Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Knowledge production and environmental conflict: Managing systematic reviews and maps for constructive outcomes Neal Haddaway, Sally Crowe
Philosophy and History, KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Philosophy and History of Technology, History of Science, Technology and Environment. Stockholm Environment Institute, Sweden.
2017 (English)In: Environmental Evidence, ISSN 2047-2382, E-ISSN 2047-2382, Vol. 6, no 1, 17Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Systematic reviews and maps in the environmental field are often carried out in contexts of contestation between different knowledge holders and users, placing demands on the review team to constructively relate to different interests and perspectives. The aim of this short commentary is to place systematic reviews and maps into a broader perspective of conflict management related to knowledge production, including the role of facilitated stakeholder involvement. We introduce a brief framework that identifies four dimensions that are relevant for choosing among different approaches to knowledge production in conflict situations: type of conflict, view of knowledge, model of stakeholder involvement, and measure of quality. We also provide some suggestions on how such a framework can be applied in connection with planning for systematic reviews and maps. Options include managing conflicts through facilitated stakeholder involvement within the review itself as well as a thorough assessment of what specifically the method can contribute in relationship to other approaches to knowledge production for environmental management.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central Ltd. , 2017. Vol. 6, no 1, 17
Keyword [en]
Conflict, Post-normal science, Stakeholder involvement, Systematic review, Wicked problems
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Philosophy, Ethics and Religion
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-216445DOI: 10.1186/s13750-017-0095-xScopus ID: 2-s2.0-85021272887OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-216445DiVA: diva2:1164012
Note

QC 20171208

Available from: 2017-12-08 Created: 2017-12-08 Last updated: 2017-12-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Nilsson, Annika

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nilsson, Annika
By organisation
History of Science, Technology and Environment
In the same journal
Environmental Evidence
Earth and Related Environmental SciencesPhilosophy, Ethics and Religion

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf