首页 > 最新文献

Environmental Sociology最新文献

英文 中文
What sewage sludge is and conflicts in Swedish circular economy policymaking 什么是污水污泥以及瑞典循环经济决策中的冲突
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2022-01-05 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.2021603
Linus Ekman Burgman
ABSTRACT Recycling nutrients from renewable sources, like sewage sludge, has been promoted as a step towards a circular economy by decreasing extraction and dependency on inorganic fertilizers. Implementation, however, is often controversial. In 2018, a Swedish governmental inquiry was commissioned to propose a complete ban on land application of sewage sludge to reduce soil pollution and increase phosphorus recovery. In 2020, the inquiry suggested two pathways, one to ban all land application, and one where agricultural land use should continuously be allowed. This paper is based on interviews with experts tied to the inquiry where they reference to sewage sludge, related objects, and future management. The inquiry’s inability to propose a coherent suggestion is analysed inspired by the concept of multiple ontology. Several ontological versions of sewage sludge emerge that unveil tensions between concepts of danger and cleanliness, pollution and naturalness, often captured in previous studies of waste. Some versions of sewage sludge conflict, which can explain the difficulty to establish an ontologically singular knowledge base for a transformation of sewage sludge from waste to resource. Though most of the experts agree that circular economy and nutrient recycling are good things, policymaking is caught in an ontological conundrum.
摘要通过减少对无机肥料的提取和依赖,从污水污泥等可再生资源中回收营养物质已被视为迈向循环经济的一步。然而,执行工作往往存在争议。2018年,瑞典政府委托进行了一项调查,建议全面禁止污泥的土地利用,以减少土壤污染并提高磷的回收率。2020年,调查提出了两条途径,一条是禁止所有土地申请,另一条是应继续允许农业用地。本文基于对与调查相关的专家的采访,他们提到了污水污泥、相关对象和未来管理。受多元本体概念的启发,分析了调查无法提出连贯建议的问题。污水污泥的几个本体论版本出现了,揭示了危险与清洁、污染与自然之间的紧张关系,这在以前的废物研究中经常被捕捉到。污水污泥的某些版本存在冲突,这可以解释为将污水污泥从废物转化为资源建立本体论单一知识库的困难。尽管大多数专家都认为循环经济和营养回收是好事,但政策制定却陷入了一个本体论难题。
{"title":"What sewage sludge is and conflicts in Swedish circular economy policymaking","authors":"Linus Ekman Burgman","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.2021603","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.2021603","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recycling nutrients from renewable sources, like sewage sludge, has been promoted as a step towards a circular economy by decreasing extraction and dependency on inorganic fertilizers. Implementation, however, is often controversial. In 2018, a Swedish governmental inquiry was commissioned to propose a complete ban on land application of sewage sludge to reduce soil pollution and increase phosphorus recovery. In 2020, the inquiry suggested two pathways, one to ban all land application, and one where agricultural land use should continuously be allowed. This paper is based on interviews with experts tied to the inquiry where they reference to sewage sludge, related objects, and future management. The inquiry’s inability to propose a coherent suggestion is analysed inspired by the concept of multiple ontology. Several ontological versions of sewage sludge emerge that unveil tensions between concepts of danger and cleanliness, pollution and naturalness, often captured in previous studies of waste. Some versions of sewage sludge conflict, which can explain the difficulty to establish an ontologically singular knowledge base for a transformation of sewage sludge from waste to resource. Though most of the experts agree that circular economy and nutrient recycling are good things, policymaking is caught in an ontological conundrum.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49635545","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Mainstreaming climate change sociology 将气候变化社会学纳入主流
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2022.2043529
S. Lockie
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment report on physical understanding of the climate system, released August 2021, concluded that human influence has unequivocally warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land (IPCC 2021). This came as no great surprise given the Fifth and Fourth Assessment reports released in 2014 and 2007 concluded exactly the same thing. Keep going back and the only discernable difference in headline conclusions from IPCC assessments is the degree of confidence with which they are put. In 1995, the balance of evidence pointed toward human influence on the climate. By 2001, the evidence that humans were responsible for most observed change was getting stronger. Increasing confidence in our understanding of climate change and its likely trajectory is to be expected. Behind subtle changes in the language used to express headline assessment findings is both a considerable global research effort and vastly improved understanding of climate changes and drivers at finer spatial and temporal scales. Of course, IPCC assessments still have their limitations. While it is known, for example, that tipping elements in the climate system increase the risk of abrupt and irreversible change at higher levels of global warming, these processes remain difficult to model (IPCC 2021). Climate agreements and policies informed by IPCC assessments proceed, for the most part, as if tipping points are unlikely when, in reality, they are poorly understood (Lenton et al. 2019). My main concern in this essay though is the continuing sociological naivety of IPCC assessments and many of the policies they subsequently inform. It is not that IPCC assessments ignore the social dimensions of climate change altogether. In fact, they report on risks to human health, livelihoods, food systems, cities and natural resource availability alongside vulnerability and adaptive capacity in relation to these risks. What renders the assessments sociologically naïve is not ignorance of the anthropogenic drivers and consequences of climate change but simplistic assumptions about the relationships between science, policy and politics and about the dynamics of social change more generally (see Grundmann and Rödder 2019). Placing greater store on the insights of sociologists (and other social scientists) would go some way to addressing this concern and so, to this end, this essay will summarize major trends in climate change sociology before turning to a small number of key, but largely outstanding questions, that demand sociological and transdisciplinary attention. First though, it will address the charge often levelled at sociology that the discipline does not take climate change seriously.
