首页> 外文期刊>Forest Policy and Economics >Value and risks of the use of analytical theory in science for forest policy. (Special Issue: Political theory for forest policy.)
【24h】

Value and risks of the use of analytical theory in science for forest policy. (Special Issue: Political theory for forest policy.)

机译:在森林政策科学中使用分析理论的价值和风险。 (特刊:森林政策的政治理论。)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The impact of analytical research on the political process is analyzed here from the view point of stakeholders in forest policy. The interests and actions of stakeholders are described based on political theory and are illustrated using examples from 25 years of research in forest policy and consulting. The value of the knowledge produced by a model of analytical research is dependent upon its salience, credibility and legitimacy. Due to the political process of knowledge transfer, strong stakeholders can achieve a high level of salience for their interests and thus misuse analytical arguments for ideological legitimacy. To address this problem, the proper use of analytical knowledge can be supported by four strategies. First, internal allies can use analytical science to persuade other stakeholders to accept specific results. Such behavior produces scientific, rational actions, even if consensus is absent and the results are biased. Second, external allies can force other stakeholders to make use of analytical science to demonstrate that they have carefully considered scientific findings, whatever they may be. Third, political learning means that the unpredictable results of analytical science can be surprising, even to powerful stakeholders, thereby inciting learning effects. Fourth, political integration is useful for identifying the limits of analytical knowledge and adding to other sources of knowledge. These four strategies prove that even if stakeholders always dominate knowledge transfer, strictly separating analytical research from the valuations and/or direct interventions of stakeholders may bring some analytical rationality to the practical use of knowledge. These options encourage the promotion of an analytical-scientific model, even if it is often ideologically misused by powerful stakeholders. Moreover, properly used analytical research can speak truth not to power but within power processes.Digital Object Identifier http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2009.12.004
机译:本文从森林政策利益相关者的角度分析了分析研究对政治进程的影响。利益相关者的利益和行为基于政治理论进行描述,并通过25年森林政策和咨询研究的实例进行说明。分析研究模型所产生的知识的价值取决于其显着性,可信性和合法性。由于知识转移的政治过程,强大的利益相关者可以实现对其利益的高度重视,从而将分析论点误用于意识形态合法性。为了解决这个问题,可以通过四种策略来支持正确使用分析知识。首先,内部盟友可以利用分析科学说服其他利益相关者接受特定结果。即使没有共识并且结果有偏见,这种行为也会产生科学,理性的行动。第二,外部盟友可以迫使其他利益相关者利用分析科学来证明他们已经仔细考虑了科学发现,无论它们可能是什么。第三,政治学习意味着分析科学的不可预测的结果可能是令人惊讶的,甚至对于强大的利益相关者而言也是如此,从而激发学习效果。第四,政治整合对于确定分析知识的局限性和增加其他知识来源很有用。这四种策略证明,即使利益相关者始终主导知识转移,将分析研究与利益相关者的估值和/或直接干预严格分开也可能为知识的实际使用带来分析理性。这些选择鼓励了分析科学模型的推广,即使它在意识形态上经常被强大的利益相关者滥用。此外,正确使用的分析研究可以说的不是权力,而是权力过程中的真相。数字对象标识符http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol。 2009.12.004

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