{"title":"Is it only about science and policy? The 'intergovernmental epistemologies' of global environmental governance.","authors":"Matteo De Donà","doi":"10.1057/s41268-022-00276-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although international actors operating under the United Nations umbrella put much faith in the possibility of bridging science and policy through various institutional arrangements, research in the Science and Technology Studies (STS) tradition suggests that different <i>civic epistemologies</i> revolve around environmental degradation issues. <i>Civic epistemologies</i>, which imply peculiar understandings of knowledge across cultures, are not easily bridged. This paper contends that conflicting (civic) epistemologies inevitably emerge in epistemic debates at the intergovernmental level, with strong implications for how science and knowledge are dealt with and understood in environmental negotiations. Drawing on the experience of global soil and land governance and building on the idiom of <i>civic epistemologies</i>, the concept of <i>intergovernmental epistemologies</i> is introduced as an analytical tool to capture the diverging ways of appreciating and validating knowledge in intergovernmental settings. Placing state actors and their perspectives center stage, <i>intergovernmental epistemologies</i> account for the tensions, contestations and politicisation processes of international institutional settings dealing with environmental issues. The paper concludes discussing the consequences of <i>intergovernmental epistemologies</i> for the study of global environmental governance: it cautions about overreliance on approaches based on learning and all-encompassing discourses, emphasizing the value of using STS-derived concepts to investigate the complexity of international environmental negotiations.</p>","PeriodicalId":46698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Relations and Development","volume":"26 1","pages":"86-110"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9519403/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Relations and Development","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-022-00276-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Although international actors operating under the United Nations umbrella put much faith in the possibility of bridging science and policy through various institutional arrangements, research in the Science and Technology Studies (STS) tradition suggests that different civic epistemologies revolve around environmental degradation issues. Civic epistemologies, which imply peculiar understandings of knowledge across cultures, are not easily bridged. This paper contends that conflicting (civic) epistemologies inevitably emerge in epistemic debates at the intergovernmental level, with strong implications for how science and knowledge are dealt with and understood in environmental negotiations. Drawing on the experience of global soil and land governance and building on the idiom of civic epistemologies, the concept of intergovernmental epistemologies is introduced as an analytical tool to capture the diverging ways of appreciating and validating knowledge in intergovernmental settings. Placing state actors and their perspectives center stage, intergovernmental epistemologies account for the tensions, contestations and politicisation processes of international institutional settings dealing with environmental issues. The paper concludes discussing the consequences of intergovernmental epistemologies for the study of global environmental governance: it cautions about overreliance on approaches based on learning and all-encompassing discourses, emphasizing the value of using STS-derived concepts to investigate the complexity of international environmental negotiations.
期刊介绍:
JIRD is an independent and internationally peer-reviewed journal in international relations and international political economy. It publishes articles on contemporary world politics and the global political economy from a variety of methodologies and approaches.
The journal, whose history goes back to 1984, has been established to encourage scholarly publications by authors coming from Central/Eastern Europe. Open to all scholars since its refoundation in the late 1990s, yet keeping this initial aim, it applied a rigorous peer-review system and became the official journal of the Central and East European International Studies Association (CEEISA).
JIRD seeks original manuscripts that provide theoretically informed empirical analyses of issues in international relations and international political economy, as well as original theoretical or conceptual analyses.