2021年8月发布的政府间气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)关于气候系统物理理解的第六次评估报告得出结论,人类的影响无疑使大气、海洋和陆地变暖(IPCC 2021)。鉴于2014年和2007年发布的第五次和第四次评估报告得出了完全相同的结论,这并不令人感到意外。继续回顾,IPCC评估的头条结论唯一明显的区别是它们的可信度。1995年,证据的平衡表明人类对气候的影响。到2001年,人类对大多数观测到的变化负有责任的证据越来越有力。人们对我们对气候变化及其可能的发展轨迹的理解越来越有信心。在用于表达标题评估结果的语言发生微妙变化的背后,既有相当大的全球研究努力,也有在更精细的空间和时间尺度上大大提高对气候变化和驱动因素的理解。当然,气专委的评估仍有局限性。例如,尽管众所周知,在全球变暖程度较高的情况下,气候系统中的临界因素会增加突然和不可逆转变化的风险,但这些过程仍然难以建模(IPCC 2021)。根据IPCC评估制定的气候协议和政策在很大程度上似乎不太可能达到临界点,而事实上,人们对这些协议和政策了解甚少(Lenton等人,2019)。然而,我在这篇文章中主要关注的是IPCC评估的持续的社会学天真,以及他们随后提出的许多政策。IPCC的评估并不是完全忽视了气候变化的社会层面。事实上,他们报告了人类健康、生计、粮食系统、城市和自然资源可用性面临的风险,以及与这些风险相关的脆弱性和适应能力。使这些评估在社会学上变得幼稚的不是对气候变化的人为驱动因素和后果的无知,而是对科学、政策和政治之间的关系以及更广泛的社会变化动态的简单假设(见Grundmann和Rödder 2019)。更多地关注社会学家(和其他社会科学家)的见解将在一定程度上解决这一问题,因此,为此,本文将总结气候变化社会学的主要趋势,然后转向少数需要社会学和跨学科关注的关键但主要是悬而未决的问题。不过,首先,它将解决社会学经常受到的指责,即该学科没有认真对待气候变化。
{"title":"Mainstreaming climate change sociology","authors":"S. Lockie","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2022.2043529","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2022.2043529","url":null,"abstract":"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment report on physical understanding of the climate system, released August 2021, concluded that human influence has unequivocally warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land (IPCC 2021). This came as no great surprise given the Fifth and Fourth Assessment reports released in 2014 and 2007 concluded exactly the same thing. Keep going back and the only discernable difference in headline conclusions from IPCC assessments is the degree of confidence with which they are put. In 1995, the balance of evidence pointed toward human influence on the climate. By 2001, the evidence that humans were responsible for most observed change was getting stronger. Increasing confidence in our understanding of climate change and its likely trajectory is to be expected. Behind subtle changes in the language used to express headline assessment findings is both a considerable global research effort and vastly improved understanding of climate changes and drivers at finer spatial and temporal scales. Of course, IPCC assessments still have their limitations. While it is known, for example, that tipping elements in the climate system increase the risk of abrupt and irreversible change at higher levels of global warming, these processes remain difficult to model (IPCC 2021). Climate agreements and policies informed by IPCC assessments proceed, for the most part, as if tipping points are unlikely when, in reality, they are poorly understood (Lenton et al. 2019). My main concern in this essay though is the continuing sociological naivety of IPCC assessments and many of the policies they subsequently inform. It is not that IPCC assessments ignore the social dimensions of climate change altogether. In fact, they report on risks to human health, livelihoods, food systems, cities and natural resource availability alongside vulnerability and adaptive capacity in relation to these risks. What renders the assessments sociologically naïve is not ignorance of the anthropogenic drivers and consequences of climate change but simplistic assumptions about the relationships between science, policy and politics and about the dynamics of social change more generally (see Grundmann and Rödder 2019). Placing greater store on the insights of sociologists (and other social scientists) would go some way to addressing this concern and so, to this end, this essay will summarize major trends in climate change sociology before turning to a small number of key, but largely outstanding questions, that demand sociological and transdisciplinary attention. First though, it will address the charge often levelled at sociology that the discipline does not take climate change seriously.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43558260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
From ‘marginal to marginal’: environmental justice under the Trump administration 从“边际到边际”:特朗普政府的环境正义
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-12-29 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.2015548
Ellen Kohl, M. Sullivan, Mark Milton Chambers, Alissa Cordner, C. Sellers, Leif Fredrickson, J. Ohayon
