put forth to communicate; dialogue is the key. It is not so important to always agree or even to be right, but rather to listen and to be heard, valued, and understood.
提出来交流;对话是关键。并不总是同意甚至正确并不重要，而是倾听和被倾听、重视和理解。

A core message my sister shares with her students in her classes is that by simplifying our lives and resisting the convention that consumption is equivalent to happiness, we see that although perspectives differ, our core values overlap. Communications research emphasizes the importance of framing an issue in different ways to appeal to our core values (Moser 2010; McKenzie-Mohr 2011; Stafford and Brain 2016). In The Psychology of Sustainable Behavior: Tips for empowering people to take environmentally positive action, Manning (2009, p 14) states “framing is honestly communicating the evidence but in a way that emphasizes how the issue connects to people’s deeper concerns and values; framing makes an issue more personally relevant. A good frame is compatible with the target audience’s worldview.” Finding common values and sharing these through effective framing is a major part of my sister’s work. What we find is despite our many differences, especially those targeted by news and social media, there are commonalities we all share.
我姐姐在课堂上与她的学生分享的一个核心信息是，通过简化我们的生活并抵制消费等同于幸福的习俗，我们看到尽管观点不同，但我们的核心价值观是重叠的。传播研究强调了以不同的方式构建问题以吸引我们的核心价值观的重要性（Moser 2010;McKenzie-Mohr 2011 年;Stafford 和 Brain 2016）。在《可持续行为心理学：赋予人们采取环保行动的技巧》中，曼宁（2009 年，第 14 页）指出“框架是诚实地传达证据，但以一种强调问题如何与人们更深层次的关注点和价值观联系起来的方式;框架使问题与个人更相关。一个好的框架是与目标受众的世界观相容的。找到共同的价值观，并通过有效的框架来分享这些价值观，是我姐姐工作的主要部分。我们发现，尽管我们之间存在许多差异，尤其是新闻和社交媒体所针对的差异，但我们都有共同点。

From my perspective, divergent opinions are best overcome through engagement and transparency (Brain et al. 2016; Chapman et al. 2018). The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) describes its technical workshop program as a place where “a multidisciplinary and tripartite approach provide[s] a balanced, science-based view on the subject.” Essentially, SETAC and its workshops are effective and successful forums because they embrace differing viewpoints, facilitate dialogue, and foster interaction. Although science is more often the pursuit of truth rather than consensus, scientists widely regard the gathering of consensus an important feature in the pursuit of truth. After all, the finding of scientific fact is of little consequence unless it is properly articulated, debated, and endorsed. Resolving the many ideologies that span the socio-political spectrum—ranging from NGOs to academics, government, and industry—is no trivial task. The ebb and flow of peace, love, and debate cycles through our families, our workplaces, and our countries. And yet, we find as siblings a shared conviction in our common values for raising our children and achieving our aspirations for their future. To confront and resolve the environmental challenges of the 21st century, collectively, the many different cultures and perspectives that constitute society will need to transcend the current confrontational approach and find places for engagement, respect, compromise, perseverance, and agreement. As different as my sister and I may be in our viewpoints, we are bound by a commitment to the next generation. Ultimately, we do not need to be one big happy family, but we also do not need to be completely dysfunctional because, for better or worse, we are all on this planet together.
从我的角度来看，最好通过参与和透明度来克服不同意见（Brain 等人，2016 年;Chapman 等人，2018 年）。环境毒理学和化学学会 （SETAC） 将其技术研讨会计划描述为“多学科和三方方法为该主题提供平衡的、基于科学的观点”的地方。从本质上讲，SETAC及其研讨会是有效和成功的论坛，因为它们接受不同的观点，促进对话并促进互动。尽管科学更多的是追求真理而不是共识，但科学家们普遍认为，收集共识是追求真理的一个重要特征。毕竟，科学事实的发现除非得到适当的阐述、辩论和认可，否则它几乎没有什么意义。解决跨越社会政治光谱的多种意识形态——从非政府组织到学术界、政府和工业界——并非易事。和平、爱和辩论的起起落落在我们的家庭、我们的工作场所和我们的国家中循环。然而，作为兄弟姐妹，我们发现我们对抚养孩子和实现他们未来抱负的共同价值观有着共同的信念。为了共同面对和解决21世纪的环境挑战，构成社会的许多不同文化和观点将需要超越当前的对抗性方法，并找到参与、尊重、妥协、坚持和达成一致的地方。尽管我和姐姐的观点可能不同，但我们对下一代的承诺是有约束力的。归根结底，我们不需要成为一个幸福的大家庭，但我们也不需要完全功能失调，因为无论好坏，我们都在这个星球上。

References
引用

Brain R, Stavely J, Ortigo L. 2016. ET&C perspectives: In response: Resolving the perception of bias in a discipline founded on objectivity—A perspective from industry. Environ Toxicol Chem 35(5):1070–1072.
脑 R、Stavely J、Ortigo L. 2016。ET&C观点：回应：解决建立在客观性的学科中的偏见——来自行业的观点。环境毒理化学35（5）：1070–1072。

Chapman PM, Brain RA, Belden JB, Forbes VE, Mebane CA, Hoke RA, Ankley GT,
查普曼 PM、Brain RA、百通 JB、福布斯 VE、Mebane CA、Hoke RA、Ankley GT、

Solomon KR. 2018. Collaborative research among academia, business, and government. Integr Environ Assess Manag 14(1):152–154. DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1975
所罗门 KR. 2018.学术界、企业界和政府之间的合作研究。综合环境评估管理14（1）：152–154。DOI： 10.1002/ieam.1975

Manning C. 2009. The psychology of sustainable behavior: Tips for empowering people to take environmentally positive action. St Paul (MN): Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. [cited
曼宁，C. 2009 年。可持续行为心理学：赋予人们采取环保行动的技巧。 圣保罗（明尼苏达州）：明尼苏达州污染控制局。[引用

2017 November 14]. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-ee1-01.pdf
2017 年 11 月 14 日]。https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-ee1-01.pdf

McKenzie-Mohr D. 2011. Fostering sustainable behavior: An introduction to community-based social marketing. Gabriola Island (BC): New Society.
McKenzie-Mohr， D. 2011 年。培养可持续行为：基于社区的社会营销简介。加布里奥拉岛（不列颠哥伦比亚省）：新社会。

Moser SC. 2010. Communicating climate change: History, challenges, process and future directions. WIREs Clim Change 1:31–53.DOI:10.1002/wcc.11
Moser SC. 2010 年。传播气候变化：历史、挑战、进程和未来方向。WIREs 气候变化 1：31–53.DOI：10.1002/wcc.11

Stafford E, Brain R. 2016. “My mom idles less than your mom!” Empowering high school teens to tackle air pollution. Solutions 6(6):48–59.[cited 2017 November 14]. https://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/article/my-mom-idlesless-than-your-momempowering-high-school-teens-to-tackle-air-pollution/
斯塔福德 E，大脑 R. 2016。“我妈比闲着事的还少！”赋予高中生解决空气污染问题的能力。解决方案6（6）：48-59。[引自2017年11月14日]。https://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/article/my-mom-idlesless-than-your-momempowering-high-school-teens-to-tackle-air-pollution/

End of text
文本结束

580). Moreover, as humans are revealed as a key force, difficult questions arise for how we incorporate the condition of the Anthropocene into security and whether and how humanity can secure itself from itself (Hamilton 2017, p. 580; Harrington 2017). As Dalby (2017, p. 235) nicely puts it, “Security too now needs an update!”
580）. 此外，随着人类被揭示为一种关键力量，我们如何将人类世的状况纳入安全以及人类是否以及如何能够保护自己免受自身侵害，出现了一些棘手的问题（汉密尔顿 2017 年，第 580 页;哈灵顿 2017 年）。正如 Dalby（2017 年，第 235 页）所说，“安全性现在也需要更新！

[…]

The Anthropocene
人类世

Humans have thrived on earth during a temperate climatic period on the planet that geologists have dubbed the Holocene, meaning “wholly new.” This short period of approximately 12,000 years since the last Ice Age has seen us reach into every corner of our planet as we have created safe spaces for ourselves in which to live, work, and play (Harrington & Shearing 2017). Enabling this accomplishment has been a planetary infrastructure of “ecological services” (Costanza et al. 1997) that have sustained us as biophysical beings.
人类在地球上的温带气候时期在地球上繁衍生息，地质学家称之为全新世，意思是“全新的”。自上一个冰河时代以来，这短短的大约12,000年的时间已经见证了我们进入地球的每个角落，因为我们为自己创造了生活，工作和娱乐的安全空间（Harrington&Shearing，2017）。使这一成就成为可能的是“生态服务”的行星基础设施（Costanza et al. 1997），它支撑着我们作为生物物理生物。

For us as humans, these services were conceived of as Nature, a realm that we took advantage of, took for granted, and thought we did not influence. Certainly, many indigenous peoples had conceptions and rules that recognized our interconnectedness with the natural world (Adamson & Davis 2017; Valverde 2017; Williams 2013, p. 261), but what many in the Global North barely glimpsed, and did not fully understand or acknowledge, was that Nature constituted our biophysical security. Without Nature, there would be no us.
对于我们人类来说，这些服务被认为是自然，一个我们利用的领域，认为是理所当然的，并认为我们没有影响。当然，许多土著人民的观念和规则承认我们与自然世界的相互联系（Adamson & Davis 2017;巴尔韦德 2017;威廉姆斯 2013 年，第 261 页），但全球北方的许多人几乎没有瞥见，也没有完全理解或承认，大自然构成了我们的生物物理安全。没有自然，就没有我们。

While we lived in and took advantage of Nature, our realm of accomplishment was “the social” (Rose 1996). The natural sciences studied Nature, whereas social scientists studied the results of the human work. Within this conception, humans, had been influential in shaping the social world, but with respect to the world of Nature we have been, in Harari’s (2014) words, decidedly “insignificant animals.”
当我们生活在大自然中并利用大自然时，我们的成就领域是“社会”（Rose 1996）。自然科学研究的是自然，而社会科学家研究的是人类工作的结果。在这种观念中，人类在塑造社会世界方面发挥了影响，但就自然世界而言，用赫拉利（2014）的话来说，我们绝对是“微不足道的动物”。

This framing has quite suddenly been overturned via a “collapse of nature into society” (O’Malley 2018), a collapse that was admittedly a long time in coming. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, an acceleration commenced, driven by a contingent coupling of a fossil fuel (initially coal), the steam engine, and manufacturing of goods through machines (Marks 2006). What we did not realize initially, but now know, is that through our harnessing of fossil fuels, and the release of carbon into the atmosphere that this involved, we humans became very significant animals indeed. So significant that we have become influential geological actors (Chakrabarty 2009) who not only are part of Nature but have fundamentally changed it. This is exemplified by anthropogenic climate change and an array of declining indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem health (Clarke 2014, Steffen et al.
通过“自然向社会的崩溃”（O'Malley 2018），这种框架突然被推翻了，这种崩溃无疑已经持续了很长时间。随着工业革命的到来，在化石燃料（最初是煤炭）、蒸汽机和通过机器制造商品的偶然耦合的推动下，开始加速（Marks 2006）。我们最初没有意识到，但现在知道的是，通过我们对化石燃料的利用，以及由此产生的碳释放到大气中，我们人类确实成为了非常重要的动物。如此重要，以至于我们已经成为有影响力的地质参与者（Chakrabarty 2009），他们不仅是自然的一部分，而且从根本上改变了自然。人为气候变化以及一系列生物多样性和生态系统健康指标下降就是一个例子（Clarke 2014，Steffen et al.

