把想象力吗?多维度和时间性是向可持续性转变的重要复杂性

IF 8.6 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Andy Stirling , Rose Cairns , Phil Johnstone , Joel Onyango
{"title":"把想象力吗?多维度和时间性是向可持续性转变的重要复杂性","authors":"Andy Stirling ,&nbsp;Rose Cairns ,&nbsp;Phil Johnstone ,&nbsp;Joel Onyango","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Through interlinked theoretical and empirical analysis, this paper explores some important but neglected questions concerning efforts to achieve sustainability. To what extents do currently dominant forms of academic study and policy visions in this field, satisfactorily address the full political depth and scope of <em>vital complexities</em> in pathways for emerging social transformations? Are there dangers that common simplifications in mainstream ways of thinking about transformation, inadvertently help invisibly to reproduce entrenched patterns of privilege and power that drive focal problems of unsustainability? In particular, does a ‘<em>monothetic</em>’ focus on circumscribed sites or sectoral formations with notionally few clear-cut dimensions of distinction before and after, risk missing more multiple and messy ‘<em>polythetic</em>’ dimensionalities in which power and privilege can hide? What are the implications of common assumptions that pathways for change proceed ‘<em>monotonically</em>’ – neatly and cumulatively in a particular direction, if real world transformations actually unfold according to more plural, undulating and unruly ‘<em>non-monotonic</em>’ temporalities? In order to investigate these questions, the paper employs the concept of <em>sociotechnical imaginaries</em> to explore the constituting dimensions of contrasting understandings of ‘urban transformations’ in Kenya and ‘the nuclear renaissance’ in the UK. Q method and in-depth interpretive policy analysis are used to test patterns in relationships between imagined transformations and their unfoldings over time. The findings suggest that current mainstream approaches may indeed unduly simplify vital complexities in the ways these political dynamics play out – with potentially important practical implications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"82 ","pages":"Article 102741"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378023001073/pdfft?md5=6f40215707d4cc8915d8bd1b95a2dcd4&pid=1-s2.0-S0959378023001073-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transforming imaginations? Multiple dimensionalities and temporalities as vital complexities in transformations to sustainability\",\"authors\":\"Andy Stirling ,&nbsp;Rose Cairns ,&nbsp;Phil Johnstone ,&nbsp;Joel Onyango\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102741\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Through interlinked theoretical and empirical analysis, this paper explores some important but neglected questions concerning efforts to achieve sustainability. To what extents do currently dominant forms of academic study and policy visions in this field, satisfactorily address the full political depth and scope of <em>vital complexities</em> in pathways for emerging social transformations? Are there dangers that common simplifications in mainstream ways of thinking about transformation, inadvertently help invisibly to reproduce entrenched patterns of privilege and power that drive focal problems of unsustainability? In particular, does a ‘<em>monothetic</em>’ focus on circumscribed sites or sectoral formations with notionally few clear-cut dimensions of distinction before and after, risk missing more multiple and messy ‘<em>polythetic</em>’ dimensionalities in which power and privilege can hide? What are the implications of common assumptions that pathways for change proceed ‘<em>monotonically</em>’ – neatly and cumulatively in a particular direction, if real world transformations actually unfold according to more plural, undulating and unruly ‘<em>non-monotonic</em>’ temporalities? In order to investigate these questions, the paper employs the concept of <em>sociotechnical imaginaries</em> to explore the constituting dimensions of contrasting understandings of ‘urban transformations’ in Kenya and ‘the nuclear renaissance’ in the UK. Q method and in-depth interpretive policy analysis are used to test patterns in relationships between imagined transformations and their unfoldings over time. The findings suggest that current mainstream approaches may indeed unduly simplify vital complexities in the ways these political dynamics play out – with potentially important practical implications.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":328,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Environmental Change\",\"volume\":\"82 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102741\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378023001073/pdfft?md5=6f40215707d4cc8915d8bd1b95a2dcd4&pid=1-s2.0-S0959378023001073-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Environmental Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"6\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378023001073\",\"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/S0959378023001073","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

通过理论和实证相结合的分析,本文探讨了一些重要但被忽视的关于可持续发展努力的问题。目前在这一领域占主导地位的学术研究形式和政策愿景在多大程度上令人满意地解决了新兴社会转型途径中至关重要的复杂性的全部政治深度和范围?对于转型的主流思考方式的普遍简化,是否会在不经意间无形中助长根深蒂固的特权和权力模式的重现,从而引发不可持续性的焦点问题?特别是,“单一”关注的是有限的地点或部门结构,在前后几乎没有明确的区分维度,是否有可能错过更多的、混乱的“综合”维度,在这些维度中,权力和特权可以隐藏起来?如果现实世界的转变实际上是根据更多元、波动和难以控制的“非单调”时间展开的,那么,变革途径“单调”地进行——整齐地、累积地朝着特定方向进行——的共同假设意味着什么?为了研究这些问题,本文采用社会技术想象的概念来探索肯尼亚“城市转型”和英国“核复兴”的对比理解的构成维度。Q方法和深入的解释性政策分析用于测试想象中的转换及其随时间展开之间的关系模式。研究结果表明,目前的主流方法确实可能过度简化了这些政治动态发挥作用的重要复杂性——具有潜在的重要实际意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transforming imaginations? Multiple dimensionalities and temporalities as vital complexities in transformations to sustainability

Through interlinked theoretical and empirical analysis, this paper explores some important but neglected questions concerning efforts to achieve sustainability. To what extents do currently dominant forms of academic study and policy visions in this field, satisfactorily address the full political depth and scope of vital complexities in pathways for emerging social transformations? Are there dangers that common simplifications in mainstream ways of thinking about transformation, inadvertently help invisibly to reproduce entrenched patterns of privilege and power that drive focal problems of unsustainability? In particular, does a ‘monothetic’ focus on circumscribed sites or sectoral formations with notionally few clear-cut dimensions of distinction before and after, risk missing more multiple and messy ‘polythetic’ dimensionalities in which power and privilege can hide? What are the implications of common assumptions that pathways for change proceed ‘monotonically’ – neatly and cumulatively in a particular direction, if real world transformations actually unfold according to more plural, undulating and unruly ‘non-monotonic’ temporalities? In order to investigate these questions, the paper employs the concept of sociotechnical imaginaries to explore the constituting dimensions of contrasting understandings of ‘urban transformations’ in Kenya and ‘the nuclear renaissance’ in the UK. Q method and in-depth interpretive policy analysis are used to test patterns in relationships between imagined transformations and their unfoldings over time. The findings suggest that current mainstream approaches may indeed unduly simplify vital complexities in the ways these political dynamics play out – with potentially important practical implications.

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