科学政治化的文化途径:林业联盟如何在芬兰新闻媒体关于增加伐木的辩论中挑战科学共识

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Anna Kukkonen, Arttu Malkamäki
{"title":"科学政治化的文化途径:林业联盟如何在芬兰新闻媒体关于增加伐木的辩论中挑战科学共识","authors":"Anna Kukkonen, Arttu Malkamäki","doi":"10.1080/08941920.2023.2259326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Politicization of science is often described as the process of political actors overemphasizing scientific uncertainty to cast doubt on a scientific consensus. We argue that in addition to exploiting the inherent uncertainty of science, actors resort to so-called technical and national arguments to politicize science. Applying the pragmatic sociology of Boltanski and Thévenot and the method of discourse network analysis to Finnish news media debate on forest policy (2015–2020), we analyze the different modes of valuation used by the so-called forestry coalition to defend increased logging and politicize the broad scientific consensus on its harmful environmental impacts. Technical arguments appeal to the common principles of technical efficiency, productivity and expertise, while national arguments invoke shared, cultural ideas of Finnish forestry. We conclude that pragmatic sociology carries considerable potential to improve our understanding of the broader cultural factors that lay the foundation for successful politicization of science.","PeriodicalId":48223,"journal":{"name":"Society & Natural Resources","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Cultural Approach to Politicization of Science: How the Forestry Coalition Challenged the Scientific Consensus in the Finnish News Media Debate on Increased Logging\",\"authors\":\"Anna Kukkonen, Arttu Malkamäki\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08941920.2023.2259326\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Politicization of science is often described as the process of political actors overemphasizing scientific uncertainty to cast doubt on a scientific consensus. We argue that in addition to exploiting the inherent uncertainty of science, actors resort to so-called technical and national arguments to politicize science. Applying the pragmatic sociology of Boltanski and Thévenot and the method of discourse network analysis to Finnish news media debate on forest policy (2015–2020), we analyze the different modes of valuation used by the so-called forestry coalition to defend increased logging and politicize the broad scientific consensus on its harmful environmental impacts. Technical arguments appeal to the common principles of technical efficiency, productivity and expertise, while national arguments invoke shared, cultural ideas of Finnish forestry. We conclude that pragmatic sociology carries considerable potential to improve our understanding of the broader cultural factors that lay the foundation for successful politicization of science.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Society & Natural Resources\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Society & Natural Resources\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2023.2259326\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Society & Natural Resources","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2023.2259326","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

科学政治化通常被描述为政治行为者过度强调科学的不确定性,从而对科学共识产生怀疑的过程。我们认为,除了利用科学固有的不确定性之外,行为者还诉诸所谓的技术和国家论点来将科学政治化。将Boltanski和thsamuvenot的实用主义社会学以及话语网络分析方法应用于芬兰新闻媒体关于森林政策的辩论(2015-2020),我们分析了所谓的林业联盟使用的不同评估模式,以捍卫增加的采伐,并将其有害环境影响的广泛科学共识政治化。技术论点诉诸于技术效率、生产力和专门知识的共同原则,而国家论点则援引芬兰林业的共同文化观念。我们的结论是,实用主义社会学具有相当大的潜力,可以提高我们对更广泛的文化因素的理解,这些文化因素为科学的成功政治化奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Cultural Approach to Politicization of Science: How the Forestry Coalition Challenged the Scientific Consensus in the Finnish News Media Debate on Increased Logging
Politicization of science is often described as the process of political actors overemphasizing scientific uncertainty to cast doubt on a scientific consensus. We argue that in addition to exploiting the inherent uncertainty of science, actors resort to so-called technical and national arguments to politicize science. Applying the pragmatic sociology of Boltanski and Thévenot and the method of discourse network analysis to Finnish news media debate on forest policy (2015–2020), we analyze the different modes of valuation used by the so-called forestry coalition to defend increased logging and politicize the broad scientific consensus on its harmful environmental impacts. Technical arguments appeal to the common principles of technical efficiency, productivity and expertise, while national arguments invoke shared, cultural ideas of Finnish forestry. We conclude that pragmatic sociology carries considerable potential to improve our understanding of the broader cultural factors that lay the foundation for successful politicization of science.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
8.00%
发文量
83
期刊介绍: Society and Natural Resources publishes cutting edge social science research that advances understanding of the interaction between society and natural resources.Social science research is extensive and comes from a number of disciplines, including sociology, psychology, political science, communications, planning, education, and anthropology. We welcome research from all of these disciplines and interdisciplinary social science research that transcends the boundaries of any single social science discipline. We define natural resources broadly to include water, air, wildlife, fisheries, forests, natural lands, urban ecosystems, and intensively managed lands. While we welcome all papers that fit within this broad scope, we especially welcome papers in the following four important and broad areas in the field: 1. Protected area management and governance 2. Stakeholder analysis, consultation and engagement; deliberation processes; governance; conflict resolution; social learning; social impact assessment 3. Theoretical frameworks, epistemological issues, and methodological perspectives 4. Multiscalar character of social implications of natural resource management
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信