Linking vulnerability, adaptation, and resilience science to practice: Pathways, players, and partnerships

被引:353
作者
Vogel, Coleen
Moser, Susanne C.
Kasperson, Roger E.
Dabelko, Geoffrey D.
机构
[1] Natl Ctr Atmospher Res, Inst Social Studies Environm, Boulder, CO 80307 USA
[2] Clark Univ, George Perkins Marsh Inst, Worcester, MA 01610 USA
[3] Woodrow Wilson Int Ctr Scholars, Washington, DC USA
来源
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS | 2007年 / 17卷 / 3-4期
关键词
vulnerability; adaptation; resilience; science-practice interface; knowledge systems; communication; southern Africa; vulnerability assessment;
D O I
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.05.002
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Vulnerability, adaptation and resilience are concepts that are finding increasing currency in several fields of research as well as in various policy and practitioner communities engaged in global environmental change science, climate change, sustainability science, disaster risk-reduction and famine interventions. As scientists and practitioners increasingly work together in this arena a number of questions are emerging: What is credible, salient and legitimate knowledge, how is this knowledge generated and how is it used in decision making? Drawing on important science in this field, and including a case study from southern Africa, we suggest an alternative mode of interaction to the usual one-way interaction between science and practice often used. In this alternative approach, different experts, risk-bearers, and local communities are involved and knowledge and practice is contested, co-produced and reflected upon. Despite some successes in the use and negotiation of such knowledge for 'real' world issues, a number of problems persist that require further investigation including the difficulties of developing consensus on the methodologies used by a range of stakeholders usually across a wide region (as the case study of southern Africa shows, particularly in determining and identifying vulnerable groups, sectors, and systems); slow delivery of products that could enhance resilience to change that reflects not only a lack of data, and need for scientific credibility, but also the time-consuming process of coming to a negotiated understanding in science-practice interactions and, finally, the need to clarify the role of 'external' agencies, stakeholders, and scientists at the outset of the dialogue process and subsequent interactions. Such factors, we argue, all hinder the use of vulnerability and resilience 'knowledge' that is being generated and will require much more detailed investigation by both producers and users Of Such knowledge. (C) 2007 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:349 / 364
页数:16
相关论文
共 159 条
[1]  
Adger W. N., 2003, Progress in Development Studies, V3, P179, DOI 10.1191/1464993403ps060oa
[2]  
Adger WN, 2005, GLOBAL ENVIRON CHANG, V15, P77, DOI [10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.12.005, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2005.03.001]
[3]  
Adger WN, 2003, ECON GEOGR, V79, P387
[4]  
Adger WN, 1999, WORLD DEV, V27, P249, DOI 10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00136-3
[5]  
ADGER WN, 2005, ADAPTING CLIMATE CHA
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2005, MILL EC ASS SYNTH RE
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2000, PERCEPTION RISK RISK
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2001, CLIMATE CHANGE 2001
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2001, Global environmental risk
[10]  
[Anonymous], 1997, PASTEURS QUADRANT