2015, UN Environ. Progr. 2012). The “unintended consequence” (Merton 1936) of our actions has been to fundamentally undermine the “safe planetary space” upon which our well-being had depended in huge and consequential ways (Holley & Shearing 2018b).
2015年，联合国环境署。项目2012）. 我们行动的“意外后果”（Merton 1936）从根本上破坏了我们的福祉以巨大而重要的方式依赖的“安全行星空间”（Holley & Shearing，2018b）。

In doing so, we have placed our survival, and that of others, in jeopardy (Lovelock 2006). This, Klein (2014) states, “changes everything.” For law, criminology, and international relations more generally, this means that we now need to rethink our most basic assumptions. We can no longer treat our “safe planetary space” as independent of us. We can no longer consider “natural” disasters as natural. What earth scientists have recognized (Crutzen 2002), and what law, criminology, and international relations must now recognize, is that Nature is in large part a human accomplishment. This recognition has given rise to the claim that the earth has now entered a new geological age, a human age, the Anthropocene.
在这样做的过程中，我们将自己和他人的生存置于危险之中（Lovelock 2006）。Klein（2014）指出，这“改变了一切”。对于法律、犯罪学和更普遍的国际关系来说，这意味着我们现在需要重新思考我们最基本的假设。我们不能再将我们的“安全行星空间”视为独立于我们。我们不能再将“自然”灾害视为自然灾害。地球科学家已经认识到（Crutzen 2002），以及法律、犯罪学和国际关系现在必须认识到的，是大自然在很大程度上是人类的成就。这种认识导致了这样一种说法，即地球现在已经进入了一个新的地质时代，一个人类时代，即人类世。

References
引用

Adamson J, Davis M. 2017. Humanities for the Environment: Integrating Knowledge, Forging New Constellations of Practice. London: Routledge
亚当森 J，戴维斯 M. 2017 年。人文学科与环境：整合知识，打造新的实践星座。伦敦：劳特利奇

Biermann F. 2014. The Anthropocene: a governance perspective. Anthr. Rev. 1(1):57–61
比尔曼，F. 2014。人类世：治理视角。炭璽。启示录1（1）：57-61

Biermann F, Bai X, Bondre N, Broadgate W, Chen C, et al. 2016. Down to Earth: contextualizing the Anthropocene. Glob. Environ. Change 39:341–50
Biermann F， Bai X， Bondre N， Broadgate W， Chen C， et al. 2016.脚踏实地：将人类世置于情境中。球体。环境。变化39：341–50

Chakrabarty D. 2009. The climate of history: four theses. Crit. Inq. 35(2):197–222
Chakrabarty，D. 2009 年。历史的气候：四个论点。Crit. Inq. 35（2）：197–222

Chalecki E. 2013. Environmental Security: A Guide to the Issues.Westport, CT: Praeger Secur. Int. Clarke RV. 2014. Technology, criminology and crime science. Eur. J. Crim. Policy Res. 10:55–63
查莱茨基，E. 2013 年。 《环境安全：问题指南》。康涅狄格州韦斯特波特：Praeger Secur。国际。 克拉克房车，2014 年。技术、犯罪学和犯罪科学。Eur. J. Crim. 政策研究 10：55-63

Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, et al. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Ecol. Econ. 387:253–60
Costanza R、d'Arge R、de Groot R、Farber S、Grasso M 等人，1997 年。世界生态系统服务和自然资本的价值。生态经济学。 387：253-60

Crutzen P. 2002. Geology of mankind. Nature 415(6867):3–23
克鲁岑，2002 年。人类地质学。自然415（6867）：3-23

Crutzen P, Stoermer E. 2000. The “Anthropocene.” IGBP Newsl. 41:17–18
克鲁岑 P， Stoermer E. 2000.“人类世”。 IGBP新闻。41：17-18

Dalby S. 2017. Anthropocene formations: environmental security, geopolitics and disaster. Theory Cult. Soc.34(2–3):233–52
多尔比，S. 2017。人类世的形成：环境安全、地缘政治和灾害。理论崇拜。34（2-3）：233-52

Floyd R. 2015. Environmental security and the case against rethinking criminology as “securityology.” Criminol. Crim. Justice 15(3):277–82
弗洛伊德，R. 2015。环境安全以及反对将犯罪学重新思考为“安全学”的案例。 刑事司法15（3）：277-82

Gunningham N, Holley C. 2016. Next-generation environmental regulation. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 12:273–93
Gunningham N， Holley C. 2016 年。下一代环境法规。 Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 12：273-93

Hamilton S. 2017. Securing ourselves from ourselves? The paradox of “entanglement” in the
汉密尔顿，S. 2017。保护自己免受伤害？“纠缠”中的悖论

Anthropocene. Crime Law Soc. Change 68(5):579–95
人类世。 犯罪法学会变化 68（5）：579–95

Hamilton C, Bonneuil C, Gemmene F. 2015. Thinking the Anthropocene. In The Anthropocene and
汉密尔顿 C、博内尔 C、杰梅内 F. 2015 年。思考人类世。在《人类世》和

the Global Environmental Crisis: Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch, ed. C Hamilton, C Bonneuil, F Gemmene, pp. 1–13. London/New York: Routledge
《全球环境危机：重新思考新时代的现代性》，C·汉密尔顿（C Hamilton），C Bonneuil，F Gemmene编，第1-13页。伦敦/纽约：劳特利奇

Harari Y. 2014. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. London: Harville Secker
赫拉利，Y. 2014 年。 智人：人类简史。 伦敦：哈维尔·塞克

Harrington C. 2017. Posthuman security and care in the Anthropocene. In Reflections on the Posthuman in International Relations: The Anthropocene, Security and Ecology, ed. C Eroukhmanoff, M Harker, pp. 73–86. Bristol, UK: E-Int. Relat.
哈灵顿，C. 2017。人类世的后人类安全和关怀。在《对国际关系中的后人类的反思：人类世、安全和生态学》中，C Eroukhmanoff，M Harker 编，第 73-86 页。英国布里斯托尔：E-Int。相对。

Harrington C, Shearing C. 2017. Security in the Anthropocene: Reflections on Safety and Care. London/Bielefeld, Ger.: Transcript
哈灵顿 C，剪切 C. 2017 年。 人类世的安全：对安全和关怀的反思。 伦敦/德国比勒费尔德：成绩单

Holley C, Shearing C. 2018b. Thriving on a pale blue dot: criminology and the Anthropocene. In Criminology and the Anthropocene, ed. C Holley, C Shearing, pp. 1–24. Abingdon, UK:
Holley C， Shearing C. 2018b. 在淡蓝色的点上茁壮成长：犯罪学和人类世。在《犯罪学与人类世》中，C·霍利（C Holley），C·希林（C Shearing），第1-24页。英国阿宾登：

Routledge
劳特利奇

Hulme K. 2009. Environmental security: implications for international law. Yearb. Int. Environ. Law 19(1):3–26
Hulme， K. 2009 年。环境安全：对国际法的影响。Yearb. Int. Environ.法律19（1）：3-26

Klein N. 2014. This Changes Everything: Capitalism Versus the Climate. New York: Simon & Schuster
克莱因，N. 2014。 這改變了一切：資本主義與氣候。纽约：Simon & Schuster

Latour B. 2014. Agency at the time of the Anthropocene. New Lit. Hist. 45(1):1–18
拉图尔，B. 2014 年。人类世时期的机构。新 Lit. Hist. 45（1）：1-18

Lidskog R, Waterton C. 2016. Anthropocene—a cautious welcome from environmental sociology? Environ. Sociol. 2(4):395–406
Lidskog R，沃特顿 C. 2016 年。人类世——环境社会学的谨慎欢迎？环境。社会。2（4）：395–406

Lövbrand E, Beck S, Chilvers J, Forsyth T, Hedrén J, et al. 2015. Who speaks for the future of earth?
Lövbrand E、Beck S、Chilvers J、Forsyth T、Hedrén J 等人，2015 年。谁为地球的未来发声？

How critical social science can extend the conversation on the Anthropocene. Global Environ. Change 32:211–18
批判性社会科学如何扩展关于人类世的对话。 全球环境。变化32：211-18

Lovelock J. 2006. The Revenge of Gaia: Earth’s Climate in Crisis and the Fate of Humanity. New
洛夫洛克，J. 2006 年。 盖亚的复仇：危机中的地球气候和人类的命运。新增功能

York: Basic Books
约克：基本书籍

Marks R. 2006. Origins of the Modern World: A Global and Ecological Narrative from the Fifteenth to the Twenty-First Century. Lanham, MD: Littlefield. 2nd ed.
马克斯，R.，2006 年。 现代世界的起源：从十五世纪到二十一世纪的全球和生态叙事。兰纳姆，医学博士：利特菲尔德。第 2 版。

Merton RK. 1936. The unintended consequences of purposeful social action. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1(6):894–904
默顿RK。1936. 有目的的社会行动的意外后果。 美国社会学修订版1（6）：894–904

O’Malley P. 2018. Bentham in the Anthropocene: imagining a sustainable criminal justice. See Holley & Shearing 2018, pp. 109–32
奥马利，P. 2018。人类世的边沁：想象可持续的刑事司法。参见 Holley & Shearing，2018 年，第 109-32 页

Rose N. 1996. The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government. J. Hum. Resour. Manag.24(3):327–56
罗斯，N. 1996 年。社会之死？重新定义政府的领土。J.哼哼。管理。24（3）：327-56

Ruddiman W, Crucifix M, Oldfield F. 2011. Introduction to the early-Anthropocene special issue. Holocene21(5):713
鲁迪曼 W、十字架 M、奥德菲尔德 F. 2011 年。《早期人类世》特刊简介。全新世21（5）：713

Shearing C. 2015. Criminology and the Anthropocene. Criminol. Crim. Justice 15(3):255–69
剪切 C. 2015.犯罪学和人类世。刑事司法15（3）：255-69

Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockström J, Cornell S, Fetzer I, et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347(6223):1259855
Steffen W、Richardson K、Rockström J、Cornell S、Fetzer I 等人，2015 年。地球边界：在不断变化的地球上指导人类发展。科学347（6223）：1259855

UN Environ. Progr. 2012. Global Environmental Outlook 5. Nairobi: UN Environ. Progr.
联合国环境。项目2012. 全球环境展望 5.内罗毕：联合国环境。项目

Valverde M. 2017. From persons and their acts to webs of relationships: some theoretical resources for environmental justice. Crime Law Soc. Change 68(5):547–62
巴尔韦德，M. 2017。从人及其行为到关系网：环境正义的一些理论资源。犯罪法学会变革 68（5）：547–62

Viñuales J. 2016. Law and the Anthropocene. Work. Pap. 2016-4, Cambridge Cent. Environ. Energy Nat. Resour. Gov., Cambridge, UK.
Viñuales J. 2016. 法律与人类世。工作。奶头。2016-4， 剑桥中心.Energy Nat. Resour.英国剑桥市政府。

Williams C. 2013. Wild law in Australia: practice and possibilities. Environ. Plan. Law J. 30:259–84
威廉姆斯，C. 2013。澳大利亚的野生法：实践和可能性。环境。计划。律法书30：259-84

