東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Social-Ecological Systems, Values, a...

Piso, Zachary Amedeo.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Social-Ecological Systems, Values, and the Science of "People Management".

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Social-Ecological Systems, Values, and the Science of "People Management"./
Author:	Piso, Zachary Amedeo.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2017,
Description:	184 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-10(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International78-10A(E).
Subject:	Environmental philosophy. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10277861
ISBN:	9781369774443

Social-Ecological Systems, Values, and the Science of "People Management".
Piso, Zachary Amedeo.

Social-Ecological Systems, Values, and the Science of "People Management". - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2017 - 184 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-10(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Michigan State University, 2017.

This dissertation interrogates a shift in environmental science, policy, and management toward conceptualizing the environment as a social-ecological system. Social-ecological systems science reflects an interdisciplinary effort to understand how individuals and communities achieve their environmental goals through the institutions that they maintain. Though the paradigmatic institutions concern economic behavior (e.g. property rights institutions), the field embraces the social sciences broadly, with contributions from sociology, anthropology, geography, political science, and so on. That said, social science is fairly narrowly conceived; leaders in the field stress that they are studying social mechanisms in order to predict and manage social behavior. In a popular textbook on the subject, Fikret Berkes and Carl Folke stress that "resource management is people management" and call for a social science of this management.

ISBN: 9781369774443Subjects--Topical Terms:

3168296
Environmental philosophy.

Social-Ecological Systems, Values, and the Science of "People Management".
LDR:04639nmm a2200349 4500 001 2165830
005 20181129124500.5
008 190424s2017 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781369774443
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10277861
035 $a (MiAaPQ)grad.msu:15262
035 $a AAI10277861
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Piso, Zachary Amedeo. $3 3353923
245 1 0 $a Social-Ecological Systems, Values, and the Science of "People Management".
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2017
300 $a 184 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-10(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Paul B. Thompson.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Michigan State University, 2017.
520 $a This dissertation interrogates a shift in environmental science, policy, and management toward conceptualizing the environment as a social-ecological system. Social-ecological systems science reflects an interdisciplinary effort to understand how individuals and communities achieve their environmental goals through the institutions that they maintain. Though the paradigmatic institutions concern economic behavior (e.g. property rights institutions), the field embraces the social sciences broadly, with contributions from sociology, anthropology, geography, political science, and so on. That said, social science is fairly narrowly conceived; leaders in the field stress that they are studying social mechanisms in order to predict and manage social behavior. In a popular textbook on the subject, Fikret Berkes and Carl Folke stress that "resource management is people management" and call for a social science of this management.
520 $a Social-ecological systems scientists have generally neglected the ethics of people management---for the most part they subscribe to a fairly typical fact/value dichotomy according to which scientists describe social-ecological systems while managers and policymakers prescribe actions in light of these descriptions. Following several philosophical traditions (in particular pragmatist philosophy of science), I call attention to the ways that social-ecological systems science is value-laden. I take environmental pragmatism to provide a roadmap for conducting social-ecological systems science ethically. Environmental pragmatists stress that science is always embedded in practical problem-solving activities that presuppose particular goals for, and side constraints to, inquiry. Many traditions in the philosophy of environmental science embrace social science for the specific role of facilitating this deliberation, but these traditions do not seem to anticipate the explanatory ambitions of social sciences. This leaves unaddressed several pertinent questions about how social explanations work (i.e. how functional distinction structure inquiry), which have very practical implications for which social science disciplines should be included in a collaboration and how social and ecological knowledge should be integrated. For example, most social situations are characterized by property rights institutions, cultural traditions, political alliances, and other social institutions within the purview of particular social science disciplines, but researchers are not reflexive about whether to explain environmental change according to one set of practices or another.
520 $a The dissertation traverses the following terrain: the first chapter more carefully motivates the questions above regarding the need for ethics and the promise, but present inadequacy, of environmental pragmatism to meet this need. Chapter two attends to Dewey's theory of inquiry, in particular the dialogical dimension of inquiry that authorizes warranted assertions. Through reflection on Daniel Bromley's volitional pragmatism and a debate between Richard Rorty and hermeneutic social scientists, chapter three attends to the way that social science structures inquiry in order to intervene in the normative practices of a community. Chapter four analyzes social-ecological explanations in order to locate normative and evaluative assumptions that should be accountable to democratic deliberation. Finally, chapter five redescribes interdisciplinary integration as an ethical project where decisions about the centering and decentering of different sciences is as much ethical as epistemological.
590 $a School code: 0128.
650 4 $a Environmental philosophy. $3 3168296
650 4 $a Philosophy of science. $2 bicssc $3 2079849
650 4 $a Sustainability. $3 1029978
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
690 $a 0392
690 $a 0402
690 $a 0640
690 $a 0422
710 2 $a Michigan State University. $b Philosophy. $3 2093853
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 78-10A(E).
790 $a 0128
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2017
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10277861