ABSTRACT How damaging was the Trump administration to environmental justice (EJ) efforts and policy? Since federal EJ oversight at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is governed by executive order, rather than statute, approaches to it have varied by presidential administration. In this paper, we draw on interviews with current and recently retired EPA employees along with staffing and budget data, to examine how EJ has historically been supported and enacted within the agency, with a focus on identifying impacts of the Trump administration on EPA’s EJ work. We find that while leadership support for EJ and emphasis across the agency have changed across presidential administrations, the EJ program has always held a marginal position in terms of allocation of resources and emphasis in regulatory decision-making. Starting from this position of long-term marginalization, EPA’s EJ program was further marginalized by the Trump administration. Though EPA employees expressed divided opinions as to how consequential the Trump administration’s actions were on enacting EJ internally, many thought that the administration’s emphasis on deregulation had significant health consequences in EJ communities. We argue that the impacts of the Trump administration, like those of future administrations, must be assessed within a historical context.
特朗普政府对环境正义(EJ)的努力和政策造成了多大的破坏?由于美国环境保护署(EPA)的联邦环境保护监督是由行政命令而不是法规管理的,因此不同的总统执政方式也有所不同。在本文中,我们利用对现任和最近退休的EPA员工的采访,以及人员配置和预算数据,来研究EPA内部历史上是如何支持和制定EJ的,重点是确定特朗普政府对EPA EJ工作的影响。我们发现,虽然领导层对EJ的支持和整个机构的重点在总统执政期间发生了变化,但就资源分配和监管决策的重点而言,EJ计划始终处于边缘地位。从这种长期边缘化的立场出发,EPA的EJ项目被特朗普政府进一步边缘化。尽管EPA员工对特朗普政府的行动对制定EJ的影响有多大表达了不同的意见,但许多人认为,政府强调放松管制对EJ社区的健康产生了重大影响。我们认为,特朗普政府的影响,就像未来的政府一样,必须在历史背景下进行评估。
{"title":"From ‘marginal to marginal’: environmental justice under the Trump administration","authors":"Ellen Kohl, M. Sullivan, Mark Milton Chambers, Alissa Cordner, C. Sellers, Leif Fredrickson, J. Ohayon","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.2015548","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.2015548","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How damaging was the Trump administration to environmental justice (EJ) efforts and policy? Since federal EJ oversight at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is governed by executive order, rather than statute, approaches to it have varied by presidential administration. In this paper, we draw on interviews with current and recently retired EPA employees along with staffing and budget data, to examine how EJ has historically been supported and enacted within the agency, with a focus on identifying impacts of the Trump administration on EPA’s EJ work. We find that while leadership support for EJ and emphasis across the agency have changed across presidential administrations, the EJ program has always held a marginal position in terms of allocation of resources and emphasis in regulatory decision-making. Starting from this position of long-term marginalization, EPA’s EJ program was further marginalized by the Trump administration. Though EPA employees expressed divided opinions as to how consequential the Trump administration’s actions were on enacting EJ internally, many thought that the administration’s emphasis on deregulation had significant health consequences in EJ communities. We argue that the impacts of the Trump administration, like those of future administrations, must be assessed within a historical context.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42387119","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Is pro-environmentalism a privilege? Country development factors as moderators of socio-psychological drivers of pro-environmental behavior 环保主义是一种特权吗?国家发展因素作为支持环境行为的社会心理驱动因素的调节因素
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-12-18 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.2018123
Öykü H. Aral, J. López-Sintas
ABSTRACT Explaining cross-national differences in individual pro-environmental behaviors is usually grounded in large, heterogeneous data sets. Consequently, research findings may over- or underestimate the effects of environmental variables of interest when analyzing cross-level interactions. This research contextualizes environmental behavior in the European Union, a set of socioeconomically different countries that share a common institutional framework. We explore the effects of country-level drivers on behavior after controlling for individual-level drivers using multilevel regression analysis to estimate the impact of country-level drivers on both the mean behavior of individuals and cross-level interactions. The direct impact of country-level drivers on pro-environmental behaviors was as expected: country affluence and income inequality had positive and negative impacts, respectively, whereas country education level, environmental issues, and cultural values had no direct impact. Nonetheless, in terms of cross-level interactions, country education level increased the effect of perceived behavioral control on behaviors. In Western countries, the influence of country affluence and education level on behavior, operating through social-psychological drivers, maybe underpinned by different socioeconomic mechanisms. Income may not be enough to change perceptions of reality, but income can be transformed into cultural capital that, in turn, may change socially ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions.