End of text
文本结束

difficulties met; and it draws lessons for future research and policy support about environmental sustainability.
遇到的困难;它为未来有关环境可持续性的研究和政策支持吸取了经验教训。

Multi-, Inter-, and Transdisciplinarity
多学科、跨学科和跨学科

Multidisciplinarity means that a particular (policy) problem or an (other) observable phenomenon is considered from different disciplinary viewpoints. This eventually involves a confrontation of different scientific approaches (concepts, models, methods, findings), in the hope that together the multidisciplinary research team succeeds in producing a coherent picture of the relevant problem, possible explanations for (parts of) it, and potential solutions.
多学科性意味着从不同的学科角度考虑特定的（政策）问题或（其他）可观察的现象。这最终涉及到不同科学方法（概念、模型、方法、发现）的对抗，希望多学科研究团队能够共同成功地产生相关问题的连贯画面、对其（部分）的可能解释以及可能的解决方案。

The biggest hope of a multidisciplinary team is that they are able to construct a common, comprehensive definition of the problem, an explanatory view of relevant mechanisms and processes, and a manageable set of problem solutions. To the extent that the team succeeds, however, they would find themselves in an interdisciplinary endeavor, in which relevant parts (concepts, models, methods, findings) of different scientific disciplines are merged together and neatly integrated. Thus, for example, a natural science model about the spreading of air pollution might be coupled to a behavioral science model of using motorized transport; or an economic model of consumer utility maximization might be combined to a psychological model of habit formation and social status seeking. This would extend the scientific basis for effective policy making.
多学科团队的最大希望是他们能够构建一个共同、全面的问题定义，对相关机制和过程的解释性观点，以及一套可管理的问题解决方案。然而，如果团队成功，他们会发现自己处于一项跨学科的努力中，其中不同科学学科的相关部分（概念、模型、方法、发现）被合并在一起并整齐地整合在一起。因此，例如，关于空气污染蔓延的自然科学模型可能与使用机动化交通工具的行为科学模型相结合;或者，消费者效用最大化的经济模型可以与习惯形成和寻求社会地位的心理学模型相结合。这将为有效的政策制定提供科学基础。

In contrast to multi- and interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity signifies the crossing of boundaries between scientific and nonscientific communities. Transdisciplinarity represents a set of lively interactions between scientists on the one hand, and representatives of industry, government, and/or civil society on the other. For scientific researchers transdisciplinarity means “reaching out to society.” For members of government, industry, and civil organizations it means maintaining contact with science and seeking scientific support and advice whenever needed. This may deepen society’s understanding of complex (policy) problems and may prevent the selection of too limited and/or biased problem solutions.
与多学科和跨学科性相比，跨学科性意味着科学界和非科学界之间的界限交叉。跨学科性一方面代表了科学家与工业界、政府和/或民间社会代表之间的一系列生动互动。对于科学研究人员来说，跨学科意味着“向社会伸出援手”。对于政府、行业和民间组织的成员来说，这意味着与科学保持联系，并在需要时寻求科学支持和建议。这可能会加深社会对复杂（政策）问题的理解，并可能防止选择过于有限和/或有偏见的问题解决方案。

Sustainability in an Applied Sciences Context
应用科学背景下的可持续性

Sustainability is a multidimensional concept involving economic security, social well-being, and environmental quality (see also Vlek and Steg, this issue). Essential items on both the research and policy agendas concerning sustainability are the resource intensity of human production and consumption patterns, the assessment and management of natural resource stocks and flows, and societal transitions in various human activity domains. Examples are energy supply and demand, agriculture and livestock production, availability and
可持续性是一个涉及经济安全、社会福祉和环境质量的多维概念（另见 Vlek 和 Steg，本期）。在关于可持续性的研究和政策议程上，基本项目是人类生产和消费模式的资源密集度、自然资源储存和流动的评估和管理以及人类活动各个领域的社会转型。例如能源供应和需求、农业和畜牧业生产、可用性和

consumption of drinking water, mobility and transportation, and recreation and tourism. Environmental impacts associated with these activity domains are urban air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental noise, soil desiccation, and nature degradation. These burdens contribute to reductions in environmental quality and may involve threats to human health and well-being.
饮用水消费、交通和运输以及娱乐和旅游。与这些活动领域相关的环境影响包括城市空气污染、温室气体排放、环境噪音、土壤干燥和自然退化。这些负担导致环境质量下降，并可能对人类健康和福祉构成威胁。

Collaboration between the natural and social (environmental) sciences is necessary to understand the complex nature of the problems, to experience the ways in which different contributions can be made from different disciplinary backgrounds, and to offer policymakers a more complete understanding and corresponding set of tools (e.g., technical and behavioral, individual, and organizational) for addressing and preventing policy problems in real-life practice.
自然科学和社会科学（环境）之间的合作对于理解问题的复杂性质、体验不同学科背景可以做出不同贡献的方式，并为政策制定者提供更完整的理解和相应的工具集（例如，技术和行为、个人和组织）以解决和预防现实生活中的政策问题是必要的。

However, practicing multidisciplinarity is often challenging. Researchers from different backgrounds have to find each other and get acquainted. They must learn to understand and appreciate each other’s perspectives. They must derive a common motivation from the idea that the whole may become more than the sum of its parts. And what should tie them together is the focus on a single problem area, for example, energy use, environmental noise, or external safety. This, however, draws them into a fair amount of practical problemanalytic homework before they can make both their own and their collective scientific contributions and reap the extra benefits of collaborating across disciplinary boundaries.
然而，实践多学科性往往具有挑战性。来自不同背景的研究人员必须找到彼此并结识。他们必须学会理解和欣赏彼此的观点。他们必须从这样一种观念中得出一个共同的动机，即整体可能变得比其各部分的总和还要多。而应该将它们联系在一起的是关注单一问题领域，例如，能源使用、环境噪声或外部安全。然而，这让他们陷入了相当多的实际问题分析作业中，然后他们才能做出自己和集体的科学贡献，并获得跨学科合作的额外好处。

[…]

Formulating Policy Implications
制定政策影响

Across the various collaborative projects conducted we have experienced that offering policy suggestions from multidisciplinary research often poses challenges. One reason for this is that the researchers and the policymakers may perceive the original or a current (seemingly fitting) policy problem rather differently. Thus good and early communication between researchers and policymakers is important. Second, policy problems generally have a dynamic character. While researchers may need a stable problem formulation for the duration of their (say, 3-year) project, policymakers may be confronted with changing circumstances whereby their original problem may be significantly transformed. Third, research may address only part of the policy problem because it would be infeasible to cover an entire policy-making process.
在开展的各种合作项目中，我们了解到，从多学科研究中提供政策建议往往会带来挑战。造成这种情况的一个原因是，研究人员和政策制定者可能会对原始或当前（看似合适的）政策问题的看法大相径庭。因此，研究人员和政策制定者之间良好和早期的沟通非常重要。第二，政策问题一般具有动态性。虽然研究人员可能需要在他们的项目期间（例如，3年）有一个稳定的问题表述，但政策制定者可能会面临不断变化的环境，他们原来的问题可能会发生重大变化。第三，研究可能只涉及政策问题的一部分，因为涵盖整个政策制定过程是不可行的。

[…]

General Conclusions and Suggestions
一般性结论和建议

[…]

Embarking upon a multidisciplinary research project may be initially alienating, and it may turn out to be painful as well as rewarding (cf. Tress, Tress, & Fry, 2005). It may alienate one from one’s home base in a given disciplinary group or department. It may be painful for the exposition of your own relative ignorance in view of others’ know-how. But after all it may be rewarding for the broadening of your intellectual horizons and the effectiveness of a collaborative policy advice. Yet, one may always be faced with the question: “How far should one go?”: in making yourself familiar with the practical policy domain under consideration, in lending your ears to colleagues trying to “sell” a completely different view of the problem at hand, or in transgressing the boundaries of “pure science” in attempting to support policymakers in handling their own immediate policy problem more effectively.
开展多学科研究项目最初可能会让人感到疏远，结果可能是痛苦的，也可能是有益的（参见Tress，Tress和Fry，2005）。它可能会使一个人与特定学科团体或部门的家乡疏远。鉴于他人的专业知识，阐述你自己的相对无知可能会很痛苦。但毕竟，对于拓宽你的知识视野和合作政策建议的有效性来说，这可能是有益的。然而，人们可能总是面临这样的问题：“一个人应该走多远？”：在让自己熟悉所考虑的实际政策领域时，在听取同事试图“推销”对手头问题的完全不同观点时，或者在试图支持政策制定者更有效地处理他们自己眼前的政策问题时，你超越了“纯科学”的界限。

In the authors’ view, multidisciplinary research often takes place in a science– society arena that is ideally suited to test and uphold the rules of the game called science: concisely describe and explain this or that problematic phenomenon; find out and predict how things work; be aware of the directive power of conceptual frameworks; consider alternative hypotheses; try and evaluate different methods; approach and exploit various data sources; check for validity and consistency; be detached from political power play; be explicit about the values your clients cherish; and be sensitive to the often subtle play of your own values in determining the design and direction of your research. In this respect it may be worthwhile to engage the real stakeholders (who may use the results) in an early stage of your research planning.
在作者看来，多学科研究通常发生在一个科学-社会领域，这个领域非常适合检验和维护称为科学的游戏规则：简明扼要地描述和解释这个或那个有问题的现象;找出并预测事物的运作方式;了解概念框架的指导力量;考虑替代假设;尝试并评估不同的方法;接近和利用各种数据源;检查有效性和一致性;脱离政治权力游戏;明确说明您的客户所珍视的价值观;并且要敏感地注意到你自己的价值观在决定你的研究设计和方向时往往微妙的作用。在这方面，在研究计划的早期阶段让真正的利益相关者（他们可能会使用结果）参与进来可能是值得的。

Challenges for Sustainability Research and Development
可持续发展研究与开发面临的挑战

Sustainability is a socially founded, policy- and action-oriented multidimensional concept. As a topic of scientific concern, it may attract scholars from various disciplines. These may eventually be assembled into a research area called “sustainability science” (Clark & Dickson, 2003; Swart, Raskin, & Robinson, 2004).
可持续性是一个以社会为基础、以政策和行动为导向的多维概念。作为一个科学关注的话题，它可能会吸引来自各个学科的学者。这些最终可能会被组装成一个称为“可持续性科学”的研究领域（Clark&Dickson，2003;Swart，Raskin和Robinson，2004）。

Scientific disciplines have a general theory-oriented purpose and they focus on the enhancement and improvement of descriptive, evaluative, and/or prescriptive knowledge (Gasper, 2001; see also Max-Neef, 2005). However, isolated monodisciplinary approaches or a noninteracting set of separate disciplines are insufficient for an adequate understanding of rather complex societal problems, of which (un)sustainable development is an urgent example. Instead, multidisciplinary or even interdisciplinary approaches are called for.
科学学科具有以理论为导向的一般目的，它们侧重于增强和改进描述性、评价性和/或规定性知识（Gasper，2001;另见Max-Neef，2005）。然而，孤立的单一学科方法或一组不相互作用的独立学科不足以充分理解相当复杂的社会问题，其中（不）可持续发展就是一个紧迫的例子。取而代之的是，需要多学科甚至跨学科的方法。

