超越邪恶:管理复杂系统和气候变化

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
J. Gilligan, M. Vandenbergh
{"title":"超越邪恶:管理复杂系统和气候变化","authors":"J. Gilligan, M. Vandenbergh","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3695265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article examines the argument that climate change is a “super-wicked” problem. It concludes that the wicked problem concept is best viewed as a rhetorical device that served a valuable function in arguing against technocratic hubris in the early 1970s but is unhelpful and possibly counterproductive as a tool for modern climate policy analysis. Richard Lazarus improved on this analysis by emphasizing the urgency of a climate response in his characterization of the climate problem as “super-wicked.” We suggest another approach based on Charles Lindblom’s “science of muddling through.” The muddling through approach supports the rhetorical points for which the original wicked problem concept was introduced and provides greater practical guidance for developing new laws and policies to address climate change and other complex and messy environmental problems.","PeriodicalId":47503,"journal":{"name":"Vanderbilt Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond Wickedness: Managing Complex Systems and Climate Change\",\"authors\":\"J. Gilligan, M. Vandenbergh\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3695265\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Article examines the argument that climate change is a “super-wicked” problem. It concludes that the wicked problem concept is best viewed as a rhetorical device that served a valuable function in arguing against technocratic hubris in the early 1970s but is unhelpful and possibly counterproductive as a tool for modern climate policy analysis. Richard Lazarus improved on this analysis by emphasizing the urgency of a climate response in his characterization of the climate problem as “super-wicked.” We suggest another approach based on Charles Lindblom’s “science of muddling through.” The muddling through approach supports the rhetorical points for which the original wicked problem concept was introduced and provides greater practical guidance for developing new laws and policies to address climate change and other complex and messy environmental problems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vanderbilt Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vanderbilt Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3695265\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vanderbilt Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3695265","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

这篇文章考察了气候变化是一个“超级邪恶”问题的论点。它的结论是,邪恶问题的概念最好被视为一种修辞手段,在反对20世纪70年代早期技术官僚的傲慢方面发挥了重要作用,但作为现代气候政策分析的工具,它毫无帮助,甚至可能适得其反。理查德·拉扎勒斯(Richard Lazarus)在将气候问题描述为“超级邪恶”时,强调了应对气候变化的紧迫性,从而改进了这一分析。我们建议另一种方法,基于查尔斯·林德布洛姆的“混过去的科学”。蒙混过去的方法支持了最初邪恶问题概念的修辞要点,并为制定新的法律和政策来解决气候变化和其他复杂而混乱的环境问题提供了更大的实践指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond Wickedness: Managing Complex Systems and Climate Change
This Article examines the argument that climate change is a “super-wicked” problem. It concludes that the wicked problem concept is best viewed as a rhetorical device that served a valuable function in arguing against technocratic hubris in the early 1970s but is unhelpful and possibly counterproductive as a tool for modern climate policy analysis. Richard Lazarus improved on this analysis by emphasizing the urgency of a climate response in his characterization of the climate problem as “super-wicked.” We suggest another approach based on Charles Lindblom’s “science of muddling through.” The muddling through approach supports the rhetorical points for which the original wicked problem concept was introduced and provides greater practical guidance for developing new laws and policies to address climate change and other complex and messy environmental problems.
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
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is an online forum designed to advance scholarly discussion. En Banc offers professors, practitioners, students, and others an opportunity to respond to articles printed in the Vanderbilt Law Review. En Banc permits extended discussion of our articles in a way that maintains academic integrity and provides authors with a quicker approach to publication. When reexamining a case “en banc” an appellate court operates at its highest level, with all judges present and participating “on the bench.” We chose the name “En Banc” to capture this spirit of focused review and provide a forum for further dialogue where all can be present and participate.
×
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