摘要:解释个人环保行为的跨国差异通常基于大型、异构的数据集。因此,在分析跨层面的相互作用时,研究结果可能会高估或低估感兴趣的环境变量的影响。这项研究以欧盟的环境行为为背景,欧盟是一组社会经济不同的国家,有着共同的制度框架。在控制了个人层面的驾驶员后,我们使用多水平回归分析来估计国家层面的驾驶员对个人平均行为和跨层面互动的影响,从而探讨了国家层面驾驶员对行为的影响。国家层面的驱动因素对环保行为的直接影响正如预期的那样:国家富裕和收入不平等分别产生了积极和消极影响,而国家教育水平、环境问题和文化价值观没有直接影响。尽管如此,在跨层面互动方面,乡村教育水平增加了感知行为控制对行为的影响。在西方国家,国家富裕程度和教育水平对行为的影响是通过社会心理驱动因素运作的,可能是由不同的社会经济机制支撑的。收入可能不足以改变人们对现实的看法,但收入可以转化为文化资本,进而改变社会根深蒂固的习惯、技能和性格。
{"title":"Is pro-environmentalism a privilege? Country development factors as moderators of socio-psychological drivers of pro-environmental behavior","authors":"Öykü H. Aral, J. López-Sintas","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.2018123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.2018123","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Explaining cross-national differences in individual pro-environmental behaviors is usually grounded in large, heterogeneous data sets. Consequently, research findings may over- or underestimate the effects of environmental variables of interest when analyzing cross-level interactions. This research contextualizes environmental behavior in the European Union, a set of socioeconomically different countries that share a common institutional framework. We explore the effects of country-level drivers on behavior after controlling for individual-level drivers using multilevel regression analysis to estimate the impact of country-level drivers on both the mean behavior of individuals and cross-level interactions. The direct impact of country-level drivers on pro-environmental behaviors was as expected: country affluence and income inequality had positive and negative impacts, respectively, whereas country education level, environmental issues, and cultural values had no direct impact. Nonetheless, in terms of cross-level interactions, country education level increased the effect of perceived behavioral control on behaviors. In Western countries, the influence of country affluence and education level on behavior, operating through social-psychological drivers, maybe underpinned by different socioeconomic mechanisms. Income may not be enough to change perceptions of reality, but income can be transformed into cultural capital that, in turn, may change socially ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43163214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Community sharing: sustainable mobility in a post-carbon, depopulating society 社区共享:人口减少的后碳社会中的可持续流动性
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-11-14 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.2002000
R. Ozaki, M. Aoyagi, F. Steward
ABSTRACT This paper examines new initiatives in shared mobility of Kashiwa City, a satellite town outside Tokyo, from the users’ perspective. In Japan, the transport sector accounts for almost 20% of carbon emissions. At the same time, a population decrease has led to a decline in use of public transport, reducing the level of the quality of life of residents who live in rural and remote areas. This makes residents depend on private cars, ending up contributing to carbon emissions. Three key issues for sustainable mobility to tackle carbon emissions and residents’ wellbeing issues are discussed. Kashiwa City has experimented with new shared transport services with fixed-route microbuses and more flexible community taxis. The paper explores user perception and experience of such community mobility services and considers the three issues from the viewpoint of the practice of mobility. Background interviews were conducted with the city’s officials and transport service operators, and an ethnographic study was carried out and in-situ conversations were made to explore the utility and meaning of mobility. To increase use of public transport to further reduce CO2 emissions from transport, it is important to pay more attention to the practice of mobility from the user’s perspective. (200 words)
摘要:本文从用户的角度研究了东京外卫星城柏华市共享出行的新举措。在日本,交通运输部门的碳排放量几乎占到总排放量的20%。与此同时,人口减少导致公共交通工具使用量下降,降低了农村和偏远地区居民的生活质量水平。这使得居民依赖私家车,最终增加了碳排放。讨论了可持续交通解决碳排放和居民福利问题的三个关键问题。柏川市已经试验了新的共享交通服务,包括固定路线的微型巴士和更灵活的社区出租车。本文探讨了这种社区移动服务的用户感知和体验,并从移动实践的角度来考虑这三个问题。对城市官员和交通服务运营商进行了背景访谈,并进行了人种学研究,并进行了现场对话,以探索交通的效用和意义。为了增加公共交通的使用,进一步减少交通运输产生的二氧化碳排放,从用户的角度更加关注移动性的实践是很重要的。(200字)
{"title":"Community sharing: sustainable mobility in a post-carbon, depopulating society","authors":"R. Ozaki, M. Aoyagi, F. Steward","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.2002000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.2002000","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper examines new initiatives in shared mobility of Kashiwa City, a satellite town outside Tokyo, from the users’ perspective. In Japan, the transport sector accounts for almost 20% of carbon emissions. At the same time, a population decrease has led to a decline in use of public transport, reducing the level of the quality of life of residents who live in rural and remote areas. This makes residents depend on private cars, ending up contributing to carbon emissions. Three key issues for sustainable mobility