Suchergebnisse

Acknowledgements -- Contents -- Biographical Notes -- Chapter 1 Introduction: Transdisciplinary Environmental Engagement in Practice -- Abstract -- 1.1 The Difference of Transdisciplinarity -- 1.2 Challenges in Transdisciplinary Research -- 1.3 Environmental Competency Groups (ECGs) -- 1.4 Working with Computer Models -- 1.5 From Flooding to Drought -- 1.6 The Kennet ECG -- 1.7 Making the Conversations -- Chapter 2 The Professors: Sarah Whatmore and Paul Whitehead in Conversation About the Kennet ECG -- Abstract -- 2.1 First Impressions of the Conversation with the Professors -- Chapter 3 The Postdocs: Eric Sarmiento and Mohammad Mortazavi-Naeini in Conversation About the Kennet ECG -- Abstract -- 3.1 First Impressions of the Conversation with the Postdocs -- Chapter 4 The Mixed Encounter: Gemma Coxon and Charlotte Hitchmough in Conversation About the Kennet ECG -- Abstract -- 4.1 First Impressions of the Conversation in the Mixed Encounter -- Chapter 5 Conclusion: Transdisciplinarity in Practice -- Abstract -- 5.1 Conversation Specific Insights -- 5.2 Shared Experience and Ideas -- 5.3 New Questions for Transdisciplinarity -- 5.4 Transdisciplinary Experience

The uptake of scientific computer models in water management is challenging. Scientists often face calls to improve stakeholder engagement procedures. However, the involvement of representatives of water management agencies has been common practice in scientific projects for at least a decade. It is therefore questionable whether more stakeholder involvement would lead to greater use of scientific models in water management. This study suggests that computer modeling has historically developed differently in water science and water management. Scientific research has focused on continuous improvement of model process representation, while water management has emphasised usability. Today, the reliance on modeling software packages in water management, exacerbated by the dynamics in the field, mitigates against the adoption of new scientific modeling tools.

This article argues that the influence of heteronormativity on the conceptualization of women and technology in feminist constructivist technology studies creates serious problems for the analysis. This research aims to understand the coproduction of gender and technology in society, but does not approach the two elements in a symmetrical fashion. Hence, ethnographic studies can only exemplify how the gender of technology producers is reflected in the technology created. Masculine gender identity is stabilized as a cause for the masculinity of a technology that is shaped by social relationships. The criticism is fleshed out in a close examination of case study accounts of ethnographies among producers and users of technology. It is argued that a habitual reproduction of heteronormativity, present in the surrounding culture and in the technological communities studied, has prevented the adoption of approaches to the subject conducive to the objective of this feminist research. Acknowledging that destabilizing gender can undermine the critical thrust of feminist critique, the paper turns towards queer theory for ideas about how to produce criticism that does not rely on the stability of identity. The article closes with suggesting how a queer feminist approach could contribute to different readings of life with technology.

It has been convincingly argued that computer simulation modeling differs from traditional science. If we understand simulation modeling as a new way of doing science, the manner in which scientists learn about the world through models must also be considered differently. This article examines how researchers learn about environmental processes through computer simulation modeling. Suggesting a conceptual framework anchored in a performative philosophical approach, we examine two modeling projects undertaken by research teams in England, both aiming to inform flood risk management. One of the modeling teams operated in the research wing of a consultancy firm, the other were university scientists taking part in an interdisciplinary project experimenting with public engagement. We found that in the first context the use of standardized software was critical to the process of improvisation, the obstacles emerging in the process concerned data and were resolved through exploiting affordances for generating, organizing, and combining scientific information in new ways. In the second context, an environmental competency group, obstacles were related to the computer program and affordances emerged in the combination of experience-based knowledge with the scientists' skill enabling a reconfiguration of the mathematical structure of the model, allowing the group to learn about local flooding.