Manufacturing ignorance or dealing with complexity? Adaptation politics and the making of river futures in Colombia

IF 3.8 3区 管理学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Lotte de Jong , Lieke Anna Melsen , Rutgerd Boelens , Gert Jan Veldwisch
{"title":"Manufacturing ignorance or dealing with complexity? Adaptation politics and the making of river futures in Colombia","authors":"Lotte de Jong ,&nbsp;Lieke Anna Melsen ,&nbsp;Rutgerd Boelens ,&nbsp;Gert Jan Veldwisch","doi":"10.1016/j.futures.2025.103664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Futures are not neutral. Imagining certain futures over others is deeply political and rooted in specific imaginaries. We address this issue by scrutinizing dominant future-making processes in riverine adaptation and elucidate power structures that shape such processes. We describe what future-making processes ground the implementation of adaptation projects, what knowledge strategies are used to (attempt to) ensure certain futures, and what knowledges are actively ignored and marginalized by dominant future-makers and adaptation implementers. To scrutinize dominance in futures and adaptation, we build upon power dynamics of truth regimes in river imaginaries and critiques of modernism in which we highlight how knowing, and not-knowing, are actively produced through manufactured ignorance. We build our understanding of manufactured ignorance by introducing the notion of Hirschman’s hiding hand principle which fundamentally suggests that failure to anticipate unintended consequences and unforeseen complexities is a good thing. We problematize this logic and describe the devastating and violent effects in a case study context of the Lower Magdalena River in Colombia, specifically in the Zapatosa wetland. Our findings suggest that the different futures and adaptation actions resonate with different imaginaries, namely a rooted-amphibian imaginary and an eco-modern imaginary. We suggest that manufactured ignorance, as a part of eco-modernism, leads to increased tensions in the case study area, produces deliberate claims of not-knowing and actively marginalizes those involved with alternative future-making practices. We conclude by arguing that the fundamental misrecognition of rooted imaginaries and related futures, rooted epistemic communities and adaptation practices face disproportionate epistemic and physical violence. This violence is legitimized by the opposing (eco)modernist imaginary through the normalization of manufactured ignorance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48239,"journal":{"name":"Futures","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 103664"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Futures","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328725001260","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Futures are not neutral. Imagining certain futures over others is deeply political and rooted in specific imaginaries. We address this issue by scrutinizing dominant future-making processes in riverine adaptation and elucidate power structures that shape such processes. We describe what future-making processes ground the implementation of adaptation projects, what knowledge strategies are used to (attempt to) ensure certain futures, and what knowledges are actively ignored and marginalized by dominant future-makers and adaptation implementers. To scrutinize dominance in futures and adaptation, we build upon power dynamics of truth regimes in river imaginaries and critiques of modernism in which we highlight how knowing, and not-knowing, are actively produced through manufactured ignorance. We build our understanding of manufactured ignorance by introducing the notion of Hirschman’s hiding hand principle which fundamentally suggests that failure to anticipate unintended consequences and unforeseen complexities is a good thing. We problematize this logic and describe the devastating and violent effects in a case study context of the Lower Magdalena River in Colombia, specifically in the Zapatosa wetland. Our findings suggest that the different futures and adaptation actions resonate with different imaginaries, namely a rooted-amphibian imaginary and an eco-modern imaginary. We suggest that manufactured ignorance, as a part of eco-modernism, leads to increased tensions in the case study area, produces deliberate claims of not-knowing and actively marginalizes those involved with alternative future-making practices. We conclude by arguing that the fundamental misrecognition of rooted imaginaries and related futures, rooted epistemic communities and adaptation practices face disproportionate epistemic and physical violence. This violence is legitimized by the opposing (eco)modernist imaginary through the normalization of manufactured ignorance.
制造无知还是处理复杂?适应政治与哥伦比亚河流未来的形成
期货不是中性的。想象某一种未来凌驾于其他未来之上,具有深刻的政治性,根植于特定的想象之中。我们通过仔细研究河流适应中主要的未来制定过程来解决这个问题,并阐明塑造这些过程的权力结构。我们描述了什么样的未来制定过程是适应项目实施的基础,什么样的知识策略被用来(试图)确保某些未来,以及什么样的知识被主导的未来制定者和适应实施者积极忽视和边缘化。为了审视未来和适应中的主导地位,我们建立在河流想象和现代主义批判中真理制度的权力动力学的基础上,其中我们强调了如何通过制造的无知积极地产生知道和不知道。我们通过引入赫希曼隐藏之手原则的概念来建立对人为无知的理解,该原则从根本上表明,未能预料到意想不到的后果和不可预见的复杂性是一件好事。我们对这一逻辑提出了质疑,并以哥伦比亚马格达莱纳河下游,特别是萨帕托萨湿地为例,描述了这种破坏性和暴力的影响。我们的研究结果表明,不同的未来和适应行动与不同的想象产生共鸣,即扎根两栖动物的想象和生态现代的想象。我们认为,作为生态现代主义的一部分,人为的无知导致案例研究领域的紧张局势加剧,故意声称不知道,并积极边缘化那些参与替代性未来制定实践的人。我们最后认为,对根深蒂固的想象和相关未来、根深蒂固的认知社区和适应实践的根本性误解面临着不成比例的认知和身体暴力。这种暴力被对立的(生态)现代主义想象通过制造无知的正常化而合法化。
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
Futures
Futures Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
124
期刊介绍: Futures is an international, refereed, multidisciplinary journal concerned with medium and long-term futures of cultures and societies, science and technology, economics and politics, environment and the planet and individuals and humanity. Covering methods and practices of futures studies, the journal seeks to examine possible and alternative futures of all human endeavours. Futures seeks to promote divergent and pluralistic visions, ideas and opinions about the future. The editors do not necessarily agree with the views expressed in the pages of Futures
×
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