to tackle carbon emissions and residents’ wellbeing issues are discussed. Kashiwa City has experimented with new shared transport services with fixed-route microbuses and more flexible community taxis. The paper explores user perception and experience of such community mobility services and considers the three issues from the viewpoint of the practice of mobility. Background interviews were conducted with the city’s officials and transport service operators, and an ethnographic study was carried out and in-situ conversations were made to explore the utility and meaning of mobility. To increase use of public transport to further reduce CO2 emissions from transport, it is important to pay more attention to the practice of mobility from the user’s perspective. (200 words)","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43342014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
The cost of leisure: the political ecology of the commercialization of Indonesia’s protected areas 休闲成本:印尼保护区商业化的政治生态
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-11-06 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.2001990
M. Purnomo, A. Maryudi, Novil Dedy Andriatmoko, Edy Muhamad Jayadi, Heiko Faust
ABSTRACT Using the political ecology approach, we investigated the Indonesian government’s decision to commercialize protected areas (PAs) and promote its tourism sector aggressively, and examined how this commercialization is enabled through various institutions and governing structures. We confirmed that the commercialization of PAs in Indonesia was an alternative accumulation, dealing with the crisis of capitalist accumulation. Our empirical finding showed that the commercialization of PAs in Indonesia had detimental environmental and social impacts, such as deadlocks or monopoly or management, and environmental deterioration. This commercialization pattern was different from accumulation by conservation in other regions, such as Africa, where local people were deprived of their access to the means of production, consequently becoming laborers in the tourism industry. In Indonesia, local people were given access to resources; however, as these resources were of little value, they became laborers in the tourism industry. Further research is needed to test whether different patterns of accumulation by conservation also apply to other types of PAs in Indonesia, such as national parks and customary forests, including various coral reef conservation areas in remote and small Islands used as tourist attractions.
利用政治生态学方法,我们调查了印度尼西亚政府将保护区(PAs)商业化并积极促进其旅游业的决定,并研究了如何通过各种机构和治理结构实现这种商业化。我们确认,印尼pa的商业化是一种替代性的积累,可以应对资本主义积累的危机。我们的实证研究结果表明,印尼保护区的商业化对环境和社会产生了不利的影响,如僵局或垄断或管理,以及环境恶化。这种商业化模式与非洲等其他地区的保护积累不同,在非洲,当地人被剥夺了获得生产资料的机会,因此成为旅游业的劳动者。在印度尼西亚,当地人可以获得资源;然而,由于这些资源没有什么价值,他们成为了旅游业的劳动力。需要进一步的研究来检验不同的养护积累模式是否也适用于印度尼西亚其他类型的保护区,例如国家公园和习惯森林,包括用作旅游景点的偏远和小岛屿上的各种珊瑚礁保护区。
{"title":"The cost of leisure: the political ecology of the commercialization of Indonesia’s protected areas","authors":"M. Purnomo, A. Maryudi, Novil Dedy Andriatmoko, Edy Muhamad Jayadi, Heiko Faust","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.2001990","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.2001990","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Using the political ecology approach, we investigated the Indonesian government’s decision to commercialize protected areas (PAs) and promote its tourism sector aggressively, and examined how this commercialization is enabled through various institutions and governing structures. We confirmed that the commercialization of PAs in Indonesia was an alternative accumulation, dealing with the crisis of capitalist accumulation. Our empirical finding showed that the commercialization of PAs in Indonesia had detimental environmental and social impacts, such as deadlocks or monopoly or management, and environmental deterioration. This commercialization pattern was different from accumulation by conservation in other regions, such as Africa, where local people were deprived of their access to the means of production, consequently becoming laborers in the tourism industry. In Indonesia, local people were given access to resources; however, as these resources were of little value, they became laborers in the tourism industry. Further research is needed to test whether different patterns of accumulation by conservation also apply to other types of PAs in Indonesia, such as national parks and customary forests, including various coral reef conservation areas in remote and small Islands used as tourist attractions.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45042867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Taking the lead or following norms? Examining intersections of power in sustainability transitions in Swedish housing associations 带头还是遵循规范?研究瑞典住房协会可持续性转型中的权力交叉
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-10-30 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.1997386
Pernilla Hagbert, Liisa Perjo, Åsa Nyblom
