TY - JOUR

T1 - Geoengineering knowledge

T2 - interdisciplinarity and the shaping of climate engineering research

AU - Szerszynski, Bronislaw

AU - Galarraga, Maialen

N1 - CC-BY-NC

PY - 2013/8

Y1 - 2013/8

N2 - In this paper we highlight the need to attend to the structuring power of knowledge production in geoengineering research, because of the way that problem definitions are shaped by disciplinary ways of thinking and describing the world. We also draw attention to a number of problematic assumptions about how interdisciplinary research should be approached and organised in this area. We first look at the logic of ‘subordination’, in which certain disciplines are given the task of problem definition and others—typically the social sciences—are allocated the task of filling in gaps within that given frame. We then examine the more fundamental ‘integrative imaginary’ which, we argue, mistakenly assumes that disciplines can be combined in a straightforward way to reveal different aspects of the same underlying world. We conclude by proposing a more reflexive imaginary for interdisciplinarity, one that challenges the idea of integration and subordination, that promotes and benefits from the multiplicity and heterogeneity of ways of seeing that different disciplines offer, and that can thereby contribute to greater ‘epistemological responsibility’ in geoengineering research.

AB - In this paper we highlight the need to attend to the structuring power of knowledge production in geoengineering research, because of the way that problem definitions are shaped by disciplinary ways of thinking and describing the world. We also draw attention to a number of problematic assumptions about how interdisciplinary research should be approached and organised in this area. We first look at the logic of ‘subordination’, in which certain disciplines are given the task of problem definition and others—typically the social sciences—are allocated the task of filling in gaps within that given frame. We then examine the more fundamental ‘integrative imaginary’ which, we argue, mistakenly assumes that disciplines can be combined in a straightforward way to reveal different aspects of the same underlying world. We conclude by proposing a more reflexive imaginary for interdisciplinarity, one that challenges the idea of integration and subordination, that promotes and benefits from the multiplicity and heterogeneity of ways of seeing that different disciplines offer, and that can thereby contribute to greater ‘epistemological responsibility’ in geoengineering research.

KW - geoengineering

KW - climate

KW - integrated assessment

KW - transparency

KW - interdisciplinarity

KW - knowledge

KW - science

KW - reflexivity

U2 - 10.1068/a45647

DO - 10.1068/a45647

M3 - Journal article

VL - 45

SP - 2817

EP - 2824

JO - Environment and Planning A

JF - Environment and Planning A

SN - 1472-3409

IS - 12

ER -