首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


The significance of meaning. Why IPBES needs the social sciences and humanities
Authors:Jens Jetzkowitz  CSA van Koppen  Rolf Lidskog  Konrad Ott  Lieske Voget-Kleschin  Catherine Mei Ling Wong
Institution:1. Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Methods of empirical social research and statistics, Helmut Schmidt University, Holstenhofweg 85, D-22043 Hamburg, Germanyjetzkowj@hsu-hh.de;3. Environmental Policy, Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1, 6706KN Wageningen, Netherlands;4. School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, ?rebro University, SE-701 82 ?rebro, Sweden;5. Department of Philosophy, Christian-Albrechts-Universit?t zu Kiel, Leibnizstr. 6, D-24118 Kiel, Germany;6. Maison des Sciences Humaines (E02 15-010) 11, Porte des Sciences, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning, Université du Luxembourg, Campus Belval, L-4366 Esch-Belval, Luxembourg
Abstract:The term “biodiversity” is often used to describe phenomena of nature, which can be studied without a reference to the socially constructed, evaluative, or indeed normative contexts. In our paper, we challenge this conception by focusing particularly on methodological aspects of biodiversity research. We thereby engage with the idea of interdisciplinary biodiversity research as a scientific approach directed at the recognition and management of contemporary society in its ecological embedding. By doing this, we explore how research on and assessments of biodiversity can be enhanced if meaning, aspiration, desires, and related aspects of agency are methodically taken into account. In six sections, we substantiate our claim that the discourse on biodiversity (including the IPBES (Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) debate) is incomplete without contributions from the social sciences and humanities. In the introduction, a brief overview of biodiversity’s conceptual history is provided showing that “biodiversity” is a lexical invention intended to create a strong political momentum. However, that does not impede its usability as a research concept. Section 2 examines the origins of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) by way of sociological discourse analysis. Subsequently, it proposes a matrix as a means to structure the ambiguities and tensions inherent in the CBD. The matrix reemphasizes our main thesis regarding the need to bring social and ethical expertise to the biodiversity discourse. In Section 3, we offer a brief sketch of the different methods of the natural and social sciences as well as ethics. This lays the groundwork for our Section 4, which explains and illustrates what social sciences and ethics can contribute to biodiversity research. Section 5 turns from research to politics and argues that biodiversity governance necessitates deliberative discourses in which participation of lay people plays an important role. Section 6 provides our conclusions.
Keywords:biodiversity  social sciences  ethics  methodology  science–policy interface  foundations of biodiversity research  IPBES
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号