ABSTRACT In this paper, we explore narratives of sustainability in housing and everyday life, positing the home as an ‘opportunity space’ for sustainability transitions. Case studies of three Swedish housing associations provide empirical insights on how sustainability is understood and practiced among residents. Addressing aspects of power and problem framing in sustainability transitions, we analyse how sustainability engagements in the associations are shaped by intersecting discourses, power relations and norms relating to age, gender, class and ethnicity. The analysis suggests that reflexivity on sustainability in the associations on one hand links to different sustainability approaches, which relate to assumptions regarding who can become engaged and the organisation of the associations’ work. On the other hand, narratives and practices of ‘doing sustainability’ are made sense of in different ways, where issues of for whom, the type of knowledge that is premiered, and the ‘upscaling’ of initiatives pose challenges for a more inclusive and transformative approach to sustainability in housing associations. Taken together, this creates different conditions for sustainability transitions in housing and everyday life, shaped both by norms of who and what is seen as sustainable, and by structures that outline the space for action for the associations and their residents.
摘要在本文中,我们探讨了住房和日常生活中的可持续性叙事,将住宅定位为可持续发展转型的“机会空间”。瑞典三个住房协会的案例研究为居民如何理解和实践可持续性提供了经验见解。针对可持续性转型中的权力和问题框架,我们分析了协会中的可持续性参与是如何通过与年龄、性别、阶级和种族相关的交叉话语、权力关系和规范来形成的。分析表明,协会对可持续性的反思一方面与不同的可持续性方法有关,这些方法与关于谁可以参与和协会工作组织的假设有关。另一方面,“做可持续性”的叙述和实践有不同的意义,为谁服务、首次发布的知识类型以及举措的“升级”等问题对住房协会采取更具包容性和变革性的可持续性方法提出了挑战。总之,这为住房和日常生活中的可持续性转变创造了不同的条件,既有谁和什么是可持续的规范,也有为协会及其居民勾勒行动空间的结构。
{"title":"Taking the lead or following norms? Examining intersections of power in sustainability transitions in Swedish housing associations","authors":"Pernilla Hagbert, Liisa Perjo, Åsa Nyblom","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.1997386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.1997386","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, we explore narratives of sustainability in housing and everyday life, positing the home as an ‘opportunity space’ for sustainability transitions. Case studies of three Swedish housing associations provide empirical insights on how sustainability is understood and practiced among residents. Addressing aspects of power and problem framing in sustainability transitions, we analyse how sustainability engagements in the associations are shaped by intersecting discourses, power relations and norms relating to age, gender, class and ethnicity. The analysis suggests that reflexivity on sustainability in the associations on one hand links to different sustainability approaches, which relate to assumptions regarding who can become engaged and the organisation of the associations’ work. On the other hand, narratives and practices of ‘doing sustainability’ are made sense of in different ways, where issues of for whom, the type of knowledge that is premiered, and the ‘upscaling’ of initiatives pose challenges for a more inclusive and transformative approach to sustainability in housing associations. Taken together, this creates different conditions for sustainability transitions in housing and everyday life, shaped both by norms of who and what is seen as sustainable, and by structures that outline the space for action for the associations and their residents.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43579857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Livelihood discourses at the water-energy-food-nexus in Victoria’s Coal Seam Gas (CSG) debate 维多利亚州煤层气(CSG)辩论中水-能源-食物关系的生计话语
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-10-28 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.1980936
Elliot Clarke
ABSTRACT Onshore Coal Seam Gas (CSG) extraction is a controversial practice that has attracted scrutiny from stakeholders surrounding its risk to livelihoods and the environment at the water-energy-food nexus. Victoria’s 2016 public Inquiry into Unconventional Gas provided an opportunity to evaluate how stakeholders conceptualise the role of livelihoods at the water-energy-food nexus and how discourses were deployed to interpret the risks and benefits of CSG development. This paper argues that the relationship between CSG, livelihood assets and resource security is discursively constructed as a form of power and plays a significant role in both nexus modelling and CSG decision-making. This is supported by the application of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which determined that stakeholders regularly considered livelihood assets to be crucial to both sustaining livelihoods and resource security in Victoria. Based on these findings, a revised water-energy-food nexus model is presented where livelihood assets are positioned at the centre of the nexus framework. This paper concludes by considering how competing environmental discourses are likely to shape the future of Australia’s water, energy and food security in ongoing CSG debates more generally.
