让景观变得可协商:Q 方法学作为一种跨越边界和增强能力的诊断方法。

IF 2.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Environmental Management Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-10 DOI:10.1007/s00267-024-02004-1
James Douglas Langston, Mirjam A F Ros-Tonen, James Reed
{"title":"让景观变得可协商:Q 方法学作为一种跨越边界和增强能力的诊断方法。","authors":"James Douglas Langston, Mirjam A F Ros-Tonen, James Reed","doi":"10.1007/s00267-024-02004-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Landscapes are conceptually fuzzy and rich, and subject to plural framings. They are places of inquiry and intervention for scientists and practitioners, but also concepts bound to peoples' dynamic identities, knowledge systems, inspiration, and well-being. These varying interpretations change the way landscapes function and evolve. Developed in the 1930s, Q-methodology is increasingly recognized for being useful in documenting and interrogating environmental discourses. Yet its application in the context of how integrated landscape approaches better navigate land-use dilemmas is still in its infancy. Based on our experience and emerging literature, such as the papers in this special collection, this article discusses the value of Q-methodology in addressing landscape sustainability issues. Q-methodology helps unravel and communicate common and contradicting landscape imaginaries and narratives in translational and boundary-spanning ways, thus bridging actors' different understandings of problems and solutions and revealing common or differentiated entry points for negotiating trade-offs between competing land uses. The methodology can be empowering for marginalized people by uncovering their views and aspirational values to decision-makers and policymakers. We argue that this potential can be further strengthened by using Q to identify counter-hegemonic discourses and alliances that combat injustices regarding whose knowledge and visions count. In this way, applying Q-methodology in integrated landscape approaches can become a key tool for transitioning toward just, inclusive, and sustainable landscapes.</p>","PeriodicalId":543,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Management","volume":" ","pages":"4-12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11208184/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Making Landscapes Negotiable: Q-methodology as a Boundary-Spanning and Empowering Diagnostic.\",\"authors\":\"James Douglas Langston, Mirjam A F Ros-Tonen, James Reed\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00267-024-02004-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Landscapes are conceptually fuzzy and rich, and subject to plural framings. They are places of inquiry and intervention for scientists and practitioners, but also concepts bound to peoples' dynamic identities, knowledge systems, inspiration, and well-being. These varying interpretations change the way landscapes function and evolve. Developed in the 1930s, Q-methodology is increasingly recognized for being useful in documenting and interrogating environmental discourses. Yet its application in the context of how integrated landscape approaches better navigate land-use dilemmas is still in its infancy. Based on our experience and emerging literature, such as the papers in this special collection, this article discusses the value of Q-methodology in addressing landscape sustainability issues. Q-methodology helps unravel and communicate common and contradicting landscape imaginaries and narratives in translational and boundary-spanning ways, thus bridging actors' different understandings of problems and solutions and revealing common or differentiated entry points for negotiating trade-offs between competing land uses. The methodology can be empowering for marginalized people by uncovering their views and aspirational values to decision-makers and policymakers. We argue that this potential can be further strengthened by using Q to identify counter-hegemonic discourses and alliances that combat injustices regarding whose knowledge and visions count. In this way, applying Q-methodology in integrated landscape approaches can become a key tool for transitioning toward just, inclusive, and sustainable landscapes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":543,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"4-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11208184/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-024-02004-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-024-02004-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

景观在概念上是模糊而丰富的,并受制于多种框架。它们既是科学家和从业人员进行探究和干预的场所,也是与人们的动态身份、知识体系、灵感和福祉息息相关的概念。这些不同的解释改变了景观的功能和演变方式。Q 方法学于 20 世纪 30 年代发展起来,因其在记录和审视环境论述方面的有用性而日益得到认可。然而,它在综合景观方法如何更好地解决土地使用困境方面的应用仍处于起步阶段。根据我们的经验和新出现的文献,如本特辑中的论文,本文讨论了 Q 方法在解决景观可持续性问题方面的价值。Q 方法有助于以转化和跨越边界的方式揭示和交流共同的、相互矛盾的景观想象和叙事,从而弥合行动者对问题和解决方案的不同理解,并揭示共同的或有区别的切入点,以便在相互竞争的土地用途之间进行协商权衡。这种方法可以向决策者和政策制定者揭示边缘化人群的观点和期望价值,从而增强他们的能力。我们认为,这种潜力可以通过使用 Q 来识别反霸权话语和联盟来进一步加强,这些话语和联盟可以消除关于谁的知识和愿景最重要的不公正现象。因此,在综合景观方法中应用 Q 方法可以成为向公正、包容和可持续景观过渡的重要工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Making Landscapes Negotiable: Q-methodology as a Boundary-Spanning and Empowering Diagnostic.

Making Landscapes Negotiable: Q-methodology as a Boundary-Spanning and Empowering Diagnostic.

Landscapes are conceptually fuzzy and rich, and subject to plural framings. They are places of inquiry and intervention for scientists and practitioners, but also concepts bound to peoples' dynamic identities, knowledge systems, inspiration, and well-being. These varying interpretations change the way landscapes function and evolve. Developed in the 1930s, Q-methodology is increasingly recognized for being useful in documenting and interrogating environmental discourses. Yet its application in the context of how integrated landscape approaches better navigate land-use dilemmas is still in its infancy. Based on our experience and emerging literature, such as the papers in this special collection, this article discusses the value of Q-methodology in addressing landscape sustainability issues. Q-methodology helps unravel and communicate common and contradicting landscape imaginaries and narratives in translational and boundary-spanning ways, thus bridging actors' different understandings of problems and solutions and revealing common or differentiated entry points for negotiating trade-offs between competing land uses. The methodology can be empowering for marginalized people by uncovering their views and aspirational values to decision-makers and policymakers. We argue that this potential can be further strengthened by using Q to identify counter-hegemonic discourses and alliances that combat injustices regarding whose knowledge and visions count. In this way, applying Q-methodology in integrated landscape approaches can become a key tool for transitioning toward just, inclusive, and sustainable landscapes.

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
Environmental Management
Environmental Management 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
2.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Management offers research and opinions on use and conservation of natural resources, protection of habitats and control of hazards, spanning the field of environmental management without regard to traditional disciplinary boundaries. The journal aims to improve communication, making ideas and results from any field available to practitioners from other backgrounds. Contributions are drawn from biology, botany, chemistry, climatology, ecology, ecological economics, environmental engineering, fisheries, environmental law, forest sciences, geosciences, information science, public affairs, public health, toxicology, zoology and more. As the principal user of nature, humanity is responsible for ensuring that its environmental impacts are benign rather than catastrophic. Environmental Management presents the work of academic researchers and professionals outside universities, including those in business, government, research establishments, and public interest groups, presenting a wide spectrum of viewpoints and approaches.
×
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