Workshop Confronting Manageability Paradigm/General Results
The more we study, the less we manage.
The more we study, the better we know whether and how to manage.
The workshop was so encouraging that people directly asked for another one. January 2009 has been suggested.
- Publication (electronic?, university edited series "Aktuelle Reihe" (by TU Cottbus faculty for environmental sciences and engineering) (
- Email list (status: done)
- Uploading presentations (status: in process)
- Local Study projects at TU Cottbus
- (Annotated) Bibliographies for various topics and fields of (Critical EM) research
- Helping each other
- Support local (BTU ERM) students to work critically. Ingmar mentions the possibility to do study projects. Projects could study reality from a social scientific perspective.
We need to work on the paper such that they relate to each other clearly. They need to be in a similar academic context. Although a coherent theoretical frame is difficult we can have some common themes which run through the contributions.
A basis for the publication could or should be the call for contributions.
Themes and questions which could run through the publication:
- How does environmental management lead to situations in which specific problems are not dealt with?
- What are/is environmental management (practices) based on?
- What do particular models of management make visible/invisible?
- How does political economy come into environmental management (practices), and how science&technology?
- How is the observed/studied (practice/paradigm) peculiar? Constitute it as worth being studied.
- What is meant by environmental management?
- What happens under the umbrella, within the container/black box "environmental management"?
Keywords could be structures, factors, believes, boundaries.
Some points which have been mentioned in the evaluation:
- wishes for products such as mentioned above
- an orientation to find solution has been missing. (yes, there was none intended. we aimed at asking questions)
- DIY spirit was seen as good
- communication in discussions were not (that) good. I.e. discussing somehow coherently was missing.
- focus of workshop was not clear
- missing conclusion (in terms of content)
- it was good to have new perspectives
- participants should be prepared, especially students should have been prepared with a reading list
- the insight that theoretical framings influence how we see the world should have been dealt with in the beginning rather than the end