Ford James D, Stephenson Ellie, Cunsolo Willox Ashlee, Edge Victoria, Farahbakhsh Khosrow, Furgal Christopher, Harper Sherilee, Chatwood Susan, Mauro Ian, Pearce Tristan, Austin Stephanie, Bunce Anna, Bussalleu Alejandra, Diaz Jahir, Finner Kaitlyn, Gordon Allan, Huet Catherine, Kitching Knut, Lardeau Marie-Pierre, McDowell Graham, McDonald Ellen, Nakoneczny Lesya, Sherman Mya
Department of Geography McGill University Montreal Canada.
Departments of Nursing and Indigenous Studies Cape Breton University Sydney Canada.
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change. 2016 Mar-Apr;7(2):175-191. doi: 10.1002/wcc.376. Epub 2015 Nov 25.
Community-based adaptation (CBA) has emerged over the last decade as an approach to empowering communities to plan for and cope with the impacts of climate change. While such approaches have been widely advocated, few have critically examined the tensions and challenges that CBA brings. Responding to this gap, this article critically examines the use of CBA approaches with Inuit communities in Canada. We suggest that CBA holds significant promise to make adaptation research more democratic and responsive to local needs, providing a basis for developing locally appropriate adaptations based on local/indigenous and Western knowledge. Yet, we argue that CBA is not a panacea, and its common portrayal as such obscures its limitations, nuances, and challenges. Indeed, if uncritically adopted, CBA can potentially lead to maladaptation, may be inappropriate in some instances, can legitimize outside intervention and control, and may further marginalize communities. We identify responsibilities for researchers engaging in CBA work to manage these challenges, emphasizing the centrality of how knowledge is generated, the need for project flexibility and openness to change, and the importance of ensuring partnerships between researchers and communities are transparent. Researchers also need to be realistic about what CBA can achieve, and should not assume that research has a positive role to play in community adaptation just because it utilizes participatory approaches. 2016, 7:175-191. doi: 10.1002/wcc.376 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.
基于社区的适应(CBA)在过去十年中逐渐兴起,成为一种让社区有能力规划并应对气候变化影响的方法。尽管此类方法已得到广泛倡导,但很少有人对CBA带来的矛盾和挑战进行批判性审视。针对这一空白,本文对加拿大因纽特社区采用CBA方法的情况进行了批判性审视。我们认为,CBA很有希望使适应研究更具民主性,并能更好地响应当地需求,为基于当地/本土知识和西方知识制定适合当地情况的适应措施提供依据。然而,我们认为CBA并非万灵药,将其普遍描绘成万灵药掩盖了其局限性、细微差别和挑战。事实上,如果不加批判地采用,CBA可能会导致适应不良,在某些情况下可能并不合适,会使外部干预和控制合法化,还可能进一步边缘化社区。我们确定了从事CBA工作的研究人员应对这些挑战的责任,强调了知识生成方式的核心地位、项目灵活性和对变化持开放态度的必要性,以及确保研究人员与社区之间的伙伴关系透明的重要性。研究人员还需要对CBA能够实现的目标保持现实态度,不应仅仅因为研究采用了参与式方法就假定其在社区适应中能发挥积极作用。2016年,7:175 - 191。doi: 10.1002/wcc.376 如需获取与本文相关的更多资源,请访问WIREs网站。