...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Energy Policy >Deconstructing facts and frames in energy research: Maxims for evaluating contentious problems
【24h】

Deconstructing facts and frames in energy research: Maxims for evaluating contentious problems

机译：解构能源研究的事实和框架：评估有争议问题的格言

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In this article, we argue that assumptions and values can play a combative, corrosive role in the generation of objective energy analysis. We then propose six maxims for energy analysts and researchers. Our maxim of information asks readers to keep up to date on trends in energy resources and technology. Our maxim of inclusivity asks readers to involve citizens and other public actors more in energy decisions. Our maxim of symmetry asks readers to keep their analysis of energy technologies centered always on both technology and society. Our maxim of reflexivity asks readers to be self-aware of one's assumptions. Our maxim of prudence asks readers to make energy decisions that are ethical or at least informed. Our maxim of agnosticism asks readers to look beyond a given energy technology to the services it provides and recognize that many systems can provide a desired service. We conclude that decisions in energy are justified by, if not predicated on, beliefs beliefs which may or may not be supported by objective data, constantly blurring the line between fact, fiction, and frames. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译：在本文中，我们认为假设和值可以在生成客观能量分析中发挥战斗性和腐蚀性作用。然后，我们为能源分析师和研究人员提出了六个准则。我们的信息要求读者保持与时俱进的能源和技术趋势。我们的包容性准则要求读者使公民和其他公共行为者更多地参与能源决策。我们的对称性要求读者保持对能源技术的分析始终以技术和社会为中心。我们反思的准则要求读者对自己的假设保持自我意识。我们的审慎原则要求读者做出符合道德或至少明智的能源决策。我们的不可知论精神要求读者将目光从给定的能源技术上移交给它提供的服务，并认识到许多系统可以提供所需的服务。我们得出的结论是，能源决策取决于（如果不是基于）客观数据可能支持或可能不支持的信念信念，从而不断模糊事实，小说和框架之间的界线。 （C）2015 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号