Geoscience and sustainability

In between keywords and buzzwords

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

This paper explores how scientists entangle themselves in between keywords and buzzwords when they make use of concepts like sustainability. It sketches out theoretical distinctions between keywords and buzzwords. Then it turns to the concept of nature discussing the paradox that nature embraces the same fuzzy, slippery and contingent character as does sustainability, yet the former has a deep ontological status, the latter does not. The paper explores a related paradox: natural sciences claim we live in the Anthropocene, in which humans have transformed geochemical cycles, e.g. of methane and carbon dioxide as much as they changed between glacial and interglacial periods. Yet, science favors (external) nature as a keyword, sustainability as a buzzword. This should cause deep reflections on how scientists make use of the power of reference in between keywords and buzzwords – as well as critical reflection on the institutionalization of such concepts.
Original languageEnglish
JournalGeoforum
Volume91
Pages (from-to)57-60
ISSN0016-7185
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Mar 2018

Keywords

  • Sustainability science
  • Anthropocene
  • Neoliberal universities
  • Use of concepts
  • Political ecologies of reference making

Cite this

@article{ffc50641542f40429125e02c8de99ab8,
title = "Geoscience and sustainability: In between keywords and buzzwords",
abstract = "This paper explores how scientists entangle themselves in between keywords and buzzwords when they make use of concepts like sustainability. It sketches out theoretical distinctions between keywords and buzzwords. Then it turns to the concept of nature discussing the paradox that nature embraces the same fuzzy, slippery and contingent character as does sustainability, yet the former has a deep ontological status, the latter does not. The paper explores a related paradox: natural sciences claim we live in the Anthropocene, in which humans have transformed geochemical cycles, e.g. of methane and carbon dioxide as much as they changed between glacial and interglacial periods. Yet, science favors (external) nature as a keyword, sustainability as a buzzword. This should cause deep reflections on how scientists make use of the power of reference in between keywords and buzzwords – as well as critical reflection on the institutionalization of such concepts.",
keywords = "Sustainability science, Anthropocene, Neoliberal universities, Use of concepts, Political ecologies of reference making",
author = "Grindsted, {Thomas Skou}",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.02.029",
language = "English",
volume = "91",
pages = "57--60",
journal = "Geoforum",
issn = "0016-7185",
publisher = "Pergamon Press",

}

Geoscience and sustainability : In between keywords and buzzwords. / Grindsted, Thomas Skou.

In: Geoforum, Vol. 91, 02.03.2018, p. 57-60.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Geoscience and sustainability

T2 - In between keywords and buzzwords

AU - Grindsted, Thomas Skou

PY - 2018/3/2

Y1 - 2018/3/2

N2 - This paper explores how scientists entangle themselves in between keywords and buzzwords when they make use of concepts like sustainability. It sketches out theoretical distinctions between keywords and buzzwords. Then it turns to the concept of nature discussing the paradox that nature embraces the same fuzzy, slippery and contingent character as does sustainability, yet the former has a deep ontological status, the latter does not. The paper explores a related paradox: natural sciences claim we live in the Anthropocene, in which humans have transformed geochemical cycles, e.g. of methane and carbon dioxide as much as they changed between glacial and interglacial periods. Yet, science favors (external) nature as a keyword, sustainability as a buzzword. This should cause deep reflections on how scientists make use of the power of reference in between keywords and buzzwords – as well as critical reflection on the institutionalization of such concepts.

AB - This paper explores how scientists entangle themselves in between keywords and buzzwords when they make use of concepts like sustainability. It sketches out theoretical distinctions between keywords and buzzwords. Then it turns to the concept of nature discussing the paradox that nature embraces the same fuzzy, slippery and contingent character as does sustainability, yet the former has a deep ontological status, the latter does not. The paper explores a related paradox: natural sciences claim we live in the Anthropocene, in which humans have transformed geochemical cycles, e.g. of methane and carbon dioxide as much as they changed between glacial and interglacial periods. Yet, science favors (external) nature as a keyword, sustainability as a buzzword. This should cause deep reflections on how scientists make use of the power of reference in between keywords and buzzwords – as well as critical reflection on the institutionalization of such concepts.

KW - Sustainability science

KW - Anthropocene

KW - Neoliberal universities

KW - Use of concepts

KW - Political ecologies of reference making

U2 - 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.02.029

DO - 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.02.029

M3 - Journal article

VL - 91

SP - 57

EP - 60

JO - Geoforum

JF - Geoforum

SN - 0016-7185

ER -