We conclude that collaboration among colleagues from different disciplines and walks of life generally offers specific rewards for the project outcomes and the participants involved. It
我们得出的结论是，来自不同学科和各行各业的同事之间的合作通常会为项目成果和参与的参与者提供特定的奖励。它

may also inspire university students by showing that there is a larger, more complex world waiting for them after they have finished a (largely) monodisciplinary education.
也可以通过展示在大学生完成（大部分）单一学科教育后，有一个更大、更复杂的世界在等着他们来激励他们。

References
引用

Biesiot, W., & Noorman, K. J. (1999). Energy requirements of household consumption. A case study of the Netherlands. Ecological Economics, 28, 367–383.
Biesiot，W.和Noorman，KJ（1999）。家庭消费的能源需求。荷兰的案例研究。生态经济学，28,367-383。

Brewer, G. D. (1999). The challenges of interdisciplinarity. Policy Sciences, 32, 327–337.
布鲁尔，GD（1999 年）。跨学科的挑战。政策科学，32,327-337。

Cavalini, P. M. (1992). It’s an ill wind that brings no good. Studies on odour annoyance and the dispersion of odorant concentrations from industries. Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, Department of Behavioural and Social Sciences.
卡瓦利尼，PM（1992 年）。 这是一股恶风，不会带来任何好处。关于气味烦恼和工业中气味浓度分散的研究。博士论文，格罗宁根大学，行为与社会科学系。

Cavalini, P. M., Koeter-Kemmerling, L. G., & Pulles, M. P. J. (1991). Coping with odor annoyance and odor concentration: Three field studies. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11, 123–142.
Cavalini， P. M.， Koeter-Kemmerling， LG， & Pulles， MPJ （1991）.应对气味烦恼和气味浓度：三项现场研究。环境心理学杂志，11,123-142。

Clark, W. C., & Dickson, N. M. (2003). Science and technology for sustainable development special feature: Sustainability science: The emerging research program. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 100, 8059–8061 (http://www.pnas.org/cgi; see also htttp://sustsci.harvard.edu).
克拉克，WC和迪克森，NM（2003）。科学技术促进可持续发展专题：可持续性科学：新兴研究计划。美国国家科学院院刊， 100， 8059–8061 （http://www.pnas.org/cgi;另见 htttp://sustsci.harvard.edu）。

CPB: Centraal Planbureau (1992). Nederland in drievoud; een scenariostudie van de Nederlandse economie 1990–215. [The Netherlands in triplicate; A scenario study of the Dutch economy 1990–2015]. The Hague (NL): Central Planning Bureau. Multidisciplinary Research for Sustainability 195
CPB：中央规划局（1992）。 Nederland in drievoud; een scenariostudie van de Nederlandse economie 1990–215.[荷兰一式三份;1990-2015年荷兰经济情景研究]。海牙（荷兰）：中央计划局。可持续发展的多学科研究 195

Dowlatabadi, H., & Morgan, M. G. (1993). A model framework for integrated studies of the climate problem. Energy Policy, 21, 209–221.
Dowlatabadi，H.和Morgan，MG（1993）。气候问题综合研究的模型框架。能源政策，21,209-221。

Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes toward technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 9, 127–152.
Fischhoff，B.，Slovic，P.，Lichtenstein，S.，Read，S.和Combs，B.（1978）。安全到什么程度才算足够安全？一项关于对技术风险和收益态度的心理测量研究。政策科学，9,127-152。

Gasper, D. (2001). Interdisciplinarity; building bridges, and nurturing a complex ecology of ideas
加斯珀，D.（2001 年）。跨学科性;搭建桥梁，培育复杂的思想生态.

ISS Working paper 331, The Hague, NL: Institute of Social Studies, 46 pp.
ISS 工作文件 331，荷兰海牙：社会研究所，46 页。

Gatersleben, B., Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2002). Measurement and determinants of environmentally significant consumer behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34, 335–362.
Gatersleben，B.，Steg，L.和Vlek，C.（2002）。对环境具有重要意义的消费者行为的测量和决定因素。环境与行为，34,335-362。

Harssema, H. (1987). Characterization of exposure in odour annoyance situations. In H. S.
Harssema，H.（1987 年）。在气味烦恼情况下暴露的表征。在 H. S.

Koelega (Ed.), Environmental annoyance: Characterization, measurement and control (pp. 95–104). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Koelega（编辑），《环境烦恼：表征、测量和控制》（第 95-104 页）。阿姆斯特丹：爱思唯尔。

Kamminga, K. J. (2001). Steering sustainability; on the potential of a radical tax-subsidy scheme to move the Dutch society towards sustainable development in the energy domain. University of Groningen (NL), Department of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, 150 pp.
Kamminga，KJ（2001 年）。 指导可持续性;关于激进的税收补贴计划的潜力，以推动荷兰社会在能源领域实现可持续发展。格罗宁根大学（荷兰），数学与自然科学系，150 页。

Kamminga, K. J., Slotegraaf, G., Van der Veen, H. C. J., & Moll, H. C. (1995). SCAN (SCenario ANalysis); analysis of the social significance, acceptability and feasibility of long-term low energy/low CO2 scenarios for The Netherlands. In S. Zwerver, R. Van Rompaey, R., M. Kok, & M. Berk (Eds), Climate change research; evaluation and policy implications (Vol. B, pp. 1241–1246). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Kamminga，KJ，Slotegraaf，G.，Van der Veen，HCJ，&Moll，HC（1995）。扫描 （SCenario ANalysis）;分析荷兰长期低能耗/低CO2情景的社会意义、可接受性和可行性。在S. Zwerver，R. Van Rompaey，R.，M. Kok和M. Berk（编辑），气候变化研究;评估和政策影响（B卷，第1241-1246页）。阿姆斯特丹：爱思唯尔科学。

Kok, R., Falkena, H. J., Benders, R. J. M., Moll, H. C., & Noorman, K. J. (2003). Household metabolism in European countries and cities. University of Groningen (NL), Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, IVEM-research report no. 110.
Kok，R.，Falkena，HJ，Benders，RJM，Moll，HC和Noorman，KJ（2003）。 欧洲国家和城市的家庭新陈代谢。格罗宁根大学（荷兰），能源与环境研究中心，IVEM研究报告第110号。

Kuyper, H., & Vlek, C. (1984). Contrasting risk judgments among interest groups. Acta
Kuyper，H.和Vlek，C.（1984）。利益集团之间风险判断的对比。学报

Psychologica, 56, 205–218. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.
心理学，56,205-218。Lazarus，R.S.和Folkman，S.（1984）。压力、评估和应对。纽约：施普林格。

Ligteringen, J. J., & Kamminga, C. (1998). The role of network setting in exploring the feasibility of a substantial energy tax-subsidy scheme. Environmental Taxation and Accounting, 2, 31– 54.
Ligteringen，JJ和Kamminga，C.（1998）。网络设置在探索大规模能源税收补贴计划的可行性中的作用。环境税收与会计，2,31-54。

Linderhof, V., Kooreman, P., Allers, M., & Wiersma, D. (2001). Weight-based pricing in the collection of household waste: The Oostzaan case. Resource and Energy Economics, 23, 359–371.
Linderhof，V.，Kooreman，P.，Allers，M.和Wiersma，D.（2001）。家庭垃圾收集中基于重量的定价：Oostzaan案例。资源与能源经济学， 23， 359–371.

Lowrance, W. W. (1976). Of acceptable risk; science and the determination of safety. Los Altos, CA: Kaufmann.
劳伦斯，WW（1976 年）。 可接受的风险;科学和安全的确定。加利福尼亚州洛斯阿尔托斯：考夫曼。

Miedema, H. (this issue). Annoyance caused by environmental noise: Elements for evidence-based noise policies.
Miedema， H.（本期）。环境噪音引起的烦恼：基于证据的噪音政策的要素。

transdisciplinary approaches (Table 1). Cross-disciplinarity is used as an overarching term that encompasses these different forms (Tress et al. 2005b).
跨学科方法（表1）。跨学科被用作包含这些不同形式的总括术语（Tress 等人，2005b）。

Not all research into environmental issues needs to be cross-disciplinary. Nevertheless, a cross-disciplinary research approach is likely to assist in understanding the complex dynamics of many key environmental problems in a socioecological context. Such research can: (1) provide new perspectives on complex, dynamic problems (Bammer 2005; Tress et al. 2005a, b; Graybill et al. 2006; Reich & Reich 2006); (2) provide a more holistic view of a problem that is better suited to targeting the underlying drivers and processes of both wider environmental and specific conservation issues (Tress et al. 2005a, b); (3) assist in the selection of more appropriate research methodologies (Kinzig 2001; Evely et al. 2008); (4) provide greater flexibility in research approach and implementation (Newell 2001; Bruce et al. 2004); and (5) facilitate production of new information and insights that would not have been achieved by single disciplinary or epistemological perspectives alone (Miller et al.
并非所有对环境问题的研究都需要是跨学科的。然而，跨学科的研究方法可能有助于理解社会生态背景下许多关键环境问题的复杂动态。这样的研究可以：（1）为复杂、动态的问题提供新的视角（Bammer 2005;Tress 等人，2005a， b;Graybill 等人，2006 年;Reich & Reich 2006）;（2）提供更全面的问题观点，更适合针对更广泛的环境和特定保护问题的根本驱动因素和过程（Tress等人，2005a，b）;（3）协助选择更合适的研究方法（Kinzig 2001;Evely 等人，2008 年）;（4）在研究方法和实施方面提供更大的灵活性（Newell 2001;Bruce 等人，2004 年）;（5）促进新信息和见解的产生，而这些信息和见解是仅靠单一学科或认识论观点无法实现的（Miller et al.

2008). […]

Table 1 Definitions of different forms of cross-disciplinary research (from Tress et al. 2005a).
表1 不同形式的跨学科研究的定义（摘自Tress et al.， 2005a）。

Term
术语

Description
描述

Role of the public
公众的角色

Non cross-disciplinary
非跨学科

Studies take place within the bounds of a single, currently-recognized academic discipline. Research is focused on answering a specific research question
研究是在单一的、目前公认的学科的范围内进行的。研究的重点是回答一个特定的研究问题

In research that is not transdisciplinary, academic researchers and nonacademic participants may exchange knowledge, but the focus is not on the integration of the different knowledge cultures to create new knowledge and theorie.]4. Participants are not involved in defining research goals and agendas
在非跨学科的研究中，学术研究人员和非学术参与者可能会交流知识，但重点不是整合不同的知识文化以创造新的知识和理论。4. 参与者不参与定义研究目标和议程

Multidisciplinary
综合

Studies involve several different academic disciplines, researching one theme with multiple disciplinary goals. Participants exchange knowledge. The research process progresses as parallel disciplinary efforts without integration, but usually with the aim to compare results
研究涉及几个不同的学科，研究一个主题具有多个学科目标。参与者交流知识。研究过程作为平行的学科工作进行，没有整合，但通常以比较结果为目标

Interdisciplinary
跨学科的

Studies involve several unrelated academic disciplines of contrasting research paradigms in a way that forces them to cross subject boundaries, to create new knowledge and theories, and solve a common research goal. By unrelated, we mean that they have contrasting research paradigms. Here the differences between
研究涉及几个不相关的学科，这些学科的研究范式截然不同，迫使它们跨越学科界限，创造新的知识和理论，并解决共同的研究目标。所谓不相关，我们的意思是它们具有截然不同的研究范式。这里之间的区别

qualitative and quantitative approaches or between
定性和定量方法之间或两者之间

analytical and interpretative approaches may be considered
可以考虑采用分析和解释方法

Transdisciplinary
跨学科

Studies integrate academic researchers from disciplines with contrasting research paradigms (see Evely et al. 2008; Miller et al. 2008) as well as nonacademic participants (such as the public) to research a common goal and create new knowledge and theories. Transdisciplinarity combines interdisciplinarity with a participatory approach
研究整合了来自具有不同研究范式的学科的学术研究人员（参见 Evely 等人，2008 年;Miller et al. 2008）以及非学术参与者（如公众）研究共同目标并创造新的知识和理论。跨学科性将跨学科与参与式方法相结合

