是什么推动了科学家的公众参与?澳大利亚的视角

IF 8.6 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Michael Murunga , Emily Ogier , Catriona Macleod , Gretta Pecl
{"title":"是什么推动了科学家的公众参与?澳大利亚的视角","authors":"Michael Murunga ,&nbsp;Emily Ogier ,&nbsp;Catriona Macleod ,&nbsp;Gretta Pecl","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2024.102889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is an increasing expectation for more scientists to engage with industry, government, and communities to solve climate change. A group for whom these calls are now prevalent are marine (natural and social) scientists working on environmental change, including climate change. Yet, there is limited empirical evidence of what drives them to embrace or avoid engaging distinct publics, including policymakers. Here, we examined via twenty-eight in-depth qualitative interviews factors affecting how Australian scientists engage the public about climate change. We found that nineteen contextual variables constrain and enable public engagement by scientists. These variables co-occur and interact at the individual, organizational, and systemic levels to affect how they prioritize, mobilize resources, and decide to engage the public. We found that while the scientists saw it rewarding to share their findings with others, they found it hard to deal with conflict, face skeptics, and navigate organizational politics and structures to engage others in a public-facing role. Also, a lack of institutional support and engagement culture, role ambiguity, unequal power relations, and a legacy of past encounters led many scientists to engage in tokenism. These findings and insights have implications for individual scientists, institutional policy, and the practice of engaging others about global environmental change. They reveal why scientists might not engage others in a public-facing role and what might be needed to transform engagement.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378024000931/pdfft?md5=4d8620c619e7433605a54311a6413835&pid=1-s2.0-S0959378024000931-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What drives public engagement by scientists? An Australian perspective\",\"authors\":\"Michael Murunga ,&nbsp;Emily Ogier ,&nbsp;Catriona Macleod ,&nbsp;Gretta Pecl\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2024.102889\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>There is an increasing expectation for more scientists to engage with industry, government, and communities to solve climate change. A group for whom these calls are now prevalent are marine (natural and social) scientists working on environmental change, including climate change. Yet, there is limited empirical evidence of what drives them to embrace or avoid engaging distinct publics, including policymakers. Here, we examined via twenty-eight in-depth qualitative interviews factors affecting how Australian scientists engage the public about climate change. We found that nineteen contextual variables constrain and enable public engagement by scientists. These variables co-occur and interact at the individual, organizational, and systemic levels to affect how they prioritize, mobilize resources, and decide to engage the public. We found that while the scientists saw it rewarding to share their findings with others, they found it hard to deal with conflict, face skeptics, and navigate organizational politics and structures to engage others in a public-facing role. Also, a lack of institutional support and engagement culture, role ambiguity, unequal power relations, and a legacy of past encounters led many scientists to engage in tokenism. These findings and insights have implications for individual scientists, institutional policy, and the practice of engaging others about global environmental change. They reveal why scientists might not engage others in a public-facing role and what might be needed to transform engagement.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":328,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Environmental Change\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378024000931/pdfft?md5=4d8620c619e7433605a54311a6413835&pid=1-s2.0-S0959378024000931-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Environmental Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"6\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378024000931\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environmental Change","FirstCategoryId":"6","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378024000931","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们越来越期待有更多的科学家与产业界、政府和社区合作,共同解决气候变化问题。从事环境变化(包括气候变化)研究的海洋(自然和社会)科学家就是其中之一。然而,关于是什么促使他们接受或避免与不同的公众(包括政策制定者)接触的经验证据却很有限。在此,我们通过 28 次深入的定性访谈研究了影响澳大利亚科学家如何与公众就气候变化问题进行互动的因素。我们发现,有 19 个环境变量限制和促进了科学家与公众的接触。这些变量在个人、组织和系统层面上同时存在并相互作用,影响着他们如何确定优先事项、调动资源以及决定如何让公众参与。我们发现,虽然科学家们认为与他人分享他们的研究成果是一件有意义的事情,但他们发现很难处理冲突、面对怀疑论者,以及驾驭组织政治和结构,让他人参与到面向公众的角色中来。此外,缺乏机构支持和参与文化、角色模糊、不平等的权力关系以及过去遭遇的遗留问题,也导致许多科学家采取象征性的做法。这些发现和见解对科学家个人、机构政策以及让他人参与全球环境变化的实践都有影响。它们揭示了为什么科学家可能不会让其他人参与到面向公众的角色中,以及转变参与方式可能需要的条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What drives public engagement by scientists? An Australian perspective

There is an increasing expectation for more scientists to engage with industry, government, and communities to solve climate change. A group for whom these calls are now prevalent are marine (natural and social) scientists working on environmental change, including climate change. Yet, there is limited empirical evidence of what drives them to embrace or avoid engaging distinct publics, including policymakers. Here, we examined via twenty-eight in-depth qualitative interviews factors affecting how Australian scientists engage the public about climate change. We found that nineteen contextual variables constrain and enable public engagement by scientists. These variables co-occur and interact at the individual, organizational, and systemic levels to affect how they prioritize, mobilize resources, and decide to engage the public. We found that while the scientists saw it rewarding to share their findings with others, they found it hard to deal with conflict, face skeptics, and navigate organizational politics and structures to engage others in a public-facing role. Also, a lack of institutional support and engagement culture, role ambiguity, unequal power relations, and a legacy of past encounters led many scientists to engage in tokenism. These findings and insights have implications for individual scientists, institutional policy, and the practice of engaging others about global environmental change. They reveal why scientists might not engage others in a public-facing role and what might be needed to transform engagement.

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
Global Environmental Change
Global Environmental Change 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
18.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
146
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Global Environmental Change is a prestigious international journal that publishes articles of high quality, both theoretically and empirically rigorous. The journal aims to contribute to the understanding of global environmental change from the perspectives of human and policy dimensions. Specifically, it considers global environmental change as the result of processes occurring at the local level, but with wide-ranging impacts on various spatial, temporal, and socio-political scales. In terms of content, the journal seeks articles with a strong social science component. This includes research that examines the societal drivers and consequences of environmental change, as well as social and policy processes that aim to address these challenges. While the journal covers a broad range of topics, including biodiversity and ecosystem services, climate, coasts, food systems, land use and land cover, oceans, urban areas, and water resources, it also welcomes contributions that investigate the drivers, consequences, and management of other areas affected by environmental change. Overall, Global Environmental Change encourages research that deepens our understanding of the complex interactions between human activities and the environment, with the goal of informing policy and decision-making.
×
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