Suchergebnisse

26 p. ; Associated with the willingness to classify environmental issues as 'wicked', is a wavering of confidence in analytical models of 'resource management' in favour of social process models of 'environmental governance.' There is an attendant shift in epistemological perspectives for the mobilisation of knowledge in support of society's collective deliberation and decision making, with governance fields increasingly espousing a 'dialogic' approach. Looking through an 'interactive governance' lens, this article highlights the diversity of different forms of dialogue for the mobilisation of knowledge, before focussing on those forms that: (a) are inclusive of a wide spectrum of knowledge systems; (b) bring together knowledge through reciprocal dialogue; and (c) allow for the negotiation of knowledge quality in terms of 'credibility, salience and legitimacy.' It then unpacks and compares three specific approaches for the dialogic mobilisation of knowledge; deliberative democracy, collaborative learning and post-normal science, and suggests a dialogue framework that highlights the strong points of each as credible, legitimate and salient relative to limitations or 'blind spots' of the others. ; Dans la mesure de l'acceptation d'une caractérisation des enjeux de changement environnementaux comme 'méchants', on constate un affaiblissement de confiance aux modèles analytiques de 'gestion rationnelle de ressources naturelles' et une disponibilité croissante vers des approches de la 'gouvernance environnementale' en termes de processus social. Il y a, par corollaire, un changement de perspective épistémologique concernant la mobilisation de connaissance pour aider la décision et la délibération collectives, avec la tendance vers des approches 'dialogiques'. Le présent article, dans une perspective de 'gouvernance interactive', insiste tout d'abord sur la diversité de formes de dialogue pour la mobilisation de connaissances avant de focaliser sur des formes qui (i) se veulent inclusives d'une large spectre de ...

26 p. ; Associated with the willingness to classify environmental issues as 'wicked', is a wavering of confidence in analytical models of 'resource management' in favour of social process models of 'environmental governance.' There is an attendant shift in epistemological perspectives for the mobilisation of knowledge in support of society's collective deliberation and decision making, with governance fields increasingly espousing a 'dialogic' approach. Looking through an 'interactive governance' lens, this article highlights the diversity of different forms of dialogue for the mobilisation of knowledge, before focussing on those forms that: (a) are inclusive of a wide spectrum of knowledge systems; (b) bring together knowledge through reciprocal dialogue; and (c) allow for the negotiation of knowledge quality in terms of 'credibility, salience and legitimacy.' It then unpacks and compares three specific approaches for the dialogic mobilisation of knowledge; deliberative democracy, collaborative learning and post-normal science, and suggests a dialogue framework that highlights the strong points of each as credible, legitimate and salient relative to limitations or 'blind spots' of the others. ; Dans la mesure de l'acceptation d'une caractérisation des enjeux de changement environnementaux comme 'méchants', on constate un affaiblissement de confiance aux modèles analytiques de 'gestion rationnelle de ressources naturelles' et une disponibilité croissante vers des approches de la 'gouvernance environnementale' en termes de processus social. Il y a, par corollaire, un changement de perspective épistémologique concernant la mobilisation de connaissance pour aider la décision et la délibération collectives, avec la tendance vers des approches 'dialogiques'. Le présent article, dans une perspective de 'gouvernance interactive', insiste tout d'abord sur la diversité de formes de dialogue pour la mobilisation de connaissances avant de focaliser sur des formes qui (i) se veulent inclusives d'une large spectre de systèmes de connaissance ; (ii) visent à réunir de disparate contributions à la connaissance par mécanismes de dialogue réciproque ; et (iii) soutiennent la négociation en société de la qualité de connaissance en termes de crédibilité, saillance et légitimité. Ensuite, il expose et compare trois approches spécifiques pour une mobilisation dialogique de connaissance -- la démocratie délibérative, l'apprentissage collaboratif et, la science post-normale -- et, suggère un cadre dialogique qui met en évidence les points forts de chacune (comme crédible, saillante et légitimé) relatifs aux limites et points d'aveuglement des autres.

