构建基于科学的目标:地球系统治理计划中的改革派和激进话语

IF 4.4 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Sasha Quahe , Sarah E. Cornell , Simon West
{"title":"构建基于科学的目标:地球系统治理计划中的改革派和激进话语","authors":"Sasha Quahe ,&nbsp;Sarah E. Cornell ,&nbsp;Simon West","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Science-Based Targets (SBTs) are being developed for companies to contribute to global sustainability goals, including for ‘nature’. The literature has not yet explored multiple understandings of SBTs. We adopt an interpretive approach, using Q methodology to explore framings of SBTs amongst 22 scientists and practitioners engaged in SBT development. Results show two distinct framings: ‘we need science-based targets to help economic systems move towards global sustainability’ and ‘the system itself is unsustainable and needs to change – science-based targets can help’, with areas of agreement and disagreement. They lean towards reformist or radical discourse, at times weaving them together. What kinds of ‘transformation’, if any, are SBTs capable of driving? Conceptualising SBTs as a boundary object, we suggest that sustainability transformations involve paradoxical tensions, including where actors appeal to the powerful to drive change, but this inhibits the most radical discourses. We conclude with potential implications for sustainability science and governance.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"18 ","pages":"Article 100196"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framing science-based targets: Reformist and radical discourses in an Earth system governance initiative\",\"authors\":\"Sasha Quahe ,&nbsp;Sarah E. Cornell ,&nbsp;Simon West\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Science-Based Targets (SBTs) are being developed for companies to contribute to global sustainability goals, including for ‘nature’. The literature has not yet explored multiple understandings of SBTs. We adopt an interpretive approach, using Q methodology to explore framings of SBTs amongst 22 scientists and practitioners engaged in SBT development. Results show two distinct framings: ‘we need science-based targets to help economic systems move towards global sustainability’ and ‘the system itself is unsustainable and needs to change – science-based targets can help’, with areas of agreement and disagreement. They lean towards reformist or radical discourse, at times weaving them together. What kinds of ‘transformation’, if any, are SBTs capable of driving? Conceptualising SBTs as a boundary object, we suggest that sustainability transformations involve paradoxical tensions, including where actors appeal to the powerful to drive change, but this inhibits the most radical discourses. We conclude with potential implications for sustainability science and governance.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":33685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Earth System Governance\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Earth System Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589811623000332\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earth System Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589811623000332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于科学的目标(SBT)正在为公司制定,以促进全球可持续发展目标,包括“自然”目标。文献尚未探索对SBT的多种理解。我们采用解释方法,使用Q方法在22名从事SBT开发的科学家和从业者中探索SBT的框架。结果显示了两个不同的框架:“我们需要基于科学的目标来帮助经济体系走向全球可持续性”和“体系本身是不可持续的,需要改变——基于科学的指标可以帮助”,这两个领域存在一致和分歧。他们倾向于改革派或激进派的话语,有时把它们交织在一起。SBT能够驱动什么样的“转变”(如果有的话)?将SBT概念化为一个边界对象,我们认为可持续性转型涉及矛盾的紧张关系,包括行动者呼吁权贵来推动变革,但这抑制了最激进的话语。最后,我们总结了对可持续性科学和治理的潜在影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Framing science-based targets: Reformist and radical discourses in an Earth system governance initiative

Science-Based Targets (SBTs) are being developed for companies to contribute to global sustainability goals, including for ‘nature’. The literature has not yet explored multiple understandings of SBTs. We adopt an interpretive approach, using Q methodology to explore framings of SBTs amongst 22 scientists and practitioners engaged in SBT development. Results show two distinct framings: ‘we need science-based targets to help economic systems move towards global sustainability’ and ‘the system itself is unsustainable and needs to change – science-based targets can help’, with areas of agreement and disagreement. They lean towards reformist or radical discourse, at times weaving them together. What kinds of ‘transformation’, if any, are SBTs capable of driving? Conceptualising SBTs as a boundary object, we suggest that sustainability transformations involve paradoxical tensions, including where actors appeal to the powerful to drive change, but this inhibits the most radical discourses. We conclude with potential implications for sustainability science and governance.

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
9.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
31
审稿时长
35 weeks
×
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