摘要陆上煤层气开采是一种有争议的做法,在水-能源-粮食关系中,它对生计和环境的风险引起了利益相关者的密切关注。维多利亚州2016年对非常规天然气的公开调查提供了一个机会,以评估利益相关者如何将生计在水-能源-粮食关系中的作用概念化,以及如何运用话语来解释CSG开发的风险和收益。本文认为,CSG、生计资产和资源安全之间的关系是作为一种权力形式进行的,并在关系建模和CSG决策中发挥着重要作用。这得到了批判性话语分析(CDA)应用的支持,该分析确定利益相关者经常认为生计资产对维持维多利亚州的生计和资源安全至关重要。基于这些发现,提出了一个修订的水-能源-粮食关系模型,其中生计资产位于关系框架的中心。本文最后考虑了在正在进行的CSG辩论中,竞争性的环境话语可能如何影响澳大利亚水、能源和粮食安全的未来。
{"title":"Livelihood discourses at the water-energy-food-nexus in Victoria’s Coal Seam Gas (CSG) debate","authors":"Elliot Clarke","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.1980936","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.1980936","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Onshore Coal Seam Gas (CSG) extraction is a controversial practice that has attracted scrutiny from stakeholders surrounding its risk to livelihoods and the environment at the water-energy-food nexus. Victoria’s 2016 public Inquiry into Unconventional Gas provided an opportunity to evaluate how stakeholders conceptualise the role of livelihoods at the water-energy-food nexus and how discourses were deployed to interpret the risks and benefits of CSG development. This paper argues that the relationship between CSG, livelihood assets and resource security is discursively constructed as a form of power and plays a significant role in both nexus modelling and CSG decision-making. This is supported by the application of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which determined that stakeholders regularly considered livelihood assets to be crucial to both sustaining livelihoods and resource security in Victoria. Based on these findings, a revised water-energy-food nexus model is presented where livelihood assets are positioned at the centre of the nexus framework. This paper concludes by considering how competing environmental discourses are likely to shape the future of Australia’s water, energy and food security in ongoing CSG debates more generally.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48480337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Sub-disciplining science in sociology: Bridges and barriers between environmental STS and environmental sociology 社会学中的亚学科科学:环境STS与环境社会学之间的桥梁与障碍
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-10-20 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.1991647
A. Porcelli, J. Besek
ABSTRACT It is inarguable that the natural sciences, from chemistry to ecology, are indispensable if sociologists are to address environmental change. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how, exactly, sociologists incorporate natural science into their work. In other words, what might a sociologist mean if they say that natural science is a vital part of their research? Here we examine this question through a comparative history of environmental science and technology studies (eSTS) and environmental sociology (ES), arguably the two sociological subdisciplines to which the inclusion of natural science is most important. Our results show a complicated picture, one in which eSTS and ES, at times, influence one another’s approach to natural science, yet at most other times diverge completely. In the first half of our analysis we detail how they have diverged, showing how most eSTS scholars have treated natural science as an object of analysis while most ES scholars, in turn, have treated natural science as a resource for analysis. Then, in the second half, we discuss where and how they have converged, focusing on three shared concerns: ignorance, democratizing environmental knowledge, and postcolonial epistemologies.
