Salience, Credibility and Legitimacy in a Rapidly Shifting World of Knowledge and Action
2. Knowledge and Action across Scales
3. Knowledge, Action and Equity
4. Knowledge and Action in a Digital World
5. Knowledge and Action in a “Post-Truth” World
6. Hypotheses about Salience, Credibility, and Legitimacy in a World of New Stressors
6.1. Cross-Scale Dynamics
6.3. Digital Transformation
Conflicts of Interest
- Resilient Boston: An Equitable and Connected City; Office of Resilience and Racial Equity, City of Boston: Boston, MA, USA, 2019. Available online: https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/document-file-07-2017/resilient_boston.pdf (accessed on 28 June 2020).
- Shaffer, L.J. Making sense of local climate change in rural Tanzania through knowledge co-production. J. Ethnobiol. 2014, 34, 315–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masson-Delmotte, V.; Portner, H.O.; Skea, J.; Zhai, P.; Roberts, D.; Shukle, P.R.; Pirani, A.; Moufouma-Okia, W.; Pean, C.; Connors, S.; et al. Global Warming of 1.5 °C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Erradicate Poverty; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Kates, R.W.; Clark, W.C.; Corell, R.; Hall, J.M.; Jaeger, C.C.; Lowe, I.; McCarthy, J.J.; Schellnhuber, H.J.; Bolin, B.; Dickson, N.; et al. Sustainability Science. Science 2001, 292, 641–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dilling, L.; Lemos, M.C. Creating usable science: Opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2011, 21, 680–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beier, P.; Hansen, L.J.; Helbrecht, L.; Behar, D. A How-to Guide for Coproduction of Actionable Science. Conserv. Lett. 2017, 10, 288–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunn, G.; Bos, J.J.; Brown, R.R. Mediating the science-policy interface: Insights from the urban water sector in Melbourne, Australia. Environ. Sci. Policy 2018, 82, 143–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozawa, C.P. Recasting Science; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2019; ISBN 9780367285173. [Google Scholar]
- Wyborn, C.; Datta, A.; Montana, J.; Ryan, M.; Leith, P.; Chaffin, B.; Miller, C.; van Kerkhoff, L. Co-Producing Sustainability: Reordering the Governance of Science, Policy, and Practice. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2019, 44, 319–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matson, P.; Clark, W.C.; Andersson, K. Pursuing Sustainability: A Guide to the Science and Practice; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2016; ISBN 1400881218. [Google Scholar]
- Bremer, S.; Meisch, S. Co-production in climate change research: Reviewing different perspectives. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 2017, 8, e482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guston, D.H. Stabilizing the boundary between US politics and science: The role of the Office of Technology Transfer as a boundary organization. Soc. Stud. Sci. 1999, 29, 87–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guston, D.H. Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduction. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 2001, 26, 399–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Cash, D.W. “In Order to Aid in Diffusing Useful and Practical Information”: Agricultural Extension and Boundary Organizations. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 2001, 26, 431–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, C. Hybrid management: Boundary organizations, science policy, and environmental governance in the climate regime. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 2001, 26, 478–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akhtar-Schuster, M.; Amiraslani, F.; Diaz Morejon, C.F.; Escadafal, R.; Fulajtar, E.; Grainger, A.; Kellner, K.; Khan, S.I.; Perez Pardo, O.; Sauchanka, U.; et al. Designing a new science-policy communication mechanism for the UN Convention to Combat Desertification. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 63, 122–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Gustafsson, K.M.; Lidskog, R. Boundary organizations and environmental governance: Performance, institutional design, and conceptual development. Clim. Risk Manag. 2018, 19, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Voorn, G.A.K.; Verburg, R.W.; Kunseler, E.M.; Vader, J.; Janssen, P.H. A checklist for model credibility, salience, and legitimacy to improve information transfer in environmental policy assessments. Environ. Model. Softw. 2016, 83, 224–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Lusiana, B.; van Noordwijk, M.; Suyamto, D.; Mulia, R.; Joshi, L.; Cadisch, G. Users’ perspectives on validity of a simulation model for natural resource management. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2011, 9, 364–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ginger, C. Integrating knowledge, interests and values through modelling in participatory processes: Dimensions of legitimacy. