...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Environmental science & policy >Understanding the North-South knowledge divide and its implications for policy: a quantitative analysis of the generation of scientific knowledge in the environmental sciences
【24h】

Understanding the North-South knowledge divide and its implications for policy: a quantitative analysis of the generation of scientific knowledge in the environmental sciences

机译：理解南北知识鸿沟及其对政策的影响：对环境科学中科学知识产生的定量分析

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

The paper investigates the scientific knowledge divide in the environmental sciences between developed and developing countries and explores the implications and impacts on both science and policyrnaking. Quantitative data analysis of more than 6400 scientific papers published in 1993-2003 yield evidence for a growing divide in authorship, publication rates, and location of scientific research in nine environmental journals with high impact factor ratings. In addition to this severe imbalance in publication rates between developed and developing countries, we also find a research bias toward certain eco-climatic zones. More than 80% of papers are published in and about temperate and cold eco-climatic zones. Only 13% of the papers in our study are based on research in the dry sub-tropical and tropical zones, although these eco-climatic zones account for more than 52% of the world's land area. Based on these results, we discuss how the limited empirical source and focus of environmental research undermine the claims of universality of environmental science and what consequences this may have on policymaking processes at different levels. Finally, we briefly explore some short- and long-term strategies to address the knowledge divide. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译：本文研究了发达国家和发展中国家之间在环境科学中的科学知识鸿沟，并探讨了对科学和政策制定的影响和影响。对1993年至2003年间发表的6400余篇科学论文的定量数据分析表明，在9个具有高影响因子评级的环境期刊中，作者，发表率和科学研究位置的分歧日益扩大。除了发达国家和发展中国家之间出版率的严重失衡外，我们还发现某些生态气候带存在研究偏见。超过80％的论文发表在温带和寒冷的生态气候区及其周围。尽管这些生态气候区占世界陆地面积的52％以上，但我们研究中只有13％的论文是基于对干燥的亚热带和热带地区的研究。基于这些结果，我们讨论了有限的环境研究经验来源和重点如何破坏环境科学普遍性的主张，以及这可能对不同级别的决策过程产生何种后果。最后，我们简要探讨了一些短期和长期策略来解决知识鸿沟。 （c）2007 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