Boundary organizations and environmental governance: Performance, institutional design, and conceptual development

被引:104
作者
Gustafsson, Karin M. [1 ]
Lidskog, Rolf [1 ]
机构
[1] Orebro Univ, Environm Sociol Sect, SE-70182 Orebro, Sweden
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
Boundary organization; Science-policy interface; Institutional design; Hybrid management; IPCC; SCIENCE-POLICY INTERFACES; CLIMATE-CHANGE; DECISION-MAKING; PORTABLE REPRESENTATIONS; INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL; WATER GOVERNANCE; INFORMATION; KNOWLEDGE; COPRODUCTION; ADAPTATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.crm.2017.11.001
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The concept boundary organization has been introduced to identify and explain a specific way of organizing the interface between science and policy. Although the original meaning of the concept has been criticized, the term has come to be frequently used in studies of knowledge transfer and science-policy relations. This usage constitutes the reason for this paper, which investigates how the concept of boundary organization has come to be used and defined and explores its contribution to the discussion of the organization of the science-policy interplay. The analysis finds that despite its spread and usage, the concept boundary organization does not refer to any specific form of organization and does not per se give any guidance about how to organize science-policy interplay. Instead, boundary organization is mainly used as an empirical label when studying the governance of expertise and the management of science-policy interfaces. This finding is also true for studies of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which describe that organization as a boundary organization without saying anything about what that label means in terms of institutional design and practical implications. However, to label an organization as a boundary organization nevertheless works performatively; it shapes an organization's identity, may provide legitimacy, and can also stabilize the interactions between it and other organizations. Therefore, boundary organization is an important concept, but primarily as a way to facilitate interaction. Thus, the focus of research should be on analyzing how the concept is used and what its implications are for the organization studied.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 11
页数:11
相关论文
共 116 条
[1]   Integrating climate forecasts and societal decision making: Challenges to an emergent boundary organization [J].
Agrawala, S ;
Broad, K ;
Guston, DH .
SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN VALUES, 2001, 26 (04) :454-477
[2]   Context and early origins of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [J].
Agrawala, S .
CLIMATIC CHANGE, 1998, 39 (04) :605-620
[3]   Structural and process history of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [J].
Agrawala, S .
CLIMATIC CHANGE, 1998, 39 (04) :621-642
[4]   Designing a new science-policy communication mechanism for the UN Convention to Combat Desertification [J].
Akhtar-Schuster, M. ;
Amiraslani, F. ;
Diaz Morejon, C. F. ;
Escadafal, R. ;
Fulajtar, E. ;
Grainger, A. ;
Kellner, K. ;
Khan, S. I. ;
Perez Pardo, O. ;
Sauchanka, U. ;
Stringer, L. C. ;
Reda, Fasil ;
Thomas, R. J. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2016, 63 :122-131
[5]  
[Anonymous], SCI TECHNOLOGY HUMAN
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2002, KSG WORKING PAPERS S
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2011, Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society
[8]  
[Anonymous], 1990, I THINK
[9]  
[Anonymous], 1998, HUMAN CHOICE AND CLI
[10]   Science-policy processes for transboundary water governance [J].
Armitage, Derek ;
de Loe, Rob C. ;
Morris, Michelle ;
Edwards, Tom W. D. ;
Gerlak, Andrea K. ;
Hall, Roland I. ;
Huitema, Dave ;
Ison, Ray ;
Livingstone, David ;
MacDonald, Glen ;
Mirumachi, Naho ;
Plummer, Ryan ;
Wolfe, Brent B. .
AMBIO, 2015, 44 (05) :353-366