All involved parties, both academic and nonacademic, define and develop the research goals and methods together in order to reach a common goal. This approach integrates disciplines and
所有相关方，包括学术和非学术方，共同定义和发展研究目标和方法，以达到共同的目标。这种方法将学科和

sub-disciplines, as well as non-academic knowledge, in an approach that shares power equally
子学科以及非学术知识，以平等分享权力的方法

A potential outcome of cross-disciplinary research is the stronger linkages it may build, not only between researchers but also between researchers and non academic practitioners (see Table 1). This can have beneficial outcomes such as: (1) increasing the relevance of the research to practice and policy (O’Fallon & Dearry 2002); (2) improving the research focus by clarifying the focus of research (Sutherland et al. 2006); (3) improving learning/adapting as a result of the research process (Fazey et al. 2005a; Reed 2008); and (4) facilitating the uptake of research results and encouraging best practices (Carlsson & Berkes 2005). Within the research process, involving practitioners can enhance scientific understanding and increase project sustainability (Colding & Folke 2001; Stringer et al. 2006; Reed 2008; Fazey et al. 2010). As a result, the contemporary idea of sustainability places a similar emphasis on the participation of stakeholders and the wider community as it does on environmental, social and economic integration (Pullin et al. 2004; Dovers 2005;
跨学科研究的一个潜在结果是，它可能建立更牢固的联系，不仅在研究人员之间，而且在研究人员和非学术从业人员之间（见表1）。这可以产生有益的结果，例如：（1）增加研究与实践和政策的相关性（O'Fallon&Dearry，2002）;（2）通过明确研究重点来提高研究重点（Sutherland et al. 2006）;（3）作为研究过程的结果，提高学习/适应能力（Fazey et al. 2005a;里德 2008）;（4）促进研究成果的吸收和鼓励最佳实践（Carlsson&Berkes，2005）。在研究过程中，让从业者参与进来可以增强科学理解并提高项目的可持续性（Colding&Folke，2001;Stringer 等人，2006 年;里德 2008;Fazey 等人，2010 年）。因此，当代的可持续性概念既强调环境、社会和经济一体化，也强调利益相关者和更广泛社区的参与（Pullin等人，2004年;多佛斯 2005;

Stringer et al. 2006; Reed 2008). Public participation within research ensures relevance to real-world problems and is thought to encourage the uptake of research results by industry or other end-users (Bruce et al. 2004; Fazey et al. 2010).
Stringer 等人，2006 年;里德 2008 年）。公众对研究的参与确保了与现实世界问题的相关性，并被认为可以鼓励行业或其他最终用户接受研究成果（Bruce 等人，2004 年;Fazey 等人，2010 年）。

This paper provides the first analysis of environmental conservation research that defines itself as cross-disciplinary. We ask three main questions in relation to environmental conservation: (1) what are the characteristics of current cross-disciplinary research in environmental conservation? (2) can a standard definition for different types of crossdisciplinarity be used? and (3) if we use a standard definition what may the potential impacts of different types of crossdisciplinary research be on colleagues and practitioners? The paper is based on an evaluation of environmental conservation research papers that define themselves as cross-disciplinary and questionnaire responses from the authors of those papers. The results are discussed in relation to the questions they raise about the current incentives and disincentives for cross-disciplinary research in conservation and for broader environmental issues.
本文首次对将自己定义为跨学科的环境保护研究进行了分析。我们提出了与环境保护相关的三个主要问题：（1）当前环境保护的跨学科研究有什么特点？（2）是否可以对不同类型的交叉学科使用标准定义？（3）如果我们使用标准定义，不同类型的跨学科研究可能对同事和从业者产生什么潜在影响？该论文基于对环境保护研究论文的评估，这些论文将自己定义为跨学科和这些论文作者的问卷回答。对研究结果进行了讨论，并结合它们提出的问题，即目前对保护和更广泛的环境问题的跨学科研究的激励和抑制作用。

METHODS
方法

Overview
概述

The research included three key stages: (1) identification of cross-disciplinary conservation research; (2) review of the research papers identified (using three separate reviewers to ensure consistency); and (3) a questionnaire sent to authors of the articles identified (n = 96) to determine whether they felt they had correctly classified their papers in relation to the different forms of cross-disciplinary conservation research, and to determine the impact of the papers (as perceived by the authors).
该研究包括三个关键阶段：（1）确定跨学科的保护研究;（2）对确定的研究论文进行审查（使用三名独立的审查员以确保一致性）;（3）向所确定文章的作者发送一份问卷（n = 96），以确定他们是否认为他们已经正确地对论文进行了与不同形式的跨学科保护研究相关的分类，并确定论文的影响（如作者所认为的那样）。

Identification and inclusion of research publications
研究出版物的识别和收录

As we were specifically interested in looking at how research in the academic literature classified their cross-disciplinary work, our research involved articles classified as crossdisciplinary within the conservation literature. Searches were conducted […] on the online database search service Web of Science (v 4.3). The search term used was ([interdisciplinar
由于我们对研究学术文献中的研究如何对他们的跨学科工作进行分类特别感兴趣，因此我们的研究涉及在保护文献中被归类为跨学科的文章。在在线数据库检索服务Web of Science（第4.3节）上进行了检索。使用的检索词是（[interdisciplinar

或多学科

或跨学科

或跨学科

] 和 [保护]）。在初步检索确定的393篇论文中，有96篇与环境保护研究直接相关（即，它们提供了关于保护、维持和恢复这个星球上的生命，包括物种、生态和进化过程以及环境的科学和技术手段的信息）。这些论文被用于进一步分析。

Assessing the characteristics of cross-disciplinary papers in conservation
评估跨学科论文在保护领域的特点

In order to identify the characteristics of current crossdisciplinary research within the field of conservation, Anna Evely (AE), Emily Lambert (EL) and Sarah Allen (SA) asked numerous questions of each publication. These included the number of authors involved in the publication, the disciplines of each author, and how many methods of data analysis or collection were used. Questions were identified through the examination of key texts (Stokols et al. 2003; Bruce et al. 2004; Lawrence & Després 2004; Tress et al. 2005a) and by reading a selection of 50 papers from those identified in searches.
为了确定当前保护领域内跨学科研究的特征，Anna Evely （AE）、Emily Lambert （EL） 和 Sarah Allen （SA） 对每份出版物提出了许多问题。这些因素包括参与出版物的作者数量、每位作者的学科以及使用了多少种数据分析或收集方法。通过对关键文本的审查确定了问题（Stokols 等人，2003 年;Bruce 等人，2004 年;Lawrence & Després 2004;Tress et al. 2005a），并从检索中发现的论文中阅读了 50 篇论文。

[…]

Identifying what the impacts of the papers were on peers and practitioners
确定论文对同行和从业者的影响

Lead or corresponding authors of papers were asked in a questionnaire to assess whether they thought their papers had (1) high impact, (2) moderate impact, (3) neither moderate nor low impact, (4) low impact and (5) no impact on colleagues and practitioners. We then conducted a bibliometric analysis (removing self citations) to compare average citations per year across categories of crossdisciplinary research (multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary and non cross-disciplinary) to validate authors’ perceptions of their impacts on colleagues. Similarly,.we compared non-academic web citations (such as blogs, conservation e-magazines and websites) for each article in order to validate authors’ perceptions of their impacts on practitioners. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess which type of reclassified cross-disciplinary research.was associated with the perceived impacts on the above groups, as well as to compare citation rates. […]
在一份问卷调查中要求论文的主要作者或通讯作者评估他们是否认为他们的论文具有（1）高影响力，（2）中等影响力，（3）既不中等影响也不低影响，（4）低影响力和（5）对同事和从业者没有影响。然后，我们进行了文献计量分析（去除自我引用），以比较跨学科研究类别（多学科、跨学科、跨学科和非跨学科）每年的平均引用次数，以验证作者对其对同事影响的看法。同样，我们比较了每篇文章的非学术网络引用（如博客、保护电子杂志和网站），以验证作者对其对从业者影响的看法。多项式logistic回归用于评估哪种类型的重新分类的跨学科研究与对上述群体的感知影响相关，以及比较引用率。[…]

RESULTS
结果

The use of cross-disciplinary terminology in conservation literature has increased dramatically since the late 1990s […]. Of the 96 papers considered and originally classified by authors, 35.4% had been classed as multidisciplinary, 53.1% as interdisciplinary, 5.2% as transdisciplinary and 6.3% had confused terms and defined their work as both interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary.
自 1990 年代后期以来，保护文献中跨学科术语的使用急剧增加 [...]。在96篇论文中，35.4%被归类为多学科，53.1%被归类为跨学科，5.2%被归类为跨学科，6.3%被混淆了术语，并将其工作定义为跨学科和多学科。

Response rate
回复率

Of the 96 questionnaires sent to the authors of crossdisciplinary papers, 57 were returned (59% response rate). To determine non-response bias, we carried out a binary logistic regression comparing respondents and non-respondents with the original classification of
在发送给跨学科论文作者的 96 份问卷中，有 57 份被退回（回复率为 59%）。为了确定非反应偏倚，我们进行了二元logistic回归，将受试者和非受试者与原始分类进行了比较。

their papers. We found no difference in disciplinary classification between respondents and non-respondents (χ2 = 3.34, df = 1, p ≈ 0.08).
他们的论文。我们发现受访者和非受访者在学科分类方面没有差异（χ2 = 3.34，df = 1，p ≈ 0.08）。

[…]

What are the impacts of a cross-disciplinary research approach on colleagues and practitioners?
跨学科研究方法对同事和从业者有什么影响？

We found a significant difference between type of crossdisciplinarity and impact on colleagues (χ2 = 17.11, df =6, p = 0.09) and practitioners (χ2 = 20.64 df = 9, p =0.01). Transdisciplinary papers, as redefined, were perceived by authors to have the lowest impact on colleagues, while papers which were non cross-disciplinary were perceived to have the highest impact (see Table 2). Authors’ perceptions of their impacts on colleagues were confirmed by bibliometric analysis comparing the average number of citations per year for each paper (m). We found that transdisciplinary papers (m = 1.5) generated significantly fewer citations per year than those which were non cross-disciplinary (m = 3.9) (χ2 = 12.11, df = 1, p < 0.001). We found transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary papers to involve significantly more public participation than multidisciplinary and non crossdisciplinary papers (χ2 = 47.42, df = 3, p < 0.001). Authors’ perceptions of their papers’ impacts on practitioners, suggested that transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary papers had a higher impact on practitioners than papers that were multidisciplinary or non cross-disciplinary (Table 2). Although this was more difficult to validate, we evaluated author perception of practitioner impact via web citations of papers. We found that transdisciplinary papers (m = 1.4) generated significantly more web citations than those that were non cross-disciplinary (m = 0.15) (χ2 = 25.09, df = 1, p <0.001).
我们发现跨学科类型和对同事（χ2 = 17.11，df =6，p = 0.09）和从业者（χ2 = 20.64，df = 9，p =0.01）的影响之间存在显着差异。重新定义的跨学科论文被作者认为对同事的影响最小，而非跨学科的论文被认为影响最大（见表2）。通过文献计量分析比较每篇论文每年的平均引用次数（m），证实了作者对自己对同事影响的看法。我们发现，跨学科论文（m = 1.5）每年产生的引用量明显少于非跨学科论文（m = 3.9）（χ2 = 12.11，df = 1，p < 0.001）。我们发现跨学科和跨学科论文比多学科和非跨学科论文更多地涉及公众参与（χ2 = 47.42，df = 3，p < 0.001）。作者对其论文对从业者影响的看法表明，跨学科和跨学科的论文对从业者的影响高于多学科或非跨学科的论文（表2）。尽管这更难验证，但我们通过网络引用论文评估了作者对从业者影响的看法。我们发现，跨学科论文（m = 1.4）比非跨学科论文（m = 0.15）产生的网络引用量明显更多（χ2 = 25.09，df = 1，p <0.001）。

