Climate change: lived experience, policy and public action
Climate change: lived experience, policy and public action
复制标题
DOI：
10.1108/ijccsm-04-2013-0040
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Wilson, Gordon
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Abbott, Dina;Wilson, Gordon
目的--本文件的目的是探讨生活经验作为科学提供的知识的补充对气候变化政策和干预的重要性。设计/方法/方法--这份概念性文件借鉴了气候变化背景下的几个方面：知识和权力；人的参与；“生活经验”的含义(及其与“当地/土著知识”的联系)；通过跨学科和跨学科调查获取生活经验；后正常科学；政策和干预的理性主义和公共行动办法。本文结合了他们不同的文献、作者以前的工作以及欧洲气候变化教育项目中的跨学科讨论。发现--理由是考虑到在气候变化政策和干预方面的实际经验，以及不这样做的危险。然而，这篇论文也指出了建立生活经验的有效性以及科学衍生知识的形式的挑战，以及以从业者可以获得的形式获取生活经验的实际挑战。报告最后认为，与传统的理性主义方法相比，公共行动的政策方法提供了更好的视角来分析气候科学的争议性，以及生活经验通过积极参与为辩论提供信息的潜力。研究限制/影响--没有关于气候变化的实证研究来解决研究关注的问题。这对于推进这篇论文的议程是必要的。实际意义--这篇论文提出了将基于政策制定和干预经验以及所需方法的证据正式化的理由。原创性/价值--这项工作在气候变化的背景下发展了生活经验的概念。它的知识公共行动理论为分析和应对气候变化方面的各种知识的挑战提供了一种新的手段。
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the importance of lived experiences, as complementary knowledge to that provided by the sciences, for policy and intervention on climate change.Design/methodology/approach - This conceptual paper draws on several strands within the context of climate change: knowledge and power; human engagement; the meaning of "lived experience" (and its association with "local/indigenous knowledge"); its capture through interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary inquiry; post-normal science; rationalist and public action approaches to policy and intervention. The paper combines these strands from their different literatures, previous work by the authors and interdisciplinary deliberation in a European climate change education project.Findings - The case is made for taking account of lived experiences in climate change policy and intervention, and the dangers of not doing so. The paper, however, also identifies the challenge of establishing the validity of lived experience alongside forms of scientifically derived knowledge, and the practical challenge of capturing it in a form that is accessible to practitioners. It concludes by arguing that a public action approach to policy provides a better lens than the conventional rationalist approach to analyse the contested nature of climate science and the potential of lived experience to inform debates through active engagement.Research limitations/implications - There has been no empirical study on climate change that addresses the research concerns. This would be necessary to forward the paper's agenda.Practical implications - The paper makes a case for formalising evidence that is based on lived experience in policy making and intervention, and the approach that is needed.Originality/value - The work develops the concept of lived experience in the context of climate change. Its public action theory of knowledge provides a novel means of analysing and meeting the challenge of diverse knowledge on climate change.