IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v48y2021i3p398-411..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boundary speak in sustainability studies: Computational reading of a transversal field

Author

Listed:
  • Jeremias Herberg
  • Seán Schmitz
  • Dorota Stasiak
  • Gregor Schmieg

Abstract

This article discusses the role of language in the collaboration between science, policy, and society. Combining computational methods of corpus linguistics (manifold learning) with sociological field theories, we analyze approximately 30,000 articles that were published in the field of transdisciplinary sustainability studies. We show that the field oscillates between deliberative and technocratic vocabularies and can therefore be characterized as a transversal field. We conclude that researchers who collaborate in science–society interstices are thrown into a semantic pluralism that cannot be boiled down to a common language. For transdisciplinary research practice and corresponding science policies, this involves trade-offs between generating a homogenous language and a collaborative appeal; between creating a stable creole and a situated semantic plurality. A corresponding theoretical viewpoint and science policy approach should be based on a pluralist view on the science–society–policy interplay.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeremias Herberg & Seán Schmitz & Dorota Stasiak & Gregor Schmieg, 2021. "Boundary speak in sustainability studies: Computational reading of a transversal field," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 398-411.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:48:y:2021:i:3:p:398-411.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scab006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:48:y:2021:i:3:p:398-411.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.