当前位置: X-MOL 学术WIREs Clim. Chang. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Framing “nature-based” solutions to climate change
WIREs Climate Change ( IF 9.2 ) Pub Date : 2021-07-15 , DOI: 10.1002/wcc.729
Shannon Osaka 1 , Rob Bellamy 1 , Noel Castree 2
Affiliation  

In recent years, there has been a growth in scholarship on “nature-based solutions” and “natural climate solutions” to climate change. A variety of actors have argued that these natural solutions—variously involving the protection, conservation, restoration, management, enhancement, or imitation of natural ecosystems—can play a crucial role in both mitigating and adapting to climate change. What is more, by virtue of their label, natural solutions promise to be particularly attractive to the public and policymakers and have received significant media and scholarly attention. But what is natural is also social: people, acting in various social groups, can selectively emphasize or deemphasize certain characteristics of climate solutions to make them seem more or less natural. The framing of particular solutions as “natural” or “unnatural” has far-reaching implications for climate policy, but has thus far been overlooked. Here, we undertake a critical review of the ways in which natural solutions to climate change have been framed and examine the normative and practical implications of this framing. We review what counts (and what does not count) as a natural solution, and find that those labeled natural are routinely framed under technical and social appraisal criteria as being more beneficial, cost effective, mature, and democratic than ostensibly artificial counterparts. And yet we show that, under greater scrutiny, the natural framing obscures the reality that natural solutions can be just as risky, expensive, immature, and technocratic. We conclude by reflecting on the dangers of narrowing the range of solutions considered natural and indeed, of selecting solutions through recourse to “nature” at all. Rather, climate solutions must be evaluated in terms of their specific qualities, against a far broader range of framings.

中文翻译:

为气候变化制定“基于自然”的解决方案

近年来,针对气候变化的“基于自然的解决方案”和“自然气候解决方案”的学术研究有所增加。许多参与者认为,这些自然解决方案——包括对自然生态系统的保护、保护、恢复、管理、增强或模仿——可以在减缓和适应气候变化方面发挥关键作用。此外,凭借其标签,自然解决方案有望对公众和决策者特别有吸引力,并受到媒体和学术界的广泛关注。但自然也是社会的:人们在不同的社会群体中行动,可以有选择地强调或不强调气候解决方案的某些特征,使它们或多或少显得自然。将特定解决方案定义为“自然”或“非自然”对气候政策具有深远的影响,但迄今为止一直被忽视。在这里,我们对气候变化的自然解决方案的构建方式进行了批判性审查,并研究了这种框架的规范和实践意义。我们回顾了什么是自然解决方案(以及什么不重要),并发现那些标记为自然的解决方案在技术和社会评估标准下通常比表面上的人工解决方案更有益、更具成本效益、成熟和民主。然而,我们表明,在更严格的审查下,自然框架掩盖了自然解决方案可能同样具有风险、昂贵、不成熟和技术官僚主义的现实。最后,我们反思缩小被认为是自然的解决方案范围的危险,事实上,通过求助于“自然”来选择解决方案的危险。相反,气候解决方案必须根据其特定质量,针对更广泛的框架进行评估。
更新日期:2021-08-13
down
wechat
bug