4.5 Article

Making knowledge and meaning in communities of practice: What role may science play? The case of sustainable soil management in England

期刊

SOIL USE AND MANAGEMENT
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 160-168

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/sum.12487

关键词

adoption; knowledge co-production; knowledge exchange; meaning-creation; social learning

资金

  1. Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Social learning is gaining popularity as a tool for understanding and designing interactions between experts and farming communities to enhance the uptake of sustainable and innovative farming practices. To date, the literature has mainly focused on the technical role scientists and researchers play in social learning, as sources of or co-producers of knowledge. Social learning, however, implies a dynamic between the creation of knowledge (what can be done) and the creation of meaning (what is considered worth doing). This paper addresses this research gap by exploring the roles that expert actors and their narratives perform in meaning-creation. I argue that a sustainable soil management community of practice is emerging in England and discuss the dynamics of farmer participation in this community. I further argue that members of this community use scientific experts and narratives to inspire, justify and legitimise sustainable soil management as a valid way of being a good farmer. This paper thus stresses the role that scientific or expert actors and narratives play in communities of practice as contributors to meaning-creation inherent to social learning. How soil degradation will be addressed is as much a technical question, a question of what can be done, as a question of meaning, a question of what land managers consider worthwhile doing. The scientific community thus needs to work with the farming community not only to co-produce technical solutions, but also to co-produce shared visions of agrarian futures which put soils at their heart.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据