环境建设和平研究中的抽样偏差

T. Ide
{"title":"环境建设和平研究中的抽样偏差","authors":"T. Ide","doi":"10.1177/27538796221143850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sampling bias poses enormous challenges to research as it can undermine the validity of results, cause significant knowledge gaps, result in research that is driven by convenience rather than need and limit the ability to provide policy advice. In this study, I assess potential sampling biases in the rapidly emerging research field of environmental peacebuilding based on a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. The field frequently engages with difficult cases which are hard to access and/or unlikely to confirm theories, hence reducing concerns about sampling by convenience and result validity. By contrast, there are clear knowledge gaps regarding countries highly vulnerable to environmental change, regarding the Pacific region and Latin America, regarding intra-state peacebuilding dynamics in Asia, and regarding countries with weak or isolated civil societies. Voices from the Global South and female scholars are relatively well represented, but further improvements are desirable. Addressing these issues would support environmental peacebuilding in challenging one-sided environment-conflict narratives, adding to the wider peacebuilding literature, and providing policy advice on sustainable peace.","PeriodicalId":11727,"journal":{"name":"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security","volume":"7 1","pages":"10 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sampling bias in environmental peacebuilding research\",\"authors\":\"T. Ide\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/27538796221143850\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sampling bias poses enormous challenges to research as it can undermine the validity of results, cause significant knowledge gaps, result in research that is driven by convenience rather than need and limit the ability to provide policy advice. In this study, I assess potential sampling biases in the rapidly emerging research field of environmental peacebuilding based on a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. The field frequently engages with difficult cases which are hard to access and/or unlikely to confirm theories, hence reducing concerns about sampling by convenience and result validity. By contrast, there are clear knowledge gaps regarding countries highly vulnerable to environmental change, regarding the Pacific region and Latin America, regarding intra-state peacebuilding dynamics in Asia, and regarding countries with weak or isolated civil societies. Voices from the Global South and female scholars are relatively well represented, but further improvements are desirable. Addressing these issues would support environmental peacebuilding in challenging one-sided environment-conflict narratives, adding to the wider peacebuilding literature, and providing policy advice on sustainable peace.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11727,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"10 - 23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/27538796221143850\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27538796221143850","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

抽样偏差给研究带来了巨大的挑战,因为它可能破坏结果的有效性,造成重大的知识空白,导致受便利而非需求驱动的研究,并限制提供政策建议的能力。在本研究中,我基于对同行评议文献的系统审查,评估了快速兴起的环境建设和平研究领域中潜在的抽样偏差。该领域经常涉及难以获得和/或不太可能证实理论的困难案例,因此通过方便和结果有效性减少了对抽样的关注。相比之下,在极易受环境变化影响的国家、太平洋地区和拉丁美洲、亚洲国家内部建设和平的动态以及民间社会薄弱或孤立的国家方面,存在明显的知识差距。来自全球南方和女性学者的声音相对较好,但需要进一步改善。解决这些问题将支持环境建设和平,挑战片面的环境冲突叙述,增加更广泛的建设和平文献,并就可持续和平提供政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sampling bias in environmental peacebuilding research
Sampling bias poses enormous challenges to research as it can undermine the validity of results, cause significant knowledge gaps, result in research that is driven by convenience rather than need and limit the ability to provide policy advice. In this study, I assess potential sampling biases in the rapidly emerging research field of environmental peacebuilding based on a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. The field frequently engages with difficult cases which are hard to access and/or unlikely to confirm theories, hence reducing concerns about sampling by convenience and result validity. By contrast, there are clear knowledge gaps regarding countries highly vulnerable to environmental change, regarding the Pacific region and Latin America, regarding intra-state peacebuilding dynamics in Asia, and regarding countries with weak or isolated civil societies. Voices from the Global South and female scholars are relatively well represented, but further improvements are desirable. Addressing these issues would support environmental peacebuilding in challenging one-sided environment-conflict narratives, adding to the wider peacebuilding literature, and providing policy advice on sustainable peace.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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