Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 12
  • Cited by
    This chapter has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Mahony, Martin and Hulme, Mike 2018. Epistemic geographies of climate change. Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 42, Issue. 3, p. 395.

    Hugé, Jean 2017. Participatory sustainability assessment for spatial planning: reflections from a pilot exercise in Flanders, Belgium. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, Vol. 35, Issue. 4, p. 284.

    Ison, Ray Allan, Catherine and Collins, Kevin 2015. Reframing water governance praxis: Does reflection on metaphors have a role?. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol. 33, Issue. 6, p. 1697.

    Cowell, Richard and Lennon, Mick 2014. The Utilisation of Environmental Knowledge in Land-Use Planning: Drawing Lessons for an Ecosystem Services Approach. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol. 32, Issue. 2, p. 263.

    Weaver, Christopher P. Lempert, Robert J. Brown, Casey Hall, John A. Revell, David and Sarewitz, Daniel 2013. Improving the contribution of climate model information to decision making: the value and demands of robust decision frameworks. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, Vol. 4, Issue. 1, p. 39.

    Yamamoto, Yuri T. 2012. Values, objectivity and credibility of scientists in a contentious natural resource debate. Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 21, Issue. 1, p. 101.

    Wibeck, Victoria 2012. Images of Environmental Management: Competing Metaphors in Focus Group Discussions of Swedish Environmental Quality Objectives. Environmental Management, Vol. 49, Issue. 4, p. 776.

    Ravera, Federica Hubacek, Klaus Reed, Mark and Tarrasón, David 2011. Learning from Experiences in Adaptive Action Research: a Critical Comparison of two Case Studies Applying Participatory Scenario Development and Modelling Approaches. Environmental Policy and Governance, Vol. 21, Issue. 6, p. 433.

    Russill, Chris 2011. Truth and opinion in climate change discourse: The Gore–Hansen disagreement. Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 20, Issue. 6, p. 796.

    Collins, Andrea Cowell, Richard and Flynn, Andrew 2009. Evaluation and Environmental Governance: The Institutionalisation of Ecological Footprinting. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 41, Issue. 7, p. 1707.

    Golobiĉ, Mojca and Maruŝiĉ, Ivan 2007. Developing an Integrated Approach for Public Participation: A Case of Land-Use Planning in Slovenia. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 34, Issue. 6, p. 993.

    Nerlich, Brigitte 2007. Media, Metaphors and Modelling. Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 32, Issue. 4, p. 432.

    ×
  • Print publication year: 2003
  • Online publication date: September 2009

3 - Models as metaphors

Summary

Introduction

This chapter discusses philosophical reflections on the intellectual adventure of conducting Integrated Assessment (IA) Focus Groups with citizens, as presented in this volume. The task of this exercise was ambitious: to bridge the gap between sustainability science and democratic debate in the climate domain. The science component was mainly represented by models, most (although not all) having the appearance of describing future states of the global climate and their consequences for human society. At first it could seem a daunting, indeed, overwhelming task: it was hard to see how lay participants could meaningfully relate to models whose construction required very special expertise in mathematics and software engineering; and whose comprehension required knowledge of climate science. But having witnessed the debates among the modelers themselves, the research team already knew that IA models are quite problematic products of science. It is freely accepted, even emphasized, among the experts that the models do not provide simple predictions; and so their epistemic status and policy relevance were already open to question. In addition, there was the knowledge that experts are usually “laypersons” outside their specialties, and that policy-makers are generally no more knowledgeable than ordinary citizens. And, in any event, the democratic process involves debate over issues where both expert and lay voices are heard. Hence the IA models were an appropriate vehicle for developing a many-sided dialogue on basic issues.

In the event, the involvement of this “extended peer community” proved far less difficult than anticipated.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Public Participation in Sustainability Science
  • Online ISBN: 9780511490972
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490972
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×