Lost in Translation – Following the Ecosystem Approach from Malawi to the Barents Sea

Q1 Social Sciences Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2023-01-06 DOI:10.23865/arctic.v14.3478
M. Hammer
{"title":"Lost in Translation – Following the Ecosystem Approach from Malawi to the Barents Sea","authors":"M. Hammer","doi":"10.23865/arctic.v14.3478","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"New ideas are constantly being produced as a changing world demands solutions to new problems. International environmental regimes often present ideas to reduce negative human effects on the environment. Implementation of ideas has often been studied through diffusion theory, where ideas are expected to be implemented in their original version. Translation theory from New Scandinavian Institutionalism allows for an analysis of how ideas invented to solve problems change from introduction to implementation. Ideas heralded through UN processes may face a very long route from introduction to local implementation, during which the idea can become radically changed. Through a thorough study of documents, this article follows the trajectories of the idea of Ecosystem Approach (EA), from its first limited practical application in the US during the 1980s and 90s, during its travels in different United Nations fora, and ending up implemented locally through the 2006 Norwegian Barents Sea Management Plan. The novelty of this study is that the analyses cover a long timeframe combined with a focus on all the different steps of translation combined. This also allows for possible drivers of change to be identified. The results show that there are changes made to the idea to such an extent that what is finally implemented is something quite different from the original idea, and more like “business as usual”. According to the theory, discrepancies do not necessarily mean the idea has not been successful; on the contrary, ideas that can be changed may be more likely to become institutionalized.","PeriodicalId":36694,"journal":{"name":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v14.3478","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

New ideas are constantly being produced as a changing world demands solutions to new problems. International environmental regimes often present ideas to reduce negative human effects on the environment. Implementation of ideas has often been studied through diffusion theory, where ideas are expected to be implemented in their original version. Translation theory from New Scandinavian Institutionalism allows for an analysis of how ideas invented to solve problems change from introduction to implementation. Ideas heralded through UN processes may face a very long route from introduction to local implementation, during which the idea can become radically changed. Through a thorough study of documents, this article follows the trajectories of the idea of Ecosystem Approach (EA), from its first limited practical application in the US during the 1980s and 90s, during its travels in different United Nations fora, and ending up implemented locally through the 2006 Norwegian Barents Sea Management Plan. The novelty of this study is that the analyses cover a long timeframe combined with a focus on all the different steps of translation combined. This also allows for possible drivers of change to be identified. The results show that there are changes made to the idea to such an extent that what is finally implemented is something quite different from the original idea, and more like “business as usual”. According to the theory, discrepancies do not necessarily mean the idea has not been successful; on the contrary, ideas that can be changed may be more likely to become institutionalized.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
迷失在翻译中——遵循从马拉维到巴伦支海的生态系统方法
随着不断变化的世界要求解决新问题,新的想法不断产生。国际环境机制经常提出减少人类对环境的负面影响的想法。思想的实施通常是通过扩散理论来研究的,在扩散理论中,思想被期望以其原始版本来实施。新斯堪的纳维亚制度主义的翻译理论允许分析为解决问题而发明的想法如何从引入到实施的变化。通过联合国进程提出的想法可能面临从引进到当地实施的漫长道路,在此期间,想法可能会发生根本变化。通过对文献的深入研究,本文遵循了生态系统方法(EA)理念的发展轨迹,从20世纪80年代和90年代在美国的第一次有限的实际应用,到在不同的联合国论坛上的传播,最后通过2006年挪威巴伦支海管理计划在当地实施。本研究的新颖之处在于分析涵盖了很长的时间框架,并将重点放在了翻译的所有不同步骤上。这也允许识别可能的变化驱动因素。结果表明,对这个想法进行了修改,以至于最终实现的东西与最初的想法大不相同,更像是“一切照旧”。根据这一理论,差异并不一定意味着想法没有成功;相反,可以改变的观念更有可能制度化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Arctic Review on Law and Politics
Arctic Review on Law and Politics Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of Residence Permit Appeals at the Administrative Courts of Finland: Acquiescence Bias by Legalised Judicial Injustices in Finland EU Engagement in the Arctic: Challenges to Achieving Ambitions in an Area outside Its Jurisdiction War in Europe, but Still Low Tension in the High North? An Analysis of Norwegian Mitigation Strategies Welcome to Another Demanding and Exiting Year Small States in World Politics: Norwegian Interests and Foreign Policy Challenges in the Arctic
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1