Scientific crafting of the climate change regime
Författare och institution:
Andreas Bjurström (Institutionen för globala studier, humanekologi)
Environmental Governance and Policy Implementation. Papers from the 8. Nordic Environmental Social Science Research Conference June 18-20 2007. Workshop 5, 2007 ( 115 )
Like political institutions and processes, the scientific community is in transition, characterised by diffusion, towards increasing complexity, decentralisation, competition and heterogeneity in and between institutions, actors and stakeholders involved in knowledge production. This has been conceptualised as “mode 2” and “triple helix”. A displacement from monodisciplinarity towards transdisciplinarity, i.e. a context of knowledge production that transgresses boundaries between disciplines as well as between the academic, public and private sector. This redistributes the actors’ prospects of controlling knowledge production and dissemination. Research aims and procedures are partly transformed through this new configuration of actors negotiating their interests and viewpoints. The societal dependence on scientific knowledge is at the same time increasing, especially in environmental regimes. Thus, scientific influence on politics increases, but the transition described above also increases the political influence on science.
These changing relations will in this paper be substantiated with the climate change regime. The aim is to explore how science participates in and construct the climate change regime and how characteristics of the regime affect policy formation and implementation. Theoretically the study will draw on discourse theory and actor network theory as well as cognitive and institutional oriented perspectives of knowledge production and policy formation. Empirically, results from a quantitative study of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will be used in combination with text analysis. However, the paper is primarily of a theoretical nature.
This approach can contribute to the understanding of why certain knowledge and actors dominate the discourse of climate change and why others are marginalised or excluded. For instance, how the common view of science as an objective and disinterested activity upheld by the IPCC can effectively coexist with extensive scientific involvement in the climate change regime. This reinforces the political power of science within the regime as well as strengthening the whole climate regime. Also, the discourse marginalises social sciences rendering lack of analysis of behaviour, values and politics. The strong dominance of natural scientific and economic knowledge production reinforces policy implementation strategies based on economics means of control and technical solutions.
Ämne (baseras på Högskoleverkets indelning av forskningsämnen):
Geovetenskap och miljövetenskap ->
TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ->
Annan naturresursteknik ->
Annan samhällsvetenskap ->
Övrig annan samhällsvetenskap ->
Teknik och social förändring
climate change, disciplinarity, science studies
Visa i Endnote-format