Department of Planning and Design, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO 80217-3364, USA.
Environ Manage. 2010 Aug;46(2):268-84. doi: 10.1007/s00267-010-9522-2. Epub 2010 Jul 8.
Two groups of biologists were responsible for an unprecedented delay in completing a endangered species habitat conservation plan in the Coachella Valley of southern California. While antagonism grew as each group relentlessly promoted their perspective on whether to add a few areas to the habitat preserve, their inability to resolve their differences was not simply a matter of mistrust or poor facilitation. I analyze how these biologists practiced science in a way that supported specific institutional and ecological relationships that in turn provided a setting in which each group's biological expertise was meaningful, credible, and useful. This tight coupling between scientific practice and society meant that something was more important to these scientists than finishing the plan. For both factions of biologists, ensuring the survival of native species in the valley rested on their ability to catalyze institutional relationships that were compatible with their scientific practice. Understanding this co-production of science and the social order is a first step toward effectively incorporating different experts in negotiation and implementation of technically complex collaborative agreements.
两组生物学家导致南加州科切拉谷的濒危物种栖息地保护计划的完成出现了前所未有的延误。当两组生物学家都不遗余力地坚持自己的观点,即是否要在保护区增加一些区域时,双方的敌意不断升级,而他们无法解决分歧不仅仅是因为缺乏信任或不善协调。我分析了这些生物学家如何以一种支持特定制度和生态关系的方式进行科学实践,而这些关系反过来又为每个群体的生物学专业知识提供了有意义、可信和有用的环境。科学实践与社会之间的这种紧密结合意味着,对这些科学家来说,完成该计划并不重要。对于生物学家的两个派别的人来说,确保该谷原生物种的生存取决于他们能够促成与他们的科学实践相兼容的制度关系。理解这种科学和社会秩序的共同产生是朝着在技术复杂的合作协议的谈判和执行中有效地纳入不同专家迈出的第一步。