我们如何更好地解释合作制作框架中的经验知识?

IF 5.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Zachary Johner, Nicole Klenk, Christopher Cvitanovic, Maud Borie
{"title":"我们如何更好地解释合作制作框架中的经验知识?","authors":"Zachary Johner,&nbsp;Nicole Klenk,&nbsp;Christopher Cvitanovic,&nbsp;Maud Borie","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Calls for co-production at the environmental science-policy interface emphasize broad participation and inclusion, yet they continue to privilege knowledge aligned with Western scientific standards over other ways of knowing. This editorial argues that experiential knowledge—embodied and affective understanding rooted in lived experience and often communicated through vivid storytelling—remains largely unrecognized and undervalued in co-production frameworks and initiatives. Drawing on insights from philosophy, narrative theory, and neuroscience, we examine how storytelling enables the transmission of experiential knowledge through aesthetic engagement and embodied simulation. We distinguish between using anecdotes as illustrative tools and crafting narratives that convey the full affective and sensory texture of experience. The article proposes non-extractive and epistemically inclusive approaches to account for experiential knowledge in research and policy, including strategies for inviting both analytical and aesthetic reading. We conclude with practical recommendations for valuing and respecting experiential knowledge, moving toward a more inclusive understanding of what counts as knowing at the environmental science-policy interface.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"171 ","pages":"Article 104183"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How can we better account for experiential knowledge in co-production frameworks?\",\"authors\":\"Zachary Johner,&nbsp;Nicole Klenk,&nbsp;Christopher Cvitanovic,&nbsp;Maud Borie\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Calls for co-production at the environmental science-policy interface emphasize broad participation and inclusion, yet they continue to privilege knowledge aligned with Western scientific standards over other ways of knowing. This editorial argues that experiential knowledge—embodied and affective understanding rooted in lived experience and often communicated through vivid storytelling—remains largely unrecognized and undervalued in co-production frameworks and initiatives. Drawing on insights from philosophy, narrative theory, and neuroscience, we examine how storytelling enables the transmission of experiential knowledge through aesthetic engagement and embodied simulation. We distinguish between using anecdotes as illustrative tools and crafting narratives that convey the full affective and sensory texture of experience. The article proposes non-extractive and epistemically inclusive approaches to account for experiential knowledge in research and policy, including strategies for inviting both analytical and aesthetic reading. We conclude with practical recommendations for valuing and respecting experiential knowledge, moving toward a more inclusive understanding of what counts as knowing at the environmental science-policy interface.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"volume\":\"171 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104183\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125001996\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125001996","RegionNum":2,"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

呼吁在环境科学与政策的界面上进行合作,强调广泛的参与和包容,但他们继续把符合西方科学标准的知识置于其他认识方式之上。这篇社论认为,经验知识——根植于生活经验的体现和情感理解,通常通过生动的故事讲述进行交流——在合作制作框架和倡议中仍未得到很大程度的认可和低估。借鉴哲学、叙事理论和神经科学的见解,我们研究了讲故事如何通过美学参与和具体化模拟来实现经验知识的传播。我们区分使用轶事作为说明工具和精心制作的叙述,传达完整的情感和感官纹理的经验。本文提出了非抽取性和认知包容性的方法来解释研究和政策中的经验知识,包括邀请分析和美学阅读的策略。最后,我们提出了重视和尊重经验知识的实用建议,朝着更包容地理解什么是环境科学-政策界面的知识的方向发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How can we better account for experiential knowledge in co-production frameworks?
Calls for co-production at the environmental science-policy interface emphasize broad participation and inclusion, yet they continue to privilege knowledge aligned with Western scientific standards over other ways of knowing. This editorial argues that experiential knowledge—embodied and affective understanding rooted in lived experience and often communicated through vivid storytelling—remains largely unrecognized and undervalued in co-production frameworks and initiatives. Drawing on insights from philosophy, narrative theory, and neuroscience, we examine how storytelling enables the transmission of experiential knowledge through aesthetic engagement and embodied simulation. We distinguish between using anecdotes as illustrative tools and crafting narratives that convey the full affective and sensory texture of experience. The article proposes non-extractive and epistemically inclusive approaches to account for experiential knowledge in research and policy, including strategies for inviting both analytical and aesthetic reading. We conclude with practical recommendations for valuing and respecting experiential knowledge, moving toward a more inclusive understanding of what counts as knowing at the environmental science-policy interface.
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 Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
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