Transdisciplinary Art and Climate Science Collaborations: Framework Conditions Creating Epistemic Injustices

IF 3.8 Q2 GEOGRAPHY
Johanna Paschen
{"title":"Transdisciplinary Art and Climate Science Collaborations: Framework Conditions Creating Epistemic Injustices","authors":"Johanna Paschen","doi":"10.1002/geo2.70060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Transdisciplinary art-science collaborations addressing the climate crisis aim to co-create knowledge by integrating diverse perspectives and knowledge types to tackle complex sustainability challenges. Despite growing institutional and funding support, little research has been done on how framework conditions shape such collaborations. This study examines how framework conditions of transdisciplinary art-science collaborations influence collaborative dynamics of knowledge integration and contribute to epistemic injustice. Framework conditions refer to circumstances, thus structural and situational factors shaping collaboration, which can enable or constrain it. Epistemic injustice involves knowledge-related injustices, including the exclusion or silencing of knowers. Applying semi-structured interviews and the transdisciplinary storywall method, six Switzerland-based transdisciplinary art-science collaborations addressing climate, ecological or sustainability issues were analysed. The exploratory thematic analysis identified the six key framework conditions of temporality, financing, location, internationality, partnering and outcome, which elicit circumstances creating epistemic injustice. Applying four epistemic injustice dimensions to categorise collaborators' experiences on conditions further, the findings show that these conditions most frequently contribute to participatory and procedural, followed by distributive and then recognition epistemic injustices. Early phases of collaboration were found to be particularly influential in shaping unjust processes. This study suggests the need for greater awareness of injustice among scientists, practitioners and artists and calls for structural adjustments by those shaping or initiating such collaborations. It offers practical recommendations to reduce epistemic injustices and strive for more inclusive and pluralistic knowledge integration and co-creation in art-science contexts, as well as across broader transdisciplinary sustainability efforts to address the climate crisis.</p>","PeriodicalId":44089,"journal":{"name":"Geo-Geography and Environment","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/geo2.70060","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geo-Geography and Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/geo2.70060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transdisciplinary art-science collaborations addressing the climate crisis aim to co-create knowledge by integrating diverse perspectives and knowledge types to tackle complex sustainability challenges. Despite growing institutional and funding support, little research has been done on how framework conditions shape such collaborations. This study examines how framework conditions of transdisciplinary art-science collaborations influence collaborative dynamics of knowledge integration and contribute to epistemic injustice. Framework conditions refer to circumstances, thus structural and situational factors shaping collaboration, which can enable or constrain it. Epistemic injustice involves knowledge-related injustices, including the exclusion or silencing of knowers. Applying semi-structured interviews and the transdisciplinary storywall method, six Switzerland-based transdisciplinary art-science collaborations addressing climate, ecological or sustainability issues were analysed. The exploratory thematic analysis identified the six key framework conditions of temporality, financing, location, internationality, partnering and outcome, which elicit circumstances creating epistemic injustice. Applying four epistemic injustice dimensions to categorise collaborators' experiences on conditions further, the findings show that these conditions most frequently contribute to participatory and procedural, followed by distributive and then recognition epistemic injustices. Early phases of collaboration were found to be particularly influential in shaping unjust processes. This study suggests the need for greater awareness of injustice among scientists, practitioners and artists and calls for structural adjustments by those shaping or initiating such collaborations. It offers practical recommendations to reduce epistemic injustices and strive for more inclusive and pluralistic knowledge integration and co-creation in art-science contexts, as well as across broader transdisciplinary sustainability efforts to address the climate crisis.

Abstract Image

跨学科艺术和气候科学合作:创造认知不公正的框架条件
应对气候危机的跨学科艺术与科学合作旨在通过整合不同的观点和知识类型来共同创造知识,以应对复杂的可持续性挑战。尽管机构和资金支持不断增加,但关于框架条件如何影响这种合作的研究却很少。本研究探讨了跨学科艺术与科学合作的框架条件如何影响知识整合的协作动态,并导致认知不公正。框架条件指的是环境,因此形成协作的结构和情境因素,这些因素可以启用或约束协作。认识上的不公正涉及与知识有关的不公正,包括对知识者的排斥或沉默。采用半结构化访谈和跨学科故事墙方法,分析了六个基于瑞士的跨学科艺术-科学合作,解决气候,生态或可持续性问题。探索性专题分析确定了六个关键框架条件,即时间性、融资、地点、国际性、伙伴关系和结果,这些条件会引发产生认知不公正的情况。应用四个认知不公正维度来进一步分类合作者在条件下的经历,研究结果表明,这些条件最常导致参与性和程序性的不公正,其次是分配性的不公正,然后是识别性的不公正。人们发现,合作的早期阶段对形成不公正的程序特别有影响。这项研究表明,科学家、从业者和艺术家需要提高对不公正现象的认识,并呼吁那些形成或发起这种合作的人进行结构调整。它提供了切实可行的建议,以减少认识上的不公正,并在艺术-科学背景下努力实现更具包容性和多元化的知识整合和共同创造,以及在更广泛的跨学科可持续性努力中解决气候危机。
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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: Geo is a fully open access international journal publishing original articles from across the spectrum of geographical and environmental research. Geo welcomes submissions which make a significant contribution to one or more of the journal’s aims. These are to: • encompass the breadth of geographical, environmental and related research, based on original scholarship in the sciences, social sciences and humanities; • bring new understanding to and enhance communication between geographical research agendas, including human-environment interactions, global North-South relations and academic-policy exchange; • advance spatial research and address the importance of geographical enquiry to the understanding of, and action about, contemporary issues; • foster methodological development, including collaborative forms of knowledge production, interdisciplinary approaches and the innovative use of quantitative and/or qualitative data sets; • publish research articles, review papers, data and digital humanities papers, and commentaries which are of international significance.
×
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
小红书