Being everything for everybody all at once: Facework for trustworthiness of a citizens’ assembly for the climate

IF 5.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Laila Mendy , Tatiana Sokolova , Fanny Möckel
{"title":"Being everything for everybody all at once: Facework for trustworthiness of a citizens’ assembly for the climate","authors":"Laila Mendy ,&nbsp;Tatiana Sokolova ,&nbsp;Fanny Möckel","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the context of distrust and scepticism about the climate issue, researchers are exploring the potential of deliberative mini-publics, such as citizens’ assemblies about climate change, to find new fora for just climate governance. However, while the literature suggests such arenas have potential to temper climate scepticism, it is less clear how specific design components of these innovations may relate to specific reasons for distrust. This paper operationalises the processes of facework, a concept denoting the translation between institutional and interpersonal trust, to capture how anticipation of distrust featured in the planning process of the Sweden's first national citizen's assembly on the climate, and how choices were made by the organisers to abate such distrust. To this end, we analyse interviews with researchers and science communicators prior to the event. Researchers employ strategies of legitimation, signification, and domination in order to build a trustworthy citizens assembly and mitigate reasons for distrust. Our findings indicate how multiple purposes of the citizens’ assembly, the anticipated heterogeneity of the assembly’s audiences, and subsequent design choices led to trade-offs that potentially undermine each other or embed incoherence into the project. Our paper concludes with a reflection on the increasing likelihood of researchers finding themselves in such contexts and how they may navigate precariousness and avoid adverse effects.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"170 ","pages":"Article 104104"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125001200","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the context of distrust and scepticism about the climate issue, researchers are exploring the potential of deliberative mini-publics, such as citizens’ assemblies about climate change, to find new fora for just climate governance. However, while the literature suggests such arenas have potential to temper climate scepticism, it is less clear how specific design components of these innovations may relate to specific reasons for distrust. This paper operationalises the processes of facework, a concept denoting the translation between institutional and interpersonal trust, to capture how anticipation of distrust featured in the planning process of the Sweden's first national citizen's assembly on the climate, and how choices were made by the organisers to abate such distrust. To this end, we analyse interviews with researchers and science communicators prior to the event. Researchers employ strategies of legitimation, signification, and domination in order to build a trustworthy citizens assembly and mitigate reasons for distrust. Our findings indicate how multiple purposes of the citizens’ assembly, the anticipated heterogeneity of the assembly’s audiences, and subsequent design choices led to trade-offs that potentially undermine each other or embed incoherence into the project. Our paper concludes with a reflection on the increasing likelihood of researchers finding themselves in such contexts and how they may navigate precariousness and avoid adverse effects.
同时为所有人提供一切服务:脸书为气候问题提供公民大会的可信度
在对气候问题的不信任和怀疑的背景下,研究人员正在探索审议微型公众的潜力,例如关于气候变化的公民大会,以寻找公正气候治理的新论坛。然而,尽管文献表明这些领域有可能缓和气候怀疑主义,但尚不清楚这些创新的具体设计组件如何与不信任的具体原因相关。本文运用了facework的过程,这是一个表示机构和人际信任之间转换的概念,以捕捉瑞典第一次全国公民气候大会规划过程中对不信任的预期,以及组织者如何做出选择来减轻这种不信任。为此,我们分析了在活动之前对研究人员和科学传播者的采访。研究人员采用合法性、意义和支配的策略,以建立一个值得信赖的公民大会,减少不信任的原因。我们的研究结果表明,市民集会的多重目的、集会观众的预期异质性以及随后的设计选择导致了权衡,这些权衡可能会相互破坏或将不连贯嵌入到项目中。我们的论文最后反思了研究人员发现自己处于这种情况的可能性越来越大,以及他们如何应对不稳定并避免不利影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信