Under embargo until: 2021-01-22 ; Citizen science is put forward as a method for extending science to include communities in learning about, and adapting to, climate variability and change in the places they live. But it is difficult to find evidence of how citizen science influences climate adaptation governance. The citizen science field lacks the assessment frameworks and empirical studies for understanding impacts on citizen scientists' common adaptive capacities for supporting social processes of adaptation. In addressing this gap, this paper describes a citizen science initiative carried out with communities in northeast Bangladesh, and assesses how it contributed to local governance capacity for climate adaptation. In doing so, it develops and tests a novel framework that assesses citizen science's contributions a high-quality knowledge base, and to five different capital stocks. The assessment saw high increases in citizen scientists' human capital relative to their awareness and understanding of local rainfall; learning that they applied in adaptive practices at work and at home, and local leadership. There were also high increases in social capital among citizen scientists, but more moderate increases in technological and resource capital, and in political capital. There was some evidence of the citizen science being used to support public adaptation decision-making. The initiative had the least impact on institutional capital. ; acceptedVersion

Climate services' main function has been to provide technical scientific evidence for decision-making in formal institutions. This article makes a case for recognising the diverse functions and meanings of climate services across the spectrum of institutions constituting climate governance. The article reports on research that identified climate services needs for building resilience in Bergen city (Norway) through a collaborative back-casting workshop with actors variously engaged in climate governance. Participants' discussions raised four key observations on climate services. First, they saw the potential for using climate information in a diverse set of formal and informal institutions. Second, they considered how to adapt information to these diverse settings. Third, they looked at how information could enhance existing initiatives, rather than demanding 'new' products. And fourth, participants' proposed climate services highlighted their diverse functions, and led the authors to suggest classifying services according to their principal functions. The article finishes by proposing a field of 'social climate services' that configures relationships between scientists and social actors, built on technologies of humility, for enriching the ongoing culturally and politically charged debates and practices around climatic change in informal institutional settings. Social climate services function can include enabling people to voice their concerns, learn, critically reflect on changes to culture and identity, build social networks, and try out new practices.

There are numerous challenges to mobilising high quality knowledge in support of climate adaptation. Urgent adaptive action often has to be taken on the basis of imperfect information, with the risk of maladaptive consequences. These issues of knowledge quality can be particularly acute in vulnerable developing countries like Bangladesh, where there can be less capacity for producing and using climate knowledge. This paper argues that climate change adaptation in places like Bangladesh would benefit from a more self-conscious critical review of the knowledge systems mobilised in support of action, and suggests that 'knowledge quality assessment' (KQA) tools can structure this review. It presents a desktop assessment of information used for climate change adaptation projects in Sylhet Division in Bangladesh, steered by the six themes of the 'Guidance for Uncertainty Assessment and Communication' KQA tool. The assessment found important differences in approaches to mobilising knowledge, particularly between governmental and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). It demonstrated that problem framing has an impact on project success; projects that adopt a narrow techno-scientific framing can lead to significant adverse side effects. Recognising this some projects are engaging stakeholders in framing adaptation. It found a lack of national policy Guidance on the use of indicators or appraisal of uncertainty, seeing government agencies fall back on their risk-based calculations, and NGOs attempt to identify indicators and uncertainties via community engagement, with mixed success. Moreover, the adaptation knowledge base is relatively disintegrated, despite tentative steps toward its consolidation and appraisal, potentially related to on-going friction impeding vertical communication within government, and horizontal communication between government, NGOs and stakeholders. This all suggests that the Bangladeshi practices at the adaptation science-policy interface can benefit from reflection on KQA criteria; reflection ...

Abstract
Climate change adaptation has increasingly come to be conceptualized as a place-based social process, in large part mediated by the local cultural context. The specificity of adaptation has called for partnerships between scientific and local communities to "co-produce" knowledge of climate variability (weather) and longer-term climate change. However, this raises numerous methodological challenges, including how to elicit the representations, knowledge, and cultural meanings of weather that are tacit to people in a community, and represent them in an explicit form that can be shared in a process of "co-production". Such work demands careful attention to the way tightly intertwined knowledge systems continuously rebuild representations of climate in a place, and how these knowledge systems are also intertwined with values and the exercise of power. This paper takes up this challenge and explores the potential offered by theories and methods of narrative. Looking at a research project "co-producing" knowledge of weather and impacts in northeast Bangladesh, this paper describes the experience of running narrative interviews with communities there, and how these narratives were analyzed along four themes to contribute to the co-production process. These themes included 1) the weather phenomena and impacts important to local communities, 2) how weather provides meaning and identity in that place, 3) how community actors produce and share weather knowledge, and 4) the climate-related narratives pervading the community. In sharing this experience, this paper seeks to fulfil a demand for more detailed practical accounts of narrative methods in climate adaptation research, particularly for knowledge co-production.