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2014, 57, 643–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarkki, S.; Tinch, R.; Niemelä, J.; Heink, U.; Waylen, K.; Timaeus, J.; van den Hove, S. Adding ‘iterativity’ to the credibility, relevance, legitimacy: A novel scheme to highlight dynamic aspects of science–policy interfaces. Environ. Sci. Policy 2015, 54, 505–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schut, M.; van Paassen, A.; Leeuwis, C. Beyond the research–policy interface. Boundary arrangements at research–stakeholder interfaces in the policy debate on biofuel sustainability in Mozambique. Environ. Sci. Policy 2013, 27, 91–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ostrom, E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 2009, 325, 419–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- York, A.M.; Sullivan, A.; Bausch, J.C. Cross-scale interactions of socio-hydrological subsystems: Examining the frontier of common pool resource governance in Arizona. Environ. Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 125019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hardin, G. The Tragedy of the Commons. Sci. J. Nat. Res. Policy Res. 1968, 162, 243–253. [Google Scholar]
- Ostrom, E. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Hollin, C.S. The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: Local surprise and global change. In Sustainable Development of the Biosphere; Clark, W.C., Munn, R.E., Eds.; International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis: Laxenburg, Austria, 1986; pp. 292–316. [Google Scholar]
- Hollin, C.S. Sustainability: The cross-scale dimension. In Defining and Measuring Sustainability: The Biogeophysical Foundations; Munasinghe, M.M., Shearer, W., Eds.; United Nations University: New York, NY, USA; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 1995; pp. 65–75. [Google Scholar]
- Wilbanks, T.J.; Kates, R.W. Global change in local places: How scale matters. Clim. Chang. 1999, 43, 601–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cash, D.W.; Moser, S.C. Linking global and local scales: Designing dynamic assessment and management processes. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2000, 10, 109–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, O. Vertical Interplay among Scale-Dependent Environmental and Resource Regimes. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cash, D.W.; Adger, W.N.; Berkes, F.; Garden, P.; Lebel, L.; Olsson, P.; Pritchard, L.; Young, O. Scale and Cross-Scale Dynamics: Governance and Information in a Multilevel World. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Termeer, C.J.A.M.; Dewulf, A.; van Lieshout, M. Disentangling scale approaches in governance research: Comparing monocentric, multilevel, and adaptive governance. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, O.R. Effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Existing knowledge, cutting-edge themes, and research strategies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 19853–19860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Wyborn, C. Cross-scale linkages in connectivity conservation: Adaptive governance challenges in spatially distributed networks. Environ. Policy Gov. 2015, 25, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UN Division for SDGs. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; UN Division for SDGs: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf (accessed on 28 June 2020).
- United Nations. Paris Agreement; 55 ILM 743; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Available online: https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf (accessed on 16 June 2020).
- Davidson, K.; Coenen, L.; Gleeson, B. A Decade of C40: Research Insights and Agendas for City Networks. Glob. Policy 2019, 10, 697–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Rockefeller Foundation and Arup. City Resilient Framework; The Rockefeller Foundation: New York, NY, USA; Arup: London, UK, 2015; Available online: https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/City-Resilience-Framework-2015.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2020).
- Board, S.A. The Future of Scientific Advice to the United Nations; United Nations Scientific Advisory Board: New York, NY, USA, 2016; Available online: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002458/245801e.pdf (accessed on 28 June 2020).
- Francis, P. Sull’enciclica «Laudato si’». Riv. Filos. 2016, 107, 99–140. [Google Scholar]
- Morello-Frosch, R.; Pastor, M.; Sadd, J.; Shonkoff, S. The Climate Gap: Inequalities in How Climate Change Hurts Americans & How to Close the Gap; Program for Environmental and Regional Equity, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2009; Available online: https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/ClimateGapReport_full_report_web.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2020).
- Moser, C.; Satterthwaite, D. Toward pro-poor adaptation to climate change in the urban centers of low-and middle-income countries. In Social Dimensions of Climate Change: Equity and Vulnerability in a Warming World; Mearns, R., Norton, A., Eds.; New Frontiers of Social Policy; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; Available online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/2689/520970PUB0EPI11C010disclosed0Dec091.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 24 June 2020).
