首页> 外文期刊>Geoforum >Deja vu or something new? The adaptation concept in the climate change literature
【24h】

Deja vu or something new? The adaptation concept in the climate change literature

机译:Deja vu还是新东西?气候变化文献中的适应概念

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This paper reflects on the resurgence and meaning of the adaptation concept in the current climate change literature. We explore the extent to which the early political economic critique of the adaptation concept has influenced how it is used in this literature. That is, has the current conceptualization been enriched by the political economic critique of the 1970s and 1980s and thus represent something new? Or is the concept used in a way today that echoes previous debates; that is, is this a deja vu experience? To answer this question, we review the early political economic critique of the natural hazards school's interpretations of vulnerability and adaptation. We then examine the revival of the adaptation concept in the climate change literature and discuss its main interpretations. For the purposes of this paper, the climate change literature encompasses the four IPCC reports and adaptation-focused articles in four scholarly journals: Global Environmental Change, Climatic Change, Climate and Development, and Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. Our content analysis shows the dominance (70%) of "adjustment adaptation" approaches, which view climate impacts as the main source of vulnerability. A much smaller percentage (3%) of articles focus on the social roots of vulnerability and the necessity for political-economic change to achieve "transformative adaptation." A larger share (27%) locates risk in both society and the biophysical hazard. It promotes "reformist adaptation," typically through "development," to reduce vulnerability within the prevailing system. We conclude with a discussion of continuity and change in the conceptualization of adaptation, and point to new research directions.
机译:本文反思了适应性概念在当前气候变化文献中的复兴和意义。我们探讨了适应概念的早期政治经济学批判在多大程度上影响了它在本文中的使用方式。也就是说,当前的概念化是否被1970年代和1980年代的政治经济评论所充实,从而代表了新的事物?还是今天使用的概念与以前的辩论相呼应?也就是说,这是一场似曾相识的经历吗?为了回答这个问题,我们回顾了对自然灾害学校对脆弱性和适应性的解释的早期政治经济学评论。然后,我们研究气候变化文献中适应概念的复兴,并讨论其主要解释。出于本文的目的,气候变化文献涵盖了四篇学术期刊中的四篇IPCC报告和针对适应问题的文章:全球环境变化,气候变化,气候与发展以及全球变化的缓解和适应策略。我们的内容分析显示,“调整适应”方法占主导地位(70%),该方法将气候影响视为脆弱性的主要来源。很少一部分文章(占3%)关注脆弱性的社会根源以及政治经济变革实现“变革性适应”的必要性。较大的份额(27%)将风险定位于社会风险和生物物理危害。它通常通过“发展”来促进“改革主义者的适应”,以减少现行系统中的脆弱性。我们以适应性概念的连续性和变化性讨论作为结尾,并指出新的研究方向。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Geoforum》 |2013年第8期|42-53|共12页
  • 作者单位

    Department of Geography and GIS, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 607 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801, USA;

    Department of Geography and GIS, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 607 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801, USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Adaptation; Vulnerability; Climate change; Political economy; Natural hazards;

    机译:适应;漏洞;气候变化;政治经济;自然危害;
  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 03:36:27

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号