政治森林中的数据和信息:REDD+ 案例

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Maria Brockhaus , Veronique De Sy , Monica Di Gregorio , Martin Herold , Grace Y. Wong , Robert Ochieng , Arild Angelsen
{"title":"政治森林中的数据和信息:REDD+ 案例","authors":"Maria Brockhaus ,&nbsp;Veronique De Sy ,&nbsp;Monica Di Gregorio ,&nbsp;Martin Herold ,&nbsp;Grace Y. Wong ,&nbsp;Robert Ochieng ,&nbsp;Arild Angelsen","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Data and information are central to policy processes, as they frame the policy problem, the design and the implementation of policy, and evaluation of policy impacts. Better data and information infrastructure is expected to lead to better policies and outcomes, for example, by enabling transparent decision making and enhancing capacity and accountability. However, the collection, selection, representation, framing and application of data are not merely technical and apolitical procedures, but are dependent on the interests represented in the policy processes they aim to inform. Social scientists have pointed to the “politics of numbers” and their effects on forests and trees and on the people relying on them, as well as on those involved in their measurements. We use the case of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) international initiative and focus on the central aspect of understanding drivers of deforestation and measures of REDD+ performance to unpack the politics of policy processes. Data and information are socially constructed, and their interpretations are shaped by the contexts in which they emerge. Dominant beliefs in the transformative power of new data and technologies cannot explain why, often, new information does not translate into policy change and action to halt deforestation. Technological advances in making new and ever larger amounts of data available for analysis are a necessary yet insufficient condition for changing the business as usual in deforestation. Through openness, reflexivity and the tackling of silences in data and information related to the global political economy of deforestation the scientific community can make a key contribution to more equitable policy change.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data and information in a political forest: The case of REDD+\",\"authors\":\"Maria Brockhaus ,&nbsp;Veronique De Sy ,&nbsp;Monica Di Gregorio ,&nbsp;Martin Herold ,&nbsp;Grace Y. Wong ,&nbsp;Robert Ochieng ,&nbsp;Arild Angelsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103251\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Data and information are central to policy processes, as they frame the policy problem, the design and the implementation of policy, and evaluation of policy impacts. Better data and information infrastructure is expected to lead to better policies and outcomes, for example, by enabling transparent decision making and enhancing capacity and accountability. However, the collection, selection, representation, framing and application of data are not merely technical and apolitical procedures, but are dependent on the interests represented in the policy processes they aim to inform. Social scientists have pointed to the “politics of numbers” and their effects on forests and trees and on the people relying on them, as well as on those involved in their measurements. We use the case of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) international initiative and focus on the central aspect of understanding drivers of deforestation and measures of REDD+ performance to unpack the politics of policy processes. Data and information are socially constructed, and their interpretations are shaped by the contexts in which they emerge. Dominant beliefs in the transformative power of new data and technologies cannot explain why, often, new information does not translate into policy change and action to halt deforestation. Technological advances in making new and ever larger amounts of data available for analysis are a necessary yet insufficient condition for changing the business as usual in deforestation. Through openness, reflexivity and the tackling of silences in data and information related to the global political economy of deforestation the scientific community can make a key contribution to more equitable policy change.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001059\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001059","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

数据和信息是政策进程的核心,因为它们为政策问题、政策的设计和实施以及政策影响的评估提供框架。更好的数据和信息基础设施有望带来更好的政策和成果,例如,使决策透明化,提高能力和加强问责制。然而,数据的收集、选择、表述、构架和应用并不仅仅是技术性和非政治性的程序,而是取决于它们所要通报的政策进程中所代表的利益。社会科学家指出了 "数字政治 "及其对森林和树木、对依赖这些数据的人们以及对参与数据测量的人们的影响。我们以 "降低因森林砍伐和退化所产生的排放"(REDD+)国际倡议为例,重点关注了解森林砍伐的驱动因素和衡量 REDD+ 绩效的核心方面,以解读政策进程的政治性。数据和信息是由社会构建的,对它们的解释也受其产生背景的影响。对新数据和新技术变革力量的主导信念无法解释为什么新信息往往无法转化为政策变革和阻止毁林的行动。技术进步可以提供更多、更大的新数据供分析之用,这是改变森林砍伐现状的必要条件,但还不够。通过开放、反思和解决与全球森林砍伐政治经济有关的数据和信息方面的沉默,科学界可以为更公平的政策变革做出重要贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Data and information in a political forest: The case of REDD+

Data and information are central to policy processes, as they frame the policy problem, the design and the implementation of policy, and evaluation of policy impacts. Better data and information infrastructure is expected to lead to better policies and outcomes, for example, by enabling transparent decision making and enhancing capacity and accountability. However, the collection, selection, representation, framing and application of data are not merely technical and apolitical procedures, but are dependent on the interests represented in the policy processes they aim to inform. Social scientists have pointed to the “politics of numbers” and their effects on forests and trees and on the people relying on them, as well as on those involved in their measurements. We use the case of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) international initiative and focus on the central aspect of understanding drivers of deforestation and measures of REDD+ performance to unpack the politics of policy processes. Data and information are socially constructed, and their interpretations are shaped by the contexts in which they emerge. Dominant beliefs in the transformative power of new data and technologies cannot explain why, often, new information does not translate into policy change and action to halt deforestation. Technological advances in making new and ever larger amounts of data available for analysis are a necessary yet insufficient condition for changing the business as usual in deforestation. Through openness, reflexivity and the tackling of silences in data and information related to the global political economy of deforestation the scientific community can make a key contribution to more equitable policy change.

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
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
×
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