Making differences legible: Incommensurability as a vehicle for sustainable landscape management

被引:5
作者
Allain, Sandrine [1 ]
Salliou, Nicolas [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Grenoble Alpes, Mt Ecosyst & Soc Lab LESSEM, INRAE, Grenoble, France
[2] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Inst Spatial & Landscape Dev, Planning Landscape & Urban Syst PLUS, Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
Agroecological pest management; Quantitative water management; Social and technical incommensurability; Participatory modeling and simulation; Collective deliberation; MULTICRITERIA EVALUATION; PEST-CONTROL; PARTICIPATION; BIODIVERSITY; AMBIGUITY; INDICATORS; SCIENCE; TECHNOLOGIES; STAKEHOLDERS; PREFERENCES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107240
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Landscape management involves tackling both systemic and social complexity: the former due to multiple interacting entities, the latter due to incommensurable knowledge and value systems of stakeholders. Current practice in landscape management makes wide use of participatory methods, which helps increase the breadth of our understanding of sustainability problems, e.g. biodiversity loss, agricultural pest damages or water penury. However, this practice also often offers a flat, harmonized picture of the landscape, which precludes observing ambiguities and out-of-the-box arguments and ideas for overcoming problems. In this article, we analyzed two research settings that tended to surface and formalize incommensurability between stakeholders regarding the sustainable management of landscapes - one focused on quantitative water management, the other on agroecological pest control. The objective was to investigate if and to which extent these 'opening-up' exercises, based on a deliberative rationale, were beneficial to landscape sustainability. The results indicated that in both cases, participants strove to position their knowledge and values relative to others: this way, they delineated a negotiation and learning space to invest in, and enhanced the quality of their arguments, allowing new insights on the focus issues. These findings offer an operational counterpoint to the prevalence of 'closing-down' approaches in landscape approaches. In the general context of ecological crisis, these examples promote methodological options that offer space to disruptive narratives, as well as tools that allow a reflexive use of the scientific knowledge, models and indicators traditionally used in sustainability appraisals, without discarding them.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 103 条
  • [71] GIS, modeling, and politics: On the tensions of collaborative decision support
    Ramsey, Kevin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2009, 90 (06) : 1972 - 1980
  • [72] Evaluating deliberative and analytical methods for the resolution of environmental conflicts
    Rauschmayer, F
    Wittmer, H
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2006, 23 (01) : 108 - 122
  • [73] Ravetz, 1990, UNCERTAINTY QUALITY, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-94-009-0621-1_3
  • [74] Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the future
    Reed, James
    Van Vianen, Josh
    Deakin, Elizabeth L.
    Barlow, Jos
    Sunderland, Terry
    [J]. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2016, 22 (07) : 2540 - 2554
  • [75] Salliou N, 2017, GESTION PAYSAGERE RA
  • [76] Governance of Ecosystem Services in Agroecology: When Coordination is Needed but Difficult to Achieve
    Salliou, Nicolas
    Muradian, Roldan
    Barnaud, Cecile
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2019, 11 (04)
  • [77] First use of participatory Bayesian modeling to study habitat management at multiple scales for biological pest control
    Salliou, Nicolas
    Vialatte, Aude
    Monteil, Claude
    Barnaud, Cecile
    [J]. AGRONOMY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, 2019, 39 (01)
  • [78] A participatory Bayesian Belief Network approach to explore ambiguity among stakeholders about socio-ecological systems
    Salliou, Nicolas
    Barnaud, Cecile
    Vialatte, Aude
    Monteil, Claude
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE, 2017, 96 : 199 - 209
  • [79] Five ways to ensure that models serve society: a manifesto
    Saltelli, Andrea
    Bammer, Gabriele
    Bruno, Isabelle
    Charters, Erica
    Di Fiore, Monica
    Didier, Emmanuel
    Espeland, Wendy Nelson
    Kay, John
    Lo Piano, Samuele
    Mayo, Deborah
    Pielke, Roger, Jr.
    Portaluri, Tommaso
    Porter, Theodore M.
    Puy, Arnald
    Rafols, Ismael
    Ravetz, Jerome R.
    Reinert, Erik
    Sarewitz, Daniel
    Stark, Philip B.
    Stirling, Andrew
    van der Sluijs, Jeroen
    Vineis, Paolo
    [J]. NATURE, 2020, 582 (7813) : 482 - 484
  • [80] What is wrong with evidence based policy, and how can it be improved?
    Saltelli, Andrea
    Giampietro, Mario
    [J]. FUTURES, 2017, 91 : 62 - 71