首页> 外文期刊>Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability >Modernising sustainable development? Standardisation, evidence and experts in local indicators
【24h】

Modernising sustainable development? Standardisation, evidence and experts in local indicators

机译:实现可持续发展的现代化?本地指标的标准化,证据和专家

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Taking inspiration from the forthcoming Rio+20 Conference in Brazil, this paper reflects upon the roles of power and knowledge in developing indicators for sustainable local development. Are indicators, the evidence they privilege, and the policies that follow from them consistent with the stated goals of sustainable development? Are they merely bureaucratic tick-boxes that enable the measurement of “progress”? Or, similarly, do they represent “knowledge modernization” whereby sustainable development can be measured objectively, like GDP? We will examine three points relating to these questions: (1) the increasing standardisation and mobility of sustainable development indicators; (2) the increasing prominence and types of “evidence” that inform sustainable development policy, and (3) the role of experts in determining the parameters of sustainable development. We argue that the development and use of indicators have become a technocratic practice that serves as a buffer between the “political” and the “rational” and thus de-politicises and restricts local sustainable development agendas, despite the inherently political nature of environmental problems and values.View full textDownload full textKeywordssustainable development, policy mobility, indicators, standardisation, ICLEIRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2012.681466
机译:从即将召开的巴西里约+ 20会议上汲取灵感,本文反思了权力和知识在制定可持续地方发展指标中的作用。指标,它们所享有的特权以及所遵循的政策是否与可持续发展的既定目标相符?它们仅仅是官僚的勾号复选框,可以衡量“进度”吗?还是类似地,它们代表“知识现代化”,从而可以像GDP一样客观地衡量可持续发展吗?我们将研究与这些问题有关的三个方面:(1)可持续发展指标的标准化和机动性不断提高; (2)越来越多的证据和类型可作为可持续发展政策的依据,以及(3)专家在确定可持续发展参数方面的作用。我们认为,指标的开发和使用已成为一种技术专家制的实践,可以在“政治”和“理性”之间起到缓冲作用,因此,尽管存在固有的内在性,但它去政治化并限制了当地的可持续发展议程环境问题和价值观的政治性质。查看全文下载全文关键字可持续发展,政策流动性,指标,标准化,ICLEIRelated var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand:“泰勒和弗朗西斯在线”,servicescompact:“ citeulike,网络病毒,微博,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin ,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布号:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2012.681466

著录项

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