- Godfrey, P.C. Introduction: Race, Gender, Class and Climate Change. Race Gend. Cl. 2012, 19, 3–11. [Google Scholar]
- Patz, J.A.; Gibbs, H.K.; Foley, J.A.; Rogers, J.V.; Smith, K.R. Climate change and global health: Quantifying a growing ethical crisis. Ecohealth 2007, 4, 397–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dodman, D.; Satterthwaite, D. Institutional capacity, climate change adaptation and the urban poor. IDS Bull. 2008, 39, 67–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Biermann, F.; Boas, I. Preparing for a warmer world: Towards a global governance system to protect climate refugees. Glob. Environ. Politics 2010, 10, 60–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siders, A.R. Social justice implications of US managed retreat buyout programs. Clim. Chang. 2019, 152, 239–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keenan, J.M. COVID, resilience, and the built environment. Environ. Syst. Decis. 2020, 40, 216–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phillips, C.A.; Caldas, A.; Cleetus, R.; Dahl, K.A.; Declet-Barreto, J.; Licker, R.; Delta Melner, L.; Ortiz-Partida, J.C.; Phelan, A.L.; Spanger-Siegfried, E.; et al. Compound climate risks in the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2020, 10, 586–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howell, J.; Elliott, J.R. Damages Done: The Longitudinal Impacts of Natural Hazards on Wealth Inequality in the United States. Soc. Probl. 2019, 66, 448–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Shi, L.; Varuzzo, A.M. Surging seas, rising fiscal stress: Exploring municipal fiscal vulnerability to climate change. Cities 2020, 100, 102658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keenan, J.M.; Hill, T.; Gumber, A. Climate gentrification: From theory to empiricism in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Environ. Res. Lett. 2018, 13, 054001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blythe, J.; Silver, J.; Evans, L.; Armitage, D.; Bennett, N.J.; Moore, M.L.; Morrisson, T.H.; Brown, K. The Dark Side of Transformation: Latent Risks in Contemporary Sustainability Discourse. Antipode 2018, 50, 1206–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anguelovski, I.; Connolly, J.J.T.; Pearsall, H.; Shokry, G.; Checker, M.; Maantay, J.; Gould, K.; Lewis, T.; Maroko, A.; Timmons Roberts, J. Why green ‘climate gentrification’ threatens poor and vulnerable populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 26139–26143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Sovacool, B.K. The cultural barriers to renewable energy and energy efficiency in the United States. Technol. Soc. 2009, 31, 365–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sovacool, B.K.; Cooper, C.; Bazilian, M.; Johnson, K.; Zoppo, D.; Clarke, S.; Eidsness, J.; Crafton, M.; Velumail, T.; Raza, H. What moves and works: Broadening the consideration of energy poverty. Energy Policy 2012, 42, 715–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nussbaumer, P.; Bazilian, M.; Modi, V. Measuring energy poverty: Focusing on what matters. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 231–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Consoli, D.; Marin, G.; Marzucchi, A.; Vona, F. Do green jobs differ from non-green jobs in terms of skills and human capital? Res. Policy 2016, 45, 1046–1060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- The Solar Foundation. U.S. Solar Industry Diversity Study; The Solar Foundation: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; Available online: https://www.thesolarfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Solar-Industry-Diversity-Study-2019-2.pdf (accessed on 17 June 2020).
- Stephens, J. Energy democracy: Redistributing power to the people through renewable transformation. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 2018, 27, 21–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Temper, L.; Del Bene, D. Transforming knowledge creation for environmental and epistemic justice. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2016, 20, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorsey, M.K. Climate Knowledge and Power: Tales of Skeptic Tanks, Weather Gods, and Sagas for Climate (In)justice. Cap. Nat. Soc. 2007, 18, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giordano, V.; Bossart, S. Assessing Smart Grid Benefits and Impacts: E.U. and U.S. Initiatives; Joint report of E.C. J.R.C. and U.S. D.O.E.; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2012; Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports/assessing-smart-grid-benefits-and-impacts-eu-and-us-initiatives (accessed on 20 June 2020).
