Tracing the Path of Knowledge on “Environmental Governance Processes” for Theory-Building

IF 3.9 3区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Liza Wood, Francesca Pia Vantaggiato, Tyler Scott
{"title":"Tracing the Path of Knowledge on “Environmental Governance Processes” for Theory-Building","authors":"Liza Wood,&nbsp;Francesca Pia Vantaggiato,&nbsp;Tyler Scott","doi":"10.1002/eet.2151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The vast range of environmental governance case studies makes one thing clear: social processes are at the heart of environmental problems—and solutions. But fragmentation in how different contributions define and study environmental governance processes prevents us from drawing lessons from the field. What is the extent of knowledge cumulation in the field, and what gaps remain unfilled in this literature? We address these questions by analyzing the bibliometric citation network of English language academic research focused on environmental governance processes. We identify eight clusters of research, where four highly cited “poles” stand out: (1) social-ecological systems, (2) collaborative governance, (3) global environmental governance, and (4) political ecology. We identify four organizing concepts that are common to all clusters (scale, the importance of social outcomes, consideration of the environment, and the role of government), but with limited shared understandings of them. The field is wider than it is deep, limiting our ability to narrow down on a few overarching theoretical statements. We argue that environmental governance needs to link up with the environmental politics literature to be able address two important roadblocks in environmental governance processes: power asymmetries and trade-offs of environmental decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47396,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Policy and Governance","volume":"35 3","pages":"505-524"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eet.2151","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Policy and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.2151","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The vast range of environmental governance case studies makes one thing clear: social processes are at the heart of environmental problems—and solutions. But fragmentation in how different contributions define and study environmental governance processes prevents us from drawing lessons from the field. What is the extent of knowledge cumulation in the field, and what gaps remain unfilled in this literature? We address these questions by analyzing the bibliometric citation network of English language academic research focused on environmental governance processes. We identify eight clusters of research, where four highly cited “poles” stand out: (1) social-ecological systems, (2) collaborative governance, (3) global environmental governance, and (4) political ecology. We identify four organizing concepts that are common to all clusters (scale, the importance of social outcomes, consideration of the environment, and the role of government), but with limited shared understandings of them. The field is wider than it is deep, limiting our ability to narrow down on a few overarching theoretical statements. We argue that environmental governance needs to link up with the environmental politics literature to be able address two important roadblocks in environmental governance processes: power asymmetries and trade-offs of environmental decisions.

Abstract Image

探寻“环境治理过程”的知识路径与理论建构
大量的环境治理案例研究表明:社会过程是环境问题及其解决方案的核心。但是,不同的贡献对环境治理过程的定义和研究存在分歧,这阻碍了我们从这一领域汲取教训。该领域的知识积累程度如何?该文献中还有哪些空白未填补?我们通过分析以环境治理过程为重点的英语学术研究的文献计量引用网络来解决这些问题。我们确定了八个研究集群,其中四个被高度引用的“极点”突出:(1)社会生态系统,(2)协同治理,(3)全球环境治理,(4)政治生态。我们确定了所有集群共有的四个组织概念(规模、社会结果的重要性、对环境的考虑和政府的作用),但对它们的共同理解有限。这个领域比它的深度更广,限制了我们在几个总体理论陈述上缩小范围的能力。我们认为,环境治理需要与环境政治文献联系起来,以便能够解决环境治理过程中的两个重要障碍:权力不对称和环境决策的权衡。
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 Policy and Governance
Environmental Policy and Governance ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Environmental Policy and Governance is an international, inter-disciplinary journal affiliated with the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE). The journal seeks to advance interdisciplinary environmental research and its use to support novel solutions in environmental policy and governance. The journal publishes innovative, high quality articles which examine, or are relevant to, the environmental policies that are introduced by governments or the diverse forms of environmental governance that emerge in markets and civil society. The journal includes papers that examine how different forms of policy and governance emerge and exert influence at scales ranging from local to global and in diverse developmental and environmental contexts.
×
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