果推理
DOI: --
发表时间: 2010
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
Andrew Bennett
通讯作者: Andrew Bennett
确定撒哈拉以南非洲气候信息服务用户及其需求:学习议程
DOI: --
发表时间: 2018
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
Helen M. Rosko
通讯作者: Helen M. Rosko
什么是分析性叙述?
DOI: --
发表时间: 2016
期刊: Workshop on Computational Models of Narrative
影响因子: --
作者:
P. Mongin
通讯作者: P. Mongin
萨赫勒地区的焦虑气氛:排外时代的移民
DOI: 10.1215/08992363-7816293
发表时间: 2020
期刊: Public Culture
影响因子: 1.5
作者:
J. Ribot;Papa Faye;M. Turner
通讯作者: M. Turner
DOI: 10.1177/030913259301700103
发表时间: 1993-03-01
影响因子: 7.1
作者:
WATTS, MJ;BOHLE, HG
通讯作者: BOHLE, HG