The Geopolitics of Climate Knowledge Mobilization
The Geopolitics of Climate Knowledge Mobilization
复制标题
气候知识动员的地缘政治
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
F. Méndez
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Katie Meehan;Nicole L. Klenk;F. Méndez
气候变化和可持续发展科学在范围上和跨学科性质上变得更加国际化，以回应人们日益增长的对科学知识直接影响集体行动和变革的期望。在本文中，我们超越科学与政策界面的理想化模型，来研究知识动员的社会过程和地缘政治动态。我们认为，与来自全球北方的基于证据的决策的“普遍”制度并行部署的跨学科研究的社会技术想象，掩盖了科学家和社会参与者的国际合作如何实际经历知识动员、其系统性障碍及其政策行动路径。通过对美洲跨学科研究项目的人种学研究，再加上对哥伦比亚的深入分析，我们揭示了参与者如何设想和体验知识动员的差异，并确定了持续存在的差异，这些差异削弱了研究人员影响决策和将气候知识融入更广泛的新自由主义发展范式的能力。研究结果指出了科学与政策的多种界面，每个界面都是由国家社会技术想象、发展优先事项和当地社会秩序塑造的。我们的结论是，为了了解气候和可持续发展知识在一个持续不平等和主导的世界中如何不均匀传播，需要对跨学科科学采取地缘政治方法。
Climate change and sustainability science have become more international in scope and transdisciplinary in nature, in response to growing expectations that scientific knowledge directly informs collective action and transformation. In this article, we move past idealized models of the science–policy interface to examine the social processes and geopolitical dynamics of knowledge mobilization. We argue that sociotechnical imaginaries of transdisciplinary research, deployed in parallel to “universal” regimes of evidence-based decision-making from the global North, conceal how international collaborations of scientists and societal actors actually experience knowledge mobilization, its systemic barriers, and its paths to policy action. Through ethnographic study of a transdisciplinary research program in the Americas, coupled with in-depth analysis of Colombia, we reveal divergences in how participants envision and experience knowledge mobilization and identify persistent disparities that diminish the capacity of researchers to influence decision-making and fit climate knowledge within broader neoliberal development paradigms. Results of the study point to a plurality of science–policy interface(s), each shaped by national sociotechnical imaginaries, development priorities, and local social orders. We conclude that a geopolitical approach to transdisciplinary science is necessary to understand how climate and sustainability knowledge circulates unevenly in a world marked by persistent inequality and dominance.