In recent years, cultural studies and cultural theory have experienced a new wave of ecological thought. Despite the engagement with the Anthropocene the history of ecology and the environmental sciences has remained somewhat of a puzzle. This goes especially for the 20th century, a period when the sciences of the environment came to matter on a broader scale. Why do we actually know so little about the environmental sciences in the 20th century? And what could a history of the environmental sciences in that period look like? This article answers these questions with two interrelated arguments. First, by reflecting on different approaches to write the history of ecology since the 1970s, it uncovers crucial entanglements between the history of science and ecological thought that created blind spots regarding the environmental sciences in the 20th century. Second, it argues for a shift in scales of analysis—towards meso‐scales. With a more regional approach historians can engage with the often‐neglected aspects of the political and economic history of the environmental sciences in the 20th century and thereby also reveal their fundamental infrastructural dimension. Because at its core, the article claims, the environmental sciences were and are essentially infrastructural sciences.

中文翻译：

---

“渴求知识”：迈向环境科学的细观历史

近年来，文化研究和文化理论掀起了新的生态学思潮。尽管与人类世有关，但生态学和环境科学的历史仍然是一个谜。尤其是在 20 世纪，环境科学在更广泛的范围内变得重要的时期。为什么我们实际上对 20 世纪的环境科学知之甚少？那个时期的环境科学史会是什么样子？本文用两个相互关联的论点回答了这些问题。首先，通过反思自 1970 年代以来编写生态学史的不同方法，它揭示了科学史和生态思想之间的重要纠葛，这些纠葛在 20 世纪造成了环境科学的盲点。其次，它主张将分析尺度转向中尺度。通过更具区域性的方法，历史学家可以研究 20 世纪环境科学政治和经济史中经常被忽视的方面，从而揭示它们的基本基础设施维度。因为在其核心，文章声称，环境科学过去和本质上都是基础设施科学。通过更具区域性的方法，历史学家可以研究 20 世纪环境科学政治和经济史中经常被忽视的方面，从而揭示它们的基本基础设施维度。因为在其核心，文章声称，环境科学过去和本质上都是基础设施科学。通过更具区域性的方法，历史学家可以研究 20 世纪环境科学政治和经济史中经常被忽视的方面，从而揭示它们的基本基础设施维度。因为在其核心，文章声称，环境科学过去和本质上都是基础设施科学。