- Paul, S.; Rabbani, S.; Kundu, R.K.; Mohammad, S.; Zaman, R. A Review of Smart Technology (Smart Grid) and its Features. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Non Conventional Energy, Kalyani, India, 16–17 January 2014; pp. 200–203. [Google Scholar]
- Tan, K.M.; Ramachandaramurthy, V.K.; Yong, J.Y. Integration of electric vehicles in smart grid: A review on vehicle to grid technologies and optimization techniques. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 53, 720–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lember, V.; Brandsen, T.; Tõnurist, P. The potential impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co-creation. Public Manag. Rev. 2019, 21, 1665–1686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ruggieri, S.; Pedreschi, D.; Turini, F. DCUBE: Discrimination discovery in databases. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Indianapolis, IN, USA, 6–11 June 2010; pp. 1127–1130. [Google Scholar]
- Nichols, T. The Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Kelkar, S. Post-Truth and the Search for Objectivity: Political Polarization and the Remaking of Knowledge Production. Engag. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2019, 5, 86–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Oreskes, N.; Conway, E.M. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming; Bloomsbury: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Clark, W.C.; Harley, A.G. Sustainability Science: Towards a Synthesis; Sustainability Science Program Working Paper 2019-01; John, F., Ed.; Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; Available online: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/sustsci/documents/papers/2019-01 (accessed on 10 June 2020).
- Franck, T. Trump Says the Coronavirus Is the Democrats’ ‘New Hoax’. CNBC, 28 February 2020. Available online: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/28/trump-says-the-coronavirus-is-the-democrats-new-hoax.html(accessed on 26 June 2020).
- McDonald, J. Trump Falsely Distorts New York Times COVID-19 Science Story. UPenn Annenberg Public Policy Center: FactCheck.org. 13 April 2020. Available online: https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trump-falsely-distorts-new-york-times-covid-19-science-story (accessed on 26 June 2020).
- Witze, A.; Subbaraman, N.; Viglione, G.; Tollefson, J. NASA Soars and Others Plummet in Trump’s Budget Proposal. Nature: News, 10 February 2020. Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00348-2(accessed on 27 June 2020).
- Trump on Climate Change Report: ‘I Don’t Believe It’. BBC News, 26 November 2018. Available online: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46351940(accessed on 26 June 2020).
- Cameron, B. I Ran the White House Pandemic Office. Trump Closed It. The Washington Post: Outlook, 13 March 2020. Available online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/nsc-pandemic-office-trump-closed/2020/03/13/a70de09c-6491-11ea-acca-80c22bbee96f_story.html(accessed on 26 June 2020).
- Holland, S.; Nichols, M. Trump Cutting U.S. Ties with World Health Organization over Virus. Reuters, 29 May 2020. Available online: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-trump-who/trump-cutting-u-s-ties-with-world-health-organization-over-virus-idUSKBN2352YJ(accessed on 28 June 2020).
- Friedman, L.E.P.A. Updates Plan to Limit Science Used in Environmental Rules. The New York Times, 4 March 2020. Available online: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/climate/trump-science-epa.html(accessed on 25 June 2020).
- Lin, A.C. President Trump’s War on Regulatory Science. Harv. Environ. Law Rev. 2019, 43, 247–306. [Google Scholar]
- Greshko, M.; Parker, L.; Clark, B.; Howard, D.; Borunda, A.; Gibbens, S. A Running List of How President Trump is Changing Environmental Policy. National Geographic: Environment, 3 May 2019. Available online: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/03/how-trump-is-changing-science-environment/#close(accessed on 25 June 2020).
- Bai, X. Integrating Global environmental concerns into urban management: The scale and readiness arguments. J. Ind. Ecol. 2007, 11, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouyé, M.; Harmeling, S.; Schutz, N.S. Connecting the Dots: Elements for a Joined-Up Implementation of the 2030 Agenda and Paris Agreement; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA; GIZ: Bonn, Germany, 2018; Available online: https://files.wri.org/s3fs-public/connecting-the-dots.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2020).
- Massimiliano, R.; Glenn Stuart, H.; Michael, C.; Sophia, H.; Verania, C.; Fatemeh, B.; Denis, D.R.D.; Miriam, L.H.; Daniel, P.; Kelly, L.; et al. Implementing Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs); UNDP: New York, NY, USA; UN Environment Program: New York, NY, USA, 2020; Available online: https://unepdtu.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/implementing-ndcs-report.pdf (accessed on 26 August 2020).
- UNEP DTU Partnership. Institutional Arrangement for Implementing Ghana’s NDCs: Facilitating Implementation and Readiness for Mitigation (FIRM); Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology, and Innovation: Accra, Ghana, 2017. Available online: http://www.lowcarbondev-support.org/-/media/Sites/FIRM_Facilitating_Implementation_and_Readiness_for_Mitigation/Final-Country-reports-Phase-2/Ghana-Country-report-NDCs-Institutions.ashx?la=da (accessed on 26 August 2020).