摘要社会学家要解决环境变化问题,从化学到生态学,自然科学是不可或缺的。然而,目前尚不清楚社会学家究竟是如何将自然科学纳入他们的工作中的。换言之,如果社会学家说自然科学是他们研究的重要组成部分,那他们的意思是什么?在这里,我们通过环境科学与技术研究(eSTS)和环境社会学(ES)的比较史来研究这个问题,这两个社会学分支学科可以说是纳入自然科学最重要的两个学科。我们的研究结果显示了一幅复杂的画面,在这幅画面中,eSTS和ES有时会影响彼此的自然科学方法,但在大多数其他时候却完全不同。在我们分析的前半部分,我们详细介绍了它们是如何分化的,显示了大多数eSTS学者如何将自然科学作为分析对象,而大多数ES学者则将自然科学视为分析资源。然后,在下半部分,我们讨论了它们在哪里以及如何融合,重点关注三个共同的问题:无知、环境知识民主化和后殖民认识论。
{"title":"Sub-disciplining science in sociology: Bridges and barriers between environmental STS and environmental sociology","authors":"A. Porcelli, J. Besek","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.1991647","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.1991647","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT It is inarguable that the natural sciences, from chemistry to ecology, are indispensable if sociologists are to address environmental change. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how, exactly, sociologists incorporate natural science into their work. In other words, what might a sociologist mean if they say that natural science is a vital part of their research? Here we examine this question through a comparative history of environmental science and technology studies (eSTS) and environmental sociology (ES), arguably the two sociological subdisciplines to which the inclusion of natural science is most important. Our results show a complicated picture, one in which eSTS and ES, at times, influence one another’s approach to natural science, yet at most other times diverge completely. In the first half of our analysis we detail how they have diverged, showing how most eSTS scholars have treated natural science as an object of analysis while most ES scholars, in turn, have treated natural science as a resource for analysis. Then, in the second half, we discuss where and how they have converged, focusing on three shared concerns: ignorance, democratizing environmental knowledge, and postcolonial epistemologies.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48089136","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Under the guise of science: how the US Forest Service deployed settler colonial and racist logics to advance an unsubstantiated fire suppression agenda 打着科学的幌子:美国林业局如何利用定居者的殖民主义和种族主义逻辑来推进未经证实的灭火议程
IF 2.5 Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-10-12 DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2021.1987608
Kirsten Vinyeta
ABSTRACT Over the last century, the United States Forest Service (USFS) has reversed its stance on the ecological role of fire – from a militant enforcer of forest fire suppression to supporting prescribed fire as a management tool. Meanwhile, the Karuk Tribe has always prioritized cultural burning as a vital spiritual and ecological practice, one that has been actively suppressed by the USFS. This article examines the discursive evolution of USFS fire science through the critical lens of settler colonial theory. A content analysis of agency discourse reveals how the USFS deployed anti-Indigenous rhetoric to justify its own unsubstantiated forest management agenda. USFS leadership racialized light burning by deridingly referring to it as ‘Piute Forestry.’ The agency has also discredited, downplayed, and erased Indigenous peoples and knowledges in ways that invoke tropes of the ‘Indian savage,’ the ‘Vanishing Indian,’ and the concept of ‘Terra Nullius.’ It wasn’t until the 1960s – in the context of the Civil Rights and American Indian Movements – that the USFS began contemplating the value of prescribed fire. This research illustrates the complicated relationship between the settler state and Western science, as well as the malleability of scientific discourse in the face of changing social contexts.
在过去的一个世纪里,美国林务局(USFS)已经改变了对火灾的生态作用的立场——从一个森林火灾镇压的激进执行者到支持规定火灾作为一种管理工具。与此同时,卡鲁克部落一直将文化焚烧作为一种重要的精神和生态实践,这一直受到美国农业部的积极压制。本文通过定居者殖民理论的批判镜头考察了美国消防科学的话语演变。对机构话语的内容分析揭示了USFS如何部署反土著言论来证明其自己未经证实的森林管理议程。美国农业部的领导将光燃烧种族化,嘲笑地称之为“贫穷林业”。该机构还以援引“印第安野蛮人”、“消失的印第安人”和“无主之地”概念的方式诋毁、淡化和抹去土著人民和知识。直到20世纪60年代,在民权运动和美国印第安人运动的背景下,USFS才开始考虑规定火灾的价值。本研究说明了拓荒者国家与西方科学之间的复杂关系,以及科学话语在面对不断变化的社会背景时的可塑性。
{"title":"Under the guise of science: how the US Forest Service deployed settler colonial and racist logics to advance an unsubstantiated fire suppression agenda","authors":"Kirsten Vinyeta","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2021.1987608","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2021.1987608","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Over the last century, the United States Forest Service (USFS) has reversed its stance on the ecological role of fire – from a militant enforcer of forest fire suppression to supporting prescribed fire as a management tool. Meanwhile, the Karuk Tribe has always prioritized cultural burning as a vital spiritual and ecological practice, one that has been actively suppressed by the USFS. This article examines the discursive evolution of USFS fire science through the critical lens of settler colonial theory. A content analysis of agency discourse reveals how the USFS deployed anti-Indigenous rhetoric to justify its own unsubstantiated forest management agenda. USFS leadership racialized light burning by deridingly referring to it as ‘Piute Forestry.’ The agency has also discredited, downplayed, and erased Indigenous peoples and knowledges in ways that invoke tropes of the ‘Indian savage,’ the ‘Vanishing Indian,’ and the concept of ‘Terra Nullius.’ It wasn’t until the 1960s – in the context of the Civil Rights and American Indian Movements – that the USFS began contemplating the value of prescribed fire. This research illustrates the complicated relationship between the settler state and Western science, as well as the malleability of scientific discourse in the face of changing social contexts.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48455926","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16
期刊
Environmental Sociology
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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