The results suggest that research which gains recognition from peers does not necessarily have a strong impact on practice, and vice versa.
结果表明，获得同行认可的研究并不一定对实践产生强烈影响，反之亦然。

[…]

DISCUSSION
讨论

[…]

What are the impacts of a cross-disciplinary research approach on colleagues and practitioners?
跨学科研究方法对同事和从业者有什么影响？

[…] Our results indicate that studies that were transdisciplinary were perceived by their authors to have the highest impact on practitioners and had more associated web citations, suggesting that the impact of transdisciplinary papers transcends academia and reaches a wider audience.
[…]我们的结果表明，跨学科的研究被其作者认为对从业者的影响最大，并且有更多的相关网络引用，这表明跨学科论文的影响超越了学术界，并接触到了更广泛的受众。

In attempting to evaluate the potential impact of cross-disciplinary research on practitioners, we found a direct link between public participation in the research process (transdisciplinary or interdisciplinary studies) and an increased impact of interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary studies on practitioners. In order for research to have any real impact on solving environmental problems, it must be accessible to practitioners (Fazey et al. 2004; Pullin et al. 2004). However, current studies show that research is time-consuming to locate, access and read (Pullin et al. 2004). If accessed by practitioners, academic papers may already be outdated (considering that publication of conservation research typically takes 3.9±0.13 years following the last year of data collection; Fazey et al. 2004) and may not be relevant to management (Kareiva et al. 2002; Fazey et al. 2005b). Our results indicate that when practitioners take a more active role in the research process, research is more accessible and practitioners are more likely to use the research and adapt their management strategies accordingly.
在试图评估跨学科研究对从业者的潜在影响时，我们发现公众参与研究过程（跨学科或跨学科研究）与跨学科或跨学科研究对从业者的影响增加之间存在直接联系。为了使研究对解决环境问题产生任何真正的影响，它必须为从业者所接受（Fazey 等人，2004 年;Pullin 等人，2004 年）。然而，目前的研究表明，研究的定位、访问和阅读非常耗时（Pullin 等人，2004 年）。如果从业者访问，学术论文可能已经过时（考虑到保护研究的发表通常需要在数据收集的最后一年后的 3.9±0.13 年;Fazey 等人，2004 年），可能与管理无关（Kareiva 等人，2002 年;Fazey 等人，2005b）。我们的研究结果表明，当从业者在研究过程中发挥更积极的作用时，研究更容易获得，从业者更有可能使用研究并相应地调整他们的管理策略。

[…]

Ways forward for cross-disciplinary research
跨学科研究的未来路向

Academics are responding to the calls for greater crossdisciplinary collaboration but, with the exception of a few studies, much of the current research falls short of integrating disciplinary methods at any depth or involving participants outside of academia. This paper therefore suggests: […]
学术界正在响应加强跨学科合作的呼吁，但除了少数研究外，目前的大部分研究都没有深入整合学科方法，也没有让学术界以外的参与者参与进来。因此，本文建议：[...]

Greater incentives be put in place to encourage cross-disciplinary research where it is thought to be important (for example for conservation, development and education.).
应制定更大的激励措施，鼓励在被认为重要的领域（例如保护、发展和教育）开展跨学科研究。

Teaching of cross-disciplinary courses be encouraged within universities, as well as greater collaboration between university departments, as a means to facilitate the dissolution of rigid university structures. Curriculum reform at the University of Aberdeen (UK) and University of Melbourne (Australia) has already begun to address such issues for undergraduates. For example, at the University of Aberdeen, the sixth-century courses (6CCs) are specifically designed to consider and contrast different approaches to knowledge and different methods of enquiry with a focus on building students’ skills in examining real-world problems. In the University of St Andrews (UK), the sustainable development undergraduate programme similarly draws on interdisciplinary modules, with the aim of providing students with the higher-order critical thinking skills and flexible epistemological thinking necessary to address complex sustainability-related issues. This also requires staff to engage more deeply in addressing different epistemological and
应鼓励在大学内部教授跨学科课程，并加强大学各部门之间的合作，以此作为促进解散僵化大学结构的手段。阿伯丁大学（英国）和墨尔本大学（澳大利亚）的课程改革已经开始为本科生解决这些问题。例如，在阿伯丁大学，六世纪的课程（6CCs）专门设计用于考虑和对比不同的知识方法和不同的探究方法，重点是培养学生研究现实世界问题的技能。在圣安德鲁斯大学（英国），可持续发展本科课程同样借鉴了跨学科模块，旨在为学生提供解决复杂的可持续发展相关问题所必需的高阶批判性思维技能和灵活的认识论思维。这也要求工作人员更深入地参与解决不同的认识论和

efforts for green and clean growth, ecoefficiency, decoupling, and the ever more sophisticated management of landscapes and species, the world seems to have come to a point where we must again determine pathways to sustainability.
在努力实现绿色和清洁增长、生态效率、脱钩以及对景观和物种进行越来越复杂的管理方面，世界似乎已经到了必须再次确定可持续发展途径的地步。

It seems this time that our hopes are tied to the humanities. In February 2012, the Responses to Environmental and Societal Challenges for Our Unstable Earth (RESCUE) initiative, commissioned by the European Science Foundation and Europe’s intergovernmental Cooperation in Science and Technology program, presented its synthesis report. It gives a high profile to the humanities, arguing that in a world where cultural values, political and religious ideas, and deep-seated human behaviors still rule the way people lead their lives, produce, and consume, the idea of environmentally relevant knowledge must change. We cannot dream of sustainability unless we start to pay more attention to the human agents of the planetary pressure that environmental experts are masters at measuring but that they seem unable to prevent.
这一次，我们的希望似乎与人文学科联系在一起。2012 年 2 月，受欧洲科学基金会和欧洲政府间科技合作计划委托的“应对不稳定地球的环境和社会挑战”（RESCUE） 倡议提交了综合报告。它高度重视人文学科，认为在一个文化价值观、政治和宗教观念以及根深蒂固的人类行为仍然主导着人们生活、生产和消费方式的世界里，环境相关知识的观念必须改变。除非我们开始更多地关注地球压力的人类因素，否则我们就无法梦想可持续性，环境专家是测量这些压力的大师，但他们似乎无法预防。

Some of the shift toward the human sciences has to do with the fundamental shift in understanding that is represented by the Anthropocene concept, coined by Crutzen and Stoermer in 2000 (Global Change Newsletter 41: 17–18). If humanity is the chief cause of the ominous change, it must surely be inevitable that research and policy will be focused on human societies and their basic functions. After half a century of putting nature first, it may be time to put humans first. Some members of the RESCUE team have moved further and are publishing a lead article titled “Reconceptualizing the ‘Anthropos’ in the Anthropocene” for a special issue of Environment and Science Policy due out later this year.
向人文科学的一些转变与理解的根本转变有关，这种转变是由 Crutzen 和 Stoermer 于 2000 年创造的人类世概念所代表的（全球变化通讯 41：17-18）。如果人类是这场不祥变化的主要原因，那么研究和政策将不可避免地集中在人类社会及其基本功能上。在半个世纪以来，人们始终坚持将自然放在首位，现在可能是时候把人类放在首位了。RESCUE团队的一些成员更进一步，正在为今年晚些时候出版的《环境与科学政策》特刊发表一篇题为“重新概念化人类世中的'人类'”的主要文章。

Other initiatives point in the same direction. Considerable energies are going into the emerging concept of environmental humanities. This is a broad multidisciplinary approach that signals a new willingness in the humanities to forgo the primary focus on disciplines (as in, e.g., environmental philosophy, environmental history) for a common effort in which the relevance of human action is on par with the environmental aspect. Programs for the environmental humanities have already started to emerge in universities in Europe, Australia, and the United States, including at Stanford. The Consortium of Humanities Centers and Institutes (CHCI), an assembly of more than 70 humanities centers worldwide, has its own Initiative Humanities for the Environment, which “serves as a network and resource for centers to develop (or extend) programming, research, and dialogue related to contemporary environmental challenges” (http://initiatives.chcinetwork. org/environment). The Transatlantic Environmental Research Network in Environmental Humanities links several universities in the United States and Canada with primarily German counterparts, including the recently set up Rachel Carson Center in Munich. Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study has devoted 2013 and 2014 to the environmental humanities as their chosen thematic field.
其他举措也指向了同样的方向。相当多的精力正在投入到新兴的环境人文学科概念中。这是一种广泛的多学科方法，标志着人文学科的新意愿，即放弃对学科（如环境哲学、环境史）的主要关注，转而共同努力，将人类行动的相关性与环境方面相提并论。环境人文学科的项目已经开始在欧洲、澳大利亚和美国的大学中出现，包括斯坦福大学。人文中心和研究所联盟 （CHCI） 由全球 70 多个人文中心组成，拥有自己的人文环境倡议，该倡议“作为中心开发（或扩展）与当代环境挑战相关的计划、研究和对话的网络和资源”（http://initiatives.chcinetwork org/environment）。跨大西洋环境人文学科环境研究网络（Transatlantic Environmental Research Network in Environmental Humanities）将美国和加拿大的几所大学与主要由德国的大学联系起来，其中包括最近在慕尼黑成立的雷切尔·卡森中心（Rachel Carson Center）。普林斯顿大学高等研究院（Institute for Advanced Study）在2013年和2014年将环境人文学科作为他们选择的主题领域。

A new journal, Environmental Humanities, will be launched this November; it is based at the University of New South Wales, where there is also an interdisciplinary environmental humanities program. Several scholarly environmental humanities networks are active in Scandinavia, and some of their work will appear a new volume, Defining the Environmental Humanities, derived from a recent conference in Sweden. After decades of very little interest in funding large-scale environmental work
一本新期刊《环境人文》将于今年11月推出;它位于新南威尔士大学，那里还有一个跨学科的环境人文学科项目。几个学术环境人文学科网络在斯堪的纳维亚半岛很活跃，他们的一些工作将出版一本新书《定义环境人文学科》，该书源自最近在瑞典举行的一次会议。几十年来，人们对资助大规模的环境工作几乎没有兴趣

