‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10071/12182 |
Resumo: | This article examines how residents in Natura 2000 sites in Southern Portugal ‘imagine themselves’ as publics participating in biodiversity conservation. Through nine focus groups (n = 49) it seeks to understand whether and how these self-imaginations reproduce and/or resist experts’ highly shared, hegemonic, representations across two dimensions: the epistemic and the normative. Analysis of the groups’ discussions shows that (1) reproduction is clearer in the normative dimension, conveyed through discursive formats that place ‘people’ as its actor and exempt the Ego from it; (2) resistance is clearer in the epistemic dimension, relying on vibrant claims of local knowledge, yet it can be maintained as hidden discourse; (3) the forms of reproduction or resistance that emerged were hybrid ones; and (4) self-imaginations are more fragmented and negative in normative matters and more unified and positive in epistemic matters. We discuss how these findings help understand how hegemonic representations are maintained/resisted in enduring public–expert relations. |
id |
RCAP_f9f2dcdc1bbc94579594366bff253378 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/12182 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservationHegemonyInteraction experts/publicsLay expertisePublic participationResistanceSocial representationsThis article examines how residents in Natura 2000 sites in Southern Portugal ‘imagine themselves’ as publics participating in biodiversity conservation. Through nine focus groups (n = 49) it seeks to understand whether and how these self-imaginations reproduce and/or resist experts’ highly shared, hegemonic, representations across two dimensions: the epistemic and the normative. Analysis of the groups’ discussions shows that (1) reproduction is clearer in the normative dimension, conveyed through discursive formats that place ‘people’ as its actor and exempt the Ego from it; (2) resistance is clearer in the epistemic dimension, relying on vibrant claims of local knowledge, yet it can be maintained as hidden discourse; (3) the forms of reproduction or resistance that emerged were hybrid ones; and (4) self-imaginations are more fragmented and negative in normative matters and more unified and positive in epistemic matters. We discuss how these findings help understand how hegemonic representations are maintained/resisted in enduring public–expert relations.SAGE Publications2016-12-07T12:20:19Z2016-01-01T00:00:00Z20162019-04-09T12:20:01Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/12182eng0963-662510.1177/0963662515581303Castro, P.Mouro, C.info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-09T18:01:46Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/12182Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T22:33:07.965494Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation |
title |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation |
spellingShingle |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation Castro, P. Hegemony Interaction experts/publics Lay expertise Public participation Resistance Social representations |
title_short |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation |
title_full |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation |
title_fullStr |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation |
title_full_unstemmed |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation |
title_sort |
‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: an example from biodiversity conservation |
author |
Castro, P. |
author_facet |
Castro, P. Mouro, C. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Mouro, C. |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Castro, P. Mouro, C. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Hegemony Interaction experts/publics Lay expertise Public participation Resistance Social representations |
topic |
Hegemony Interaction experts/publics Lay expertise Public participation Resistance Social representations |
description |
This article examines how residents in Natura 2000 sites in Southern Portugal ‘imagine themselves’ as publics participating in biodiversity conservation. Through nine focus groups (n = 49) it seeks to understand whether and how these self-imaginations reproduce and/or resist experts’ highly shared, hegemonic, representations across two dimensions: the epistemic and the normative. Analysis of the groups’ discussions shows that (1) reproduction is clearer in the normative dimension, conveyed through discursive formats that place ‘people’ as its actor and exempt the Ego from it; (2) resistance is clearer in the epistemic dimension, relying on vibrant claims of local knowledge, yet it can be maintained as hidden discourse; (3) the forms of reproduction or resistance that emerged were hybrid ones; and (4) self-imaginations are more fragmented and negative in normative matters and more unified and positive in epistemic matters. We discuss how these findings help understand how hegemonic representations are maintained/resisted in enduring public–expert relations. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-12-07T12:20:19Z 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z 2016 2019-04-09T12:20:01Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/12182 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/12182 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
0963-6625 10.1177/0963662515581303 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
embargoedAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SAGE Publications |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SAGE Publications |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799134892908347392 |