Accountability and the academy: producing knowledge about the human dimensions of climate change
Accountability and the academy: producing knowledge about the human dimensions of climate change
复制标题
问责制和学术界：提供有关气候变化对人类影响的知识
DOI：
10.1111/1467-9655.12162
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
T. Sanders
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. F. Hall;T. Sanders
对问责制和“有影响力”研究的呼吁从根本上重塑了学术界，催生了大量关于新自由主义问责制及其有害影响的批判性学术研究。但这些呼吁也激发了其他受到较少批评关注的机构形式和做法。其中包括通过跨学科、与利益攸关方合作和解决现实问题承诺问责的新形式的科学。本文考虑了这种可问责科学的一个例子：气候变化领域的人类维度研究。这一研究努力产生了令人惊讶的结果，包括不加批判地采用有争议的欧美关于传统他者的观点。在探索这是如何发生的过程中，文章考虑了如何在这个领域内管理理论和学科多样性，以及使气候科学和科学家能够共同工作的组织逻辑。我们最终认为，负责任的科学——就像其他新自由主义的问责模式一样——可以产生没有人可以被追究责任的结果。
Calls for accountability and ‘impactful’ research are fundamentally reshaping the academy, giving rise to a large, critical scholarship on neoliberal regimes of accountability and their pernicious effects. But these calls also animate other institutional forms and practices that have received less critical attention. These include new forms of science that promise accountability through interdisciplinarity, collaborating with stakeholders, and addressing real-world problems. This article considers one example of such accountable science: human dimensions of climate change field research. This research endeavour has produced surprising results, including the uncritical adoption of controversial Euro-American ideas about traditional Others. In exploring how this has come about, the article considers how theoretical and disciplinary diversity are managed within this arena, and the organizing logics that enable climate sciences and scientists to work together. We ultimately argue that accountable science – like other neoliberal modes of accountability – can produce outcomes for which no one can be held to account.