In general terms, the approaches coalescing under the banner of the environmental humanities have explicitly rejected the way in which humanities work on the environment has frequently been cast as ‘non-science’, with the primary role of mediating between the natural sciences and ‘the public’. In addition, work in the environmental humanities has tended to eschew the focus of many of the approaches that have dominated the political uptake of social science and humanities scholarship on the environment that have their grounding in behavioural economics and cognitive psychology. As is increasingly being shown, at the core of these approaches is an impoverished and narrow conceptualisation of human agency, social and cultural formation, social change and the entangled relations between human and nonhuman worlds.2
一般而言，在环境人文学科的旗帜下融合的方法明确拒绝了人文学科对环境的研究方式，这种方式经常被塑造成“非科学”的，其主要作用是在自然科学和“公众”之间起中介作用。此外，环境人文学科的工作往往回避了许多方法的重点，这些方法在政治上主导了社会科学和人文学科的环境学术研究，这些研究以行为经济学和认知心理学为基础。正如越来越多的人所表明的那样，这些方法的核心是对人类能动性、社会和文化形成、社会变革以及人类与非人类世界之间纠缠不清的关系的贫乏和狭隘的概念化2。

Given this backdrop, the need for a more integrated and conceptually sensitive approach to environmental issues is being increasingly recognised across the humanities and the social and environmental sciences.3 The development of the environmental humanities might therefore be understood as a response to this need; an effort to enrich environmental research with a more extensive conceptual vocabulary, whilst at the same time vitalising the humanities by rethinking the ontological exceptionality of the human.
鉴于这种背景，在人文学科、社会科学和环境科学领域，人们越来越认识到需要对环境问题采取更加综合和概念敏感的方法。努力用更广泛的概念词汇丰富环境研究，同时通过重新思考人类的本体论特殊性来振兴人文学科。

The humanities have traditionally worked with questions of meaning, value, ethics, justice and the politics of knowledge production. In bringing these questions into environmental domains, we are able to articulate a ‘thicker’ notion of humanity, one that rejects reductionist accounts of self-contained, rational, decision making subjects. Rather, the environmental humanities positions us as participants in lively ecologies of meaning and value, entangled within rich patterns of cultural and historical diversity that shape who we are and the ways in which we are able to ‘become with’ others.4 At the core of this approach is a focus on the underlying cultural and philosophical frameworks that are entangled with the ways in which diverse human cultures have made themselves at home in a more than human world. In short, there is now a recognition that the whole world, at all scales, is a ‘contact zone’.5 The deepening environmental and social crises of our time are unfolding in this zone where the nature/culture divide collapses and the possibilities of life and death for everyone are at stake.
传统上，人文学科一直在处理意义、价值、伦理、正义和知识生产的政治问题。在将这些问题带入环境领域时，我们能够阐明一种“更厚重”的人性概念，一种拒绝对自足的、理性的、决策主体的简化主义描述的概念。相反，环境人文学科将我们定位为意义和价值的生动生态的参与者，纠缠在丰富的文化和历史多样性模式中，这些模式塑造了我们是谁以及我们能够与他人“成为”的方式.4 这种方法的核心是关注潜在的文化和哲学框架，这些框架与不同的人类文化在社区中融入家园的方式纠缠在一起。不仅仅是人类世界。简言之，现在人们已经认识到，整个世界，无论规模如何，都是一个“接触区”.5 我们这个时代日益加深的环境和社会危机正在这个区域展开，在这个区域，自然/文化鸿沟崩溃，每个人的生死可能性都处于危险之中。

[…]

Some of this diversity is showcased in the profiles of members of our editorial board, available at:
我们编辑委员会成员的简介展示了这种多样性的一部分，可在以下网址获得：

http://environmentalhumanities.org/about/profiles

Elizabeth Shove, “Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change,” Environment & Planning A 42, no. 6 (2010).
Elizabeth Shove，“超越ABC：气候变化政策和社会变革理论”，《环境与规划》A 42，第6期（2010年）。

For example, see the recent Consortium of Humanities Centers and Institutes’ (CHCI) Humanities for the Environment initiative and the European Science Foundation’s Responses to Environmental and Societal Challenges for Our Unstable Earth (RESCUE) initiative. For broader discussion of the importance of the environmental humanities for the natural
例如，参见最近的人文中心和研究所联盟 （CHCI） 的“人文促进环境”倡议和欧洲科学基金会的“应对我们不稳定地球的环境和社会挑战”（RESCUE） 倡议。更广泛地讨论环境人文学科对自然的重要性

sciences, see Sverker Sörlin, “Environmental Humanities: Why Should Biologists Interested in the Environment Take the Humanities Seriously?,” BioScience 62, no. 9 (2012); John Urry, Climate Change and Society (London: Polity, 2011)
科学，参见 Sverker Sörlin，“环境人文学科：为什么生物学家应该对环境感兴趣吗？约翰·乌里，《气候变化与社会》（伦敦：政治出版社，2011年）.

Haraway, When Species Meet
哈拉威，当物种相遇时.

Donna Haraway, When Species Meet (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008).
唐娜·哈拉威，《当物种相遇时》（明尼阿波利斯：明尼苏达大学出版社，2008 年）。

Bibliography
书目

Chakrabarty, Dipesh. “The Climate of History: Four Theses.” Critical Inquiry 35 (2009): 197-222.
查克拉巴蒂，迪佩什。“历史的气候：四个论点。” 批判性探究35（2009）：197-222。

Clark, Nigel. Inhuman Nature: Sociable Life on a Dynamic Planet. London: Sage, 2011.
克拉克，奈杰尔。 非人性：动态星球上的社交生活。 伦敦：Sage，2011 年。

Haraway, Donna. When Species Meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008.
哈拉威，唐娜。 当物种相遇时。明尼阿波利斯：明尼苏达大学出版社，2008 年。

Haraway, Donna. “Cloning Mutts, Saving Tigers: Ethical Emergents in Technocultural Dog Worlds,” in Remaking Life and Death: Toward an Anthropology of the Biosciences, eds. Sarah Franklin and Margaret Lock. Santa Fe: NM: SAR Press, 2003.
哈拉威，唐娜。“克隆狗，拯救老虎：技术文化狗世界的道德涌现”，在《重塑生与死：迈向生物科学人类学》中，莎拉·富兰克林和玛格丽特·洛克编辑。圣达菲：新墨西哥州：特区出版社，2003 年。

Hird, Myra J. The Origins of Sociable Life: Evolution After Science Studies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
希尔德，迈拉 J. 社交生活的起源：科学研究后的进化。贝辛斯托克：帕尔格雷夫·麦克米伦，2009 年。

Kirby, Vicki. Quantum Anthropologies: Life at Large. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2011.
柯比，薇琪。 量子人类学：整个生命。 北卡罗来纳州达勒姆：杜克大学出版社，2011 年。

Kirksey, S. Eben, and Stefan Helmreich. “The Emergence of Multispecies Ethnography.” Cultural Anthropology 25, no. 4 (2010).
Kirksey、S. Eben 和 Stefan Helmreich。“多物种民族志的出现。” 《文化人类学》第25卷第4期（2010年）。

Lestel, Dominique , Florence Brunois, and Florence Gaunet. “Etho-Ethnology and Ethno-Ethology: The coming synthesis.” Social Science Information 45, no. 2 (2006): 155-77.
莱斯特尔、多米尼克、弗洛伦斯·布鲁诺瓦和弗洛伦斯·高内。“Etho-Ethnology 和 Ethno-Ethno-Ethology：即将到来的综合。” 社会科学信息45，第2期（2006）：155-77。

Mol, Annemarie, Ingunn Moser and Jeannette Pols, eds., Care in Practice: On Tinkering in Clinics, Homes and Farms. Bielefeld: Verlag, 2010.
Mol、Annemarie、Ingunn Moser 和 Jeannette Pols 编辑，《实践中的护理：关于诊所、家庭和农场的修补补》。比勒费尔德：出版社，2010 年。

Plumwood, Val. “Animals and Ecology: Towards a Better Integration.” Unpublished article in the ANU Digital Collection (available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1885/41767) (2003).
“动物与生态学：迈向更好的整合。”澳大利亚国立大学数字馆藏中未发表的文章（可在以下网址获得：http://hdl.handle.net/1885/41767）（2003年）。

———. Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason. London & New York: Routledge, 2002. Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria. “Matters of Care in Technoscience: Assembling Neglected Things.” Social Studies of Science 4, no. 1 (2011).
———. 环境文化：理性的生态危机。伦敦和纽约：劳特利奇，2002 年。Puig de la Bellacasa，玛丽亚。“技术科学中的护理问题：组装被忽视的东西。” 《科学社会研究》第4期，第1期（2011年）。

Shove, Elizabeth. “Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change.” Environment & Planning A 42, no. 6 (2010).
推，伊丽莎白。“超越ABC：气候变化政策和社会变革理论。” 环境与规划A 42，第6号（2010年）。

Sörlin, Sverker “Environmental Humanities: Why Should Biologists Interested in the Environment Take the Humanities Seriously?” BioScience 62, no. 9 (2012): 788-89.
Sörlin， Sverker “环境人文学科：为什么对环境感兴趣的生物学家应该认真对待人文学科？” 生物科学 62， no. 9 （2012）： 788-89.

Tsing, Anna. “Arts of Inclusion, or, How to Love a Mushroom.” Australian Humanities Review 50 (2011): 5-22. Urry, John. Climate Change and Society. London: Polity, 2011.
青安娜。“包容的艺术，或者说，如何爱上蘑菇。”澳大利亚人文评论50（2011）：5-22。乌里，约翰。气候变化与社会。伦敦：政治，2011 年。

End of text
文本结束

Introduction
介绍

It is acknowledged that a sustainable future cannot be achieved solely through political agreements, technological solutions and economic incentives (Fien 2004). Indeed, it requires changes in the way people think and act, and education can play a key role in bringing about this change (UNESCO 2013). ‘Education can empower children, youth, and adults to take action at a local, national and global level and cooperate in meeting current and emerging challenges in an increasingly interconnected world’ UNESCO 2014, 45).
人们认识到，仅靠政治协议、技术解决方案和经济激励措施是无法实现可持续未来的（Fien 2004）。事实上，它需要改变人们的思维和行为方式，而教育可以在实现这种变化方面发挥关键作用（UNESCO 2013）。“教育可以增强儿童、青年和成人的权能，使其在地方、国家和全球层面采取行动，并在日益相互联系的世界中合作应对当前和正在出现的挑战”，教科文组织，2014年，第45页）。

It follows that schools, then, should have a substantial contribution to make: appropriate teaching strategies to equip students with skills such as agency, critical thinking, action taking and problem-solving would empower children to act as agents of change, proactively tackling environmental issues. (Stuhmcke 2012, 34).
因此，学校应该做出重大贡献：适当的教学策略使学生具备能动性、批判性思维、采取行动和解决问题等技能，这将使儿童能够成为变革的推动者，积极解决环境问题。（Stuhmcke 2012,34）。

If we consider that students’ mental models can shape the ways in which they solve problems (Halford 2014), it is essential for teachers to be aware of them so they can support children’s constructions of environmental knowledge and problem-solving skills accordingly (Shepardson et al. 2007). Any accomplishments in environmental education can have a direct as well as an indirect impact, whether the actions are collective or are executed as individuals. (Jensen 2002, 326; Jensen and Schnack 2006). In this study, we refer to the notion of ‘direct action’ as being an instant and short-term solution to an environmental problem, whereas ‘indirect action’ is considered to be a longer term addressing of the problem aimed at inhibiting the recurrence of the problem.
如果我们考虑到学生的心智模型可以塑造他们解决问题的方式（Halford 2014），那么教师必须意识到它们，以便他们能够相应地支持儿童对环境知识和解决问题技能的构建（Shepardson et al. 2007）。环境教育方面的任何成就都可能产生直接和间接的影响，无论这些行动是集体的还是作为个人执行的。（Jensen 2002， 326;Jensen 和 Schnack 2006）。在这项研究中，我们将“直接行动”的概念称为环境问题的即时和短期解决方案，而“间接行动”则被认为是旨在抑制问题再次发生的问题的长期解决。

