4.7 Article

Strategic environmental ignorance: Antipolitical knowledge gaps from drought measurement to adaptation in Cambodia

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY
卷 136, 期 -, 页码 261-269

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2022.06.011

关键词

Environmental Data; Climate change politics; Anti-politics of climate change; Adaptation; Agnotology; Cambodia

资金

  1. British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowship scheme [pf170152]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Knowledge is powerful in shaping environmental policy, but the control over ignorance can also manipulate policy outcomes. This paper examines the influence of data gaps, restrictions on data sharing, and obstacles to data dissemination on the development of Cambodian drought policy. Through examining different aspects of drought sensing, it shows how political and institutional interests shape data generation, dissemination, and policy adaptation, closing certain adaptation pathways while opening others.
In shaping environmental policy, knowledge is power. Yet the opposite is also true. Control over the absence of knowledge facilitates certain policy outcomes being deflected, obscured, or magnified in a way that furthers political, personal, or institutional ends. Applying previous work on ignorance studies and agnotology to the development of Cambodian drought policy, the paper demonstrates how data gaps, restrictions on data sharing, and obstacles to data dissemination serve institutional interests and shape policy development. It proceeds in three parts, each reflecting one aspect of drought sensing in Cambodia and more broadly: hydrological, meteorological, and agricultural. First, how data on the Mekong River is shaped by regional geopolitics. Second, how national rainfall and flood data reflect the political geography of sub-national government administration. Third, how this multi-scalar landscape of political and institutional interests links data generation, data dissemination and adaptation policy, closing certain adaptation pathways, whilst opening others.

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

4.7
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