巴西与德国之间的生物经济科学合作--平等吗?

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS Forest Policy and Economics Pub Date : 2024-02-27 DOI:10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103181
Júlia Mascarello , Rosa Lehmann , Alexandru Giurca
{"title":"巴西与德国之间的生物经济科学合作--平等吗?","authors":"Júlia Mascarello ,&nbsp;Rosa Lehmann ,&nbsp;Alexandru Giurca","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Knowledge, science, and technology are at the core of both a ‘resource-based’ and ‘knowledge-based’ bioeconomy. Collaboration in science considers varying circumstances such as resource availability and technological infrastructure. Significant investments have been mobilized for supporting research, development, and bioeconomicy innovations in Brazil. Germany, in particular, is among Brazil's most prominent bioeconomy collaborators, specifically with regard to tropical forests for their function as a carbon sink, as a site with specific atmospheric and soil conditions for research, and as a provider of forest and agricultural biomass to contribute to the setup of biomass supply chains, and biodiversity. However, North-South inequalities continue to materialize both in knowledge production and scientific work. To better understand the nature of these inequalities, we conduct an explorative empirical study on German-Brazilian scientific collaboration on bioeconomy. Building on theoretical contributions located at the interface between International Relations and Science, Technology, and Innovation studies, we propose a categorization of inequalities in science collaboration which we then use to reflect upon and contextualize the findings from our qualitative interviews with bioeconomy researchers. Our analysis indicates that interviewed researchers perceive the scientific collaboration on bioeconomy between Brazil and Germany as unequal. These inequalities range from research infrastructure to academic career opportunities. However, inequalities are heavily influenced by how the national and international bioeconomy research agenda is defined, and most importantly by whom research agendas are set. Building on these findings, we discuss how international bioeconomy research could move away from the traditional North-South dichotomy in science collaboration towards a more collaborative and inclusive research agenda setting.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124000340/pdfft?md5=827fc2a1f51a54f832035616382ee6c4&pid=1-s2.0-S1389934124000340-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bioeconomy science collaboration between Brazil and Germany – On equal footing?\",\"authors\":\"Júlia Mascarello ,&nbsp;Rosa Lehmann ,&nbsp;Alexandru Giurca\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103181\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Knowledge, science, and technology are at the core of both a ‘resource-based’ and ‘knowledge-based’ bioeconomy. Collaboration in science considers varying circumstances such as resource availability and technological infrastructure. Significant investments have been mobilized for supporting research, development, and bioeconomicy innovations in Brazil. Germany, in particular, is among Brazil's most prominent bioeconomy collaborators, specifically with regard to tropical forests for their function as a carbon sink, as a site with specific atmospheric and soil conditions for research, and as a provider of forest and agricultural biomass to contribute to the setup of biomass supply chains, and biodiversity. However, North-South inequalities continue to materialize both in knowledge production and scientific work. To better understand the nature of these inequalities, we conduct an explorative empirical study on German-Brazilian scientific collaboration on bioeconomy. Building on theoretical contributions located at the interface between International Relations and Science, Technology, and Innovation studies, we propose a categorization of inequalities in science collaboration which we then use to reflect upon and contextualize the findings from our qualitative interviews with bioeconomy researchers. Our analysis indicates that interviewed researchers perceive the scientific collaboration on bioeconomy between Brazil and Germany as unequal. These inequalities range from research infrastructure to academic career opportunities. However, inequalities are heavily influenced by how the national and international bioeconomy research agenda is defined, and most importantly by whom research agendas are set. Building on these findings, we discuss how international bioeconomy research could move away from the traditional North-South dichotomy in science collaboration towards a more collaborative and inclusive research agenda setting.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124000340/pdfft?md5=827fc2a1f51a54f832035616382ee6c4&pid=1-s2.0-S1389934124000340-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124000340\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124000340","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

知识、科学和技术是 "资源型 "和 "知识型 "生物经济的核心。科学合作要考虑到不同的情况,如资源可用性和技术基础设施。巴西已调动大量投资,支持研究、开发和生物经济创新。德国尤其是巴西最重要的生物经济合作者之一,特别是在热带森林方面,因为热带森林具有碳汇功能,是具有特定大气和土壤条件的研究场所,也是森林和农业生物质的提供者,有助于建立生物质供应链和生物多样性。然而,在知识生产和科学工作方面,南北不平等现象依然存在。为了更好地理解这些不平等现象的本质,我们对德国与巴西在生物经济方面的科学合作进行了探索性实证研究。基于国际关系与科学、技术和创新研究之间的理论贡献,我们对科学合作中的不平等现象进行了分类,并以此为基础对生物经济研究人员的定性访谈结果进行了反思和归纳。我们的分析表明,受访研究人员认为巴西和德国在生物经济领域的科学合作是不平等的。这些不平等包括从研究基础设施到学术职业机会等各个方面。然而,不平等在很大程度上受到国家和国际生物经济研究议程定义方式的影响,最重要的是,研究议程是由谁制定的。在这些研究结果的基础上,我们讨论了国际生物经济研究如何从传统的南北科学合作二分法转向更具协作性和包容性的研究议程制定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Bioeconomy science collaboration between Brazil and Germany – On equal footing?

Knowledge, science, and technology are at the core of both a ‘resource-based’ and ‘knowledge-based’ bioeconomy. Collaboration in science considers varying circumstances such as resource availability and technological infrastructure. Significant investments have been mobilized for supporting research, development, and bioeconomicy innovations in Brazil. Germany, in particular, is among Brazil's most prominent bioeconomy collaborators, specifically with regard to tropical forests for their function as a carbon sink, as a site with specific atmospheric and soil conditions for research, and as a provider of forest and agricultural biomass to contribute to the setup of biomass supply chains, and biodiversity. However, North-South inequalities continue to materialize both in knowledge production and scientific work. To better understand the nature of these inequalities, we conduct an explorative empirical study on German-Brazilian scientific collaboration on bioeconomy. Building on theoretical contributions located at the interface between International Relations and Science, Technology, and Innovation studies, we propose a categorization of inequalities in science collaboration which we then use to reflect upon and contextualize the findings from our qualitative interviews with bioeconomy researchers. Our analysis indicates that interviewed researchers perceive the scientific collaboration on bioeconomy between Brazil and Germany as unequal. These inequalities range from research infrastructure to academic career opportunities. However, inequalities are heavily influenced by how the national and international bioeconomy research agenda is defined, and most importantly by whom research agendas are set. Building on these findings, we discuss how international bioeconomy research could move away from the traditional North-South dichotomy in science collaboration towards a more collaborative and inclusive research agenda setting.

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
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
期刊最新文献
Reviewing factors that influence voluntary participation in conservation programs in Latin America Preliminary evidence of softwood shortage and hardwood availability in EU regions: A spatial analysis using the European Forest Industry Database How contracted tree farmers engage in and benefit from inclusive value chains: Evidence from Vietnam Outsourcing stumpage price uncertainty with American put option for active timber management1 Multiple crises as a policy window for forest and nature a power-analysis from Germany
×
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