当你对一颗(GWP)星许愿时:环境治理和全球变暖指标的反射性表现。

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
George Cusworth, Jeremy Brice, Jamie Lorimer, Tara Garnett
{"title":"当你对一颗(GWP)星许愿时:环境治理和全球变暖指标的反射性表现。","authors":"George Cusworth,&nbsp;Jeremy Brice,&nbsp;Jamie Lorimer,&nbsp;Tara Garnett","doi":"10.1177/03063127221134275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The metrics used in environmental management are performative. That is, the tools deployed to classify and measure the natural world interact with the things they were designed to observe. The idea of performativity also captures the way these interactions shape or distort the governance activities that metrics are used to inform. The performativity of metrics reveals how mundane practices of measurement and auditing are inscribed with substantial power. This has proven particularly true for the global warming metrics, like GWP100, that are central to the management of anthropogenic climate change. Greenhouse gases are materially heterogenous, and the metrics used to commensurate their various warming impacts influence the distribution of both culpability and capital in climate policy and markets. The publication of a new warming metric, GWP* (or GWP Star), has generated a modest scientific controversy, as a diverse cast of stakeholders recognize this performativity seek to influence the metrological regime under which they live. We analyse this controversy, particularly as it unfolded in the fractious discourse around sustainable food and farming, to develop the concept of <i>reflexive performativity</i>: where actors are anticipatory and strategic in their engagement with the metrics that are used to govern their lives. We situate this idea in relation to, and in tentative evidential support of, the concept of reflexive modernization.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"53 1","pages":"3-28"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9893306/pdf/","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When you wish upon a (GWP) star: Environmental governance and the reflexive performativity of global warming metrics.\",\"authors\":\"George Cusworth,&nbsp;Jeremy Brice,&nbsp;Jamie Lorimer,&nbsp;Tara Garnett\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03063127221134275\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The metrics used in environmental management are performative. That is, the tools deployed to classify and measure the natural world interact with the things they were designed to observe. The idea of performativity also captures the way these interactions shape or distort the governance activities that metrics are used to inform. The performativity of metrics reveals how mundane practices of measurement and auditing are inscribed with substantial power. This has proven particularly true for the global warming metrics, like GWP100, that are central to the management of anthropogenic climate change. Greenhouse gases are materially heterogenous, and the metrics used to commensurate their various warming impacts influence the distribution of both culpability and capital in climate policy and markets. The publication of a new warming metric, GWP* (or GWP Star), has generated a modest scientific controversy, as a diverse cast of stakeholders recognize this performativity seek to influence the metrological regime under which they live. We analyse this controversy, particularly as it unfolded in the fractious discourse around sustainable food and farming, to develop the concept of <i>reflexive performativity</i>: where actors are anticipatory and strategic in their engagement with the metrics that are used to govern their lives. We situate this idea in relation to, and in tentative evidential support of, the concept of reflexive modernization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"3-28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9893306/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221134275\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221134275","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

环境管理中使用的度量标准是可执行的。也就是说,用于分类和测量自然世界的工具与它们被设计用来观察的事物相互作用。性能的概念还捕获了这些交互塑造或扭曲使用度量来通知的治理活动的方式。度量的性能揭示了度量和审计的平凡实践是如何被赋予巨大的权力的。对于全球变暖指标来说尤其如此,比如GWP100,它是人为气候变化管理的核心。温室气体在物质上是异质的,用于衡量其各种变暖影响的指标影响了气候政策和市场中的责任和资本分布。一种新的变暖度量,GWP*(或GWP星)的发布引起了一场适度的科学争议,因为不同的利益相关者认识到这一性能试图影响他们所生活的计量制度。我们分析了这一争议,特别是当它在围绕可持续粮食和农业的激烈讨论中展开时,发展了反思性表演的概念:行动者在参与用于管理他们生活的指标时具有预见性和战略性。我们将这一观点与反思性现代化的概念联系起来,并作为初步的证据支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

When you wish upon a (GWP) star: Environmental governance and the reflexive performativity of global warming metrics.

When you wish upon a (GWP) star: Environmental governance and the reflexive performativity of global warming metrics.

When you wish upon a (GWP) star: Environmental governance and the reflexive performativity of global warming metrics.

When you wish upon a (GWP) star: Environmental governance and the reflexive performativity of global warming metrics.

The metrics used in environmental management are performative. That is, the tools deployed to classify and measure the natural world interact with the things they were designed to observe. The idea of performativity also captures the way these interactions shape or distort the governance activities that metrics are used to inform. The performativity of metrics reveals how mundane practices of measurement and auditing are inscribed with substantial power. This has proven particularly true for the global warming metrics, like GWP100, that are central to the management of anthropogenic climate change. Greenhouse gases are materially heterogenous, and the metrics used to commensurate their various warming impacts influence the distribution of both culpability and capital in climate policy and markets. The publication of a new warming metric, GWP* (or GWP Star), has generated a modest scientific controversy, as a diverse cast of stakeholders recognize this performativity seek to influence the metrological regime under which they live. We analyse this controversy, particularly as it unfolded in the fractious discourse around sustainable food and farming, to develop the concept of reflexive performativity: where actors are anticipatory and strategic in their engagement with the metrics that are used to govern their lives. We situate this idea in relation to, and in tentative evidential support of, the concept of reflexive modernization.

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
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
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