- Susskind, L.; Field, P.; Smith, G. Joint Fact-finding: Process and Practice. In Joint Fact-Finding in Urban Planning and Environmental Disputes; Matsuura, M., Schenk, T., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2016; pp. 34–47. [Google Scholar]
- Stroth, S.; Blumberg, P. States Sue Trump’s EPA over Rule Relaxation during Pandemic. Bloomberg Law: Environment and Energy Report. 13 May 2020. Available online: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/states-sue-trumps-epa-over-rule-relaxation-during-pandemic-1 (accessed on 29 June 2020).
- Vaisvilas, F. Two Wisconsin Tribes Join Lawsuit against Trump Administration, EPA over Water Protections. Green Bay Press Gazette, 26 June 2020. Available online: https://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/story/news/2020/06/26/wisconsin-tribes-sue-trump-administration-epa-over-water-protections/3263826001/(accessed on 28 June 2020).
- Barrios, J.; Hochberg, Y. Risk Perception and Politics in the Time of COVID-19: Areas with Higher Trump Vote Shares Perceived Less Risk to COVID-19 Early in the Pandemic, and Practiced Less Social Distancing. Becker Friedman Institute for Economics at the University of Chicago. 7 April 2020. Available online: https://bfi.uchicago.edu/insight/fact/risk-perception-and-politics-in-the-time-of-covid-19 (accessed on 26 June 2020).
- Dong, E.; Du, H.; Gardner, L. An Interactive Web-Based Dashboard to Track COVID-19 in Real Time. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020, 20, 533–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Kerkhoff, L.; Pilbeam, V. Understanding Socio-Cultural Dimensions of Environmental Decision-making: A Knowledge Governance Approach. Environ. Sci. Policy 2017, 73, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|Interaction||Increases interaction where deliberate inputs by citizens are necessary. Diminishes the perceived need for interaction with citizens.||Allows swifter and broader exchange of information. Digital interaction diminishes physical interaction.||Allows a more effective selection of specific target groups to interact with or manipulate through nudging.||Increases human-to-machine interaction. Reduces human-to-human interaction or cuts out human interaction altogether.|
|Motivation||Allows a level of personalization of services that increases motivation. Diminishes motivation through fear and surveillance and information overload.||Increases motivation by lower threshold, better evidence and more entertainment. Decreases motivation by crowding out intrinsic motives and threatening privacy.||With the aid of communication technology, increases personalization and thus motivation. With the aid of communication technology, enables more effective nudging that decreases the will to co-produce.||Increases motivation as new opportunities for co-production emerge. Decreases motivation as automation leads to disengagement with the service process.|
|Resources||Generates data that can be used to increase the quality and scope of co-production/co-creation.||Allows the mobilization of resources from citizens on a far wider scale. Enables hidden privatization.||Generates new resources, which can be used to increase or decrease interaction, motivation and shared decision-making.||Lowers the time and effort needed to co-produce. Increases need for technical skills and strengthens existing inequalities.|
|Decision-making||Data from sensing allows citizens to become part of the decision-making process. Data from sensing allow data owners to exclude citizens from decision-making.||Empowers citizens through a more open process and improved knowledge. Diminishes the need for shared decision-making, by allowing governments to manipulate and citizens to self-organize more effectively.||With the aid of communication technology, supports a more shared decision-making process. With the aid of actuation technology, supports both more open and more closed types of decision-making.||Control can be decentralized through adaptive decision-making. Control can be centralized, making programmed decisions without any direct input from citizens.|
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Cash, D.W.; Belloy, P.G. Salience, Credibility and Legitimacy in a Rapidly Shifting World of Knowledge and Action. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187376
Cash DW, Belloy PG. Salience, Credibility and Legitimacy in a Rapidly Shifting World of Knowledge and Action. Sustainability. 2020; 12(18):7376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187376Chicago/Turabian Style
Cash, David W., and Patricio G. Belloy. 2020. "Salience, Credibility and Legitimacy in a Rapidly Shifting World of Knowledge and Action" Sustainability 12, no. 18: 7376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187376