首页> 外文OA文献 >Governance and Land Management Fires Understanding Objects of Governance as Expressing an Ethics of Dissensus
【2h】

Governance and Land Management Fires Understanding Objects of Governance as Expressing an Ethics of Dissensus

机译:治理与土地管理激发了对理解治理对象表达异议伦理的理解

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Having worked in science studies for many years, objects of knowledge are my usual focus of analysis. In particular in the past I have puzzled about how the objects that scientists know, and objects that practitioners of Aboriginal Australian knowledge traditions know, might be connected and separated. One example of that analytic work involved analysing the objects of knowledge involved as scientists and Aboriginal landowners engaged with each other around land management firing (Verran, 2002a). In 2014 I find that the character of the entity that is my focus of analysis must change. Epistemic practices as such, are no longer of much interest to those who fund research in Australia. Nowadays it is objects of governance that are of interest. Of course objects of governance come to life as knowable in knowledge practices, but it is not their capacity to constitute enough certainty about the world known that matters nowadays. It is their role in allowing transparent organisational accountability that now matters. And that shift is accompanied by changed institutional arrangements. Research associated with services provision is now largely the order of the day in Australian universities. Thus it is that, near the end of my career, I find myself working in ‘GroundUP,’ a research group and a services provider located in a policy research unit in Charles Darwin University (see Charles Darwin University’s webpage www. cdu.edu.au/centres/groundup/). No longer a field worker, I am a story-teller who worries at coming up with some useful naming’s of what we are doing in our ground-up policy research and services delivery projects.
机译:在科学研究领域工作了多年的知识对象是我通常的分析重点。特别是在过去,我对科学家知道的物体和澳大利亚原住民知识传统的从业者知道的物体如何连接和分离感到困惑。这种分析工作的一个例子是分析科学家和原住民土地所有者在土地管理解雇期间相互接触时所涉及的知识对象(Verran,2002a)。在2014年,我发现作为分析重点的实体的性质必须改变。像这样的认知实践对资助澳大利亚研究的人们不再有太大的兴趣。如今,有趣的是治理对象。当然,在知识实践中可以理解的治理对象是可以实现的,但是对当今已知的世界构成足够确定性的能力并不重要。现在,重要的是他们在允许透明的组织责任制中的作用。这种转变伴随着制度安排的改变。现在,与服务提供相关的研究在澳大利亚大学中已成为日常工作。因此,就是在我职业生涯即将结束时,我发现自己在“ GroundUP”工作,这是一个位于查尔斯·达尔文大学政策研究部门的研究小组和服务提供商(请参阅查尔斯·达尔文大学的网页www.cdu.edu。)。 au / centres / groundup /)。我不再是现场工作人员,而是一个讲故事的人,他担心提出一些有用的命名,说明我们在基础政策研究和服务交付项目中正在做的事情。

著录项

  • 作者

    Verran Helen;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2015
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 English
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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