In a review of the literature, Rickinson (2001) highlighted a limited number of studies focusing on students’ mental models of the environment, with the existing body of research in environmental education focusing on students’ factual knowledge about environmental issues. It is important that research in environmental education is conducted with the aim of identifying students’ mental models about various aspects of the environment (Payne 1998), as the conceptions held by students might shape the ways in which they understand environmental issues, guide their environmental behaviours (Loughland, Reid, and Petocz 2002; Rickinson 2001; Shepardson et al. 2007), and influence the way they solve these issues (Halford 2014). Wood and Walton (1990) strongly believe many environmental problems remain unsolved because people are unaware of these issues or they cannot provide a solution. Thus, we believe that it is helpful for educators to be aware of students’ mental models of environmental issues and how the students themselves think they could address them: this knowledge may prove useful in better curricular planning and more effective instructional design, which ultimately enhances curricular continuity (Driver et al.
在对文献的回顾中，Rickinson（2001）强调了数量有限的研究，这些研究侧重于学生对环境的心智模型，而现有的环境教育研究机构则侧重于学生对环境问题的事实知识。重要的是，环境教育研究的目的是确定学生对环境各个方面的心智模型（Payne 1998），因为学生所持有的观念可能会影响他们理解环境问题的方式，指导他们的环境行为（Loughland， Reid， and Petocz 2002;里金森 2001;Shepardson 等人，2007 年），并影响他们解决这些问题的方式（Halford 2014 年）。Wood和Walton（1990）坚信，许多环境问题仍未得到解决，因为人们没有意识到这些问题，或者他们无法提供解决方案。因此，我们认为，对于教育工作者来说，了解学生对环境问题的心理模型以及学生自己认为他们可以如何解决这些问题是有帮助的：这些知识可能有助于更好的课程规划和更有效的教学设计，最终提高课程的连续性（Driver et al.

1994).

With this background in mind, the present study aims to illustrate students’ mental models of collective and personal ways of addressing the specific environmental issues of forest destruction and waste.
考虑到这一背景，本研究旨在说明学生解决森林破坏和浪费等具体环境问题的集体和个人方式的心智模型。

Literature review
文献综述

Children’s thinking about environmental issues
儿童对环境问题的思考

There are some insightful studies of young children’s conceptions of the environment and environmental issues: for instance, some studies in environmental education have investigated children’s conceptions about nature (Keliher 1997; Payne 1998) or the environment as an ecosystem (Alerby 2000; Barraza 1999; Loughland, Reid, and Petocz 2002; Shepardson et al. 2007). Some literature focuses specifically on children’s conceptions of the environmental issues of ‘forest degradation’ and ‘waste’: these areas are discussed further in the sections below.
对幼儿对环境和环境问题的概念有一些有见地的研究：例如，一些环境教育研究调查了儿童对自然的观念（Keliher，1997年;Payne 1998）或作为生态系统的环境（Alerby 2000;巴拉扎 1999;Loughland、Reid 和 Petocz 2002;Shepardson 等人，2007 年）。一些文献专门关注儿童对“森林退化”和“浪费”等环境问题的概念：以下各节将进一步讨论这些领域。

Children’s perceptions of forest degradation
儿童对森林退化的看法

Most of the studies investigating children’s understanding of forest issues have focused on children’s conceptions of forests or rainforests as ecosystems (Bowker 2007; Palmer, Suggate, and Matthews 1996; Snaddon, Turner, and Foster 2008; Strommen 1995), or of human interventions within a forest ecosystem (Ergazaki and Andriotou 2010). However, a small number of studies have investigated children’s notions of either the collective ways of addressing forest destruction or of their personal contribution to the protection of forests. A pertinent study conducted by Barraza and Pineda (2003), with 108 students aged between 12 and 16 years-old, indicated that the students suggested technical and management solutions in the case of forest rehabilitation and that conservation activities such as tree planting, tree pruning and fire prevention campaigns should be employed. Interestingly, though, they neither considered themselves as being part of the problem nor as agents of change, even though they declared willingness to participate in forest protection and rehabilitation initiatives.
调查儿童对森林问题理解情况的大多数研究都集中在儿童将森林或热带雨林视为生态系统的概念上（Bowker，2007年;Palmer、Suggate 和 Matthews 1996;Snaddon、Turner 和 Foster 2008 年;Strommen 1995），或森林生态系统内的人类干预（Ergazaki 和 Andriotou，2010 年）。然而，少数研究调查了儿童对解决森林破坏问题的集体方式或他们个人对保护森林的贡献的概念。Barraza和Pineda（2003年）对108名年龄在12至16岁之间的学生进行了一项相关研究，结果表明，这些学生在森林恢复方面提出了技术和管理解决办法，并应采取诸如植树、修剪树木和防火运动等保护活动。然而，有趣的是，尽管他们宣布愿意参与森林保护和恢复倡议，但他们既不认为自己是问题的一部分，也不认为自己是变革的推动者。

A study exploring 30 6-year-old children’s conceptions of dealing with forest destruction, both collectively (i.e. how people, in general, can address the problem) and individually (i.e. how every single child can address the problem) (Iliopoulou 2016), revealed that the children suggested mostly (17 out of 19 responses) direct/short-term actions such as extinguishing a fire once it had begun. In contrast, only five of the responses proposed proactive/indirect/long-term actions (protection, management, prohibition, punishment). In terms of the children’s personal contributions, only 12 of the participants responded. Three of the total responses suggested direct action, whereas eight of them reflected their belief
一项研究探讨了 30 名 6 岁儿童处理森林破坏的概念，包括集体（即人们通常如何解决问题）和个人（即每个儿童如何解决问题）（Iliopoulou，2016 年），发现这些儿童主要（19 个回答中的 17 个）建议采取直接/短期行动，例如在火灾发生后扑灭火灾。相比之下，只有5份答复提出了主动/间接/长期行动（保护、管理、禁止、惩罚）。就孩子们的个人贡献而言，只有12名参与者做出了回应。在所有答复中，有3份建议采取直接行动，而其中8份则反映了他们的信念

that they can contribute proactively/indirectly by protecting the forest, with one response suggesting that people should be forbidden from damaging it.
他们可以通过保护森林来积极/间接地做出贡献，其中一项回应建议应该禁止人们破坏森林。

Children’s perceptions of waste
儿童对废物的看法

Studies investigating students’ thinking about waste (Glazar, Vrtacnik, and Bacnik 1998; Grodzinska-Jurczak, Stepska, and Nieszporek 2006) indicated that some of the solutions for reducing waste that the young children suggested were direct/short-term and some were proactive/long-term, with the proactive/long-term solutions being proposed mainly by the older students (11- to 12-year-olds). More specifically, Iliopoulou’s study (2016) indicated that, of 18 6-year-olds who responded, 10 considered actions such as throwing rubbish into the bin as being a solution for waste reduction, whereas 8 referred to proactive/indirect/longterm actions such as management (6 responses) and prohibition (2 responses). The 15 the children who responded to questions related to their personal contribution to waste reduction gave the following responses: the direct action of throwing it into the bin (7 responses), a proactive/long-term action of managing the waste (7 responses) or verbal admonition or prohibition (1 response).
调查学生对废物思考的研究（Glazar、Vrtacnik 和 Bacnik 1998;Grodzinska-Jurczak、Stepska 和 Nieszporek 2006 年）指出，幼儿提出的一些减少浪费的解决方案是直接/短期的，有些是主动/长期的，其中主动/长期解决方案主要由年龄较大的学生（11 至 12 岁）提出。更具体地说，Iliopoulou的研究（2016年）表明，在18名接受调查的6岁儿童中，有10人认为将垃圾扔进垃圾桶等行动是减少浪费的解决方案，而8人则提到了主动/间接/长期行动，如管理（6次回应）和禁止（2次回应）。15名儿童在回答有关他们个人对减少废物的贡献的问题时，给出了以下回答：直接将其扔进垃圾桶（7个回答），积极/长期管理废物的行动（7个回答）或口头告诫或禁止（1个回答）。

Malandrakis (2008) investigated 173 children’s conceptions (8- to 12-year-olds) of their personal contribution to waste reduction, and found that only 12% considered that they, personally, could contribute to waste reduction: the vast majority believed that it was someone else’s responsibility (e.g. the municipality, state). Some participants (41%) suggested mainly direct actions (i.e. throwing waste into the bin, picking up rubbish) for getting involved in waste reduction efforts and only 15% mentioned recycling, 5.3% organising or participating in group actions and 3% reducing consumption as methods of substantial personal involvement. The results indicated that proactive/long-term solutions, such as recycling, were proposed mainly by the older students (11- to 12-year-olds). The younger students (up to 9-years-old), on the other hand, suggested mainly direct actions, such as throwing waste into the bin.
Malandrakis（2008年）调查了173名儿童（8至12岁）对他们个人对减少废物贡献的概念，发现只有12%的人认为他们个人可以为减少废物做出贡献：绝大多数人认为这是其他人的责任（例如市政当局，州）。部分受访者（41%）建议主要采取直接行动（即将废物扔进垃圾桶、捡垃圾）参与减少废物的工作，只有15%提到回收再造、5.3%组织或参与集体行动和3%减少消费，这些都是个人积极参与的方法。结果表明，积极/长期的解决方案，如回收利用，主要由年龄较大的学生（11至12岁）提出。另一方面，年龄较小的学生（9岁以下）主要建议采取直接行动，例如将垃圾扔进垃圾桶。

[…]

The current study: aims and purpose
当前研究：目的和目的

The present article is part of a larger research study (Iliopoulou 2011) which aimed at identifying the children’s mental models of four environmental phenomena (forest, waste production, pollution and water/energy consumption), of their associated issues (deforestation, waste management, air and sea pollution and water/energy waste), and of their collective and personal actions. The primary aim of the larger study was to understand how these mental models interrelate within each issue and also to comprehend how the suggested solutions or actions for the environmental problem may match the mental models
本文是一项更大规模的研究（Iliopoulou 2011）的一部分，该研究旨在确定儿童对四种环境现象（森林、废物产生、污染和水/能源消耗）、其相关问题（森林砍伐、废物管理、空气和海洋污染以及水/能源浪费）的心理模型，以及他们的集体和个人行动。这项更大规模研究的主要目的是了解这些心智模型如何在每个问题中相互关联，并理解环境问题的建议解决方案或行动如何与心智模型相匹配

held. The purpose of the present paper is to explore a sample of 9-year-olds’ conceptualisations of the solutions to two issues – namely, forest degradation and waste, collectively and individually. The specific issues of forest and waste were selected because they are important environmental issues which children experience in their daily life and which are included in the Greek Primary curriculum (DEPPS 2003).
举行。本文的目的是探索 9 岁儿童对两个问题（即森林退化和浪费）的集体和个人解决方案的概念化样本。之所以选择森林和废物的具体问题，是因为它们是儿童在日常生活中经历的重要环境问题，并被纳入希腊小学课程（DEPPS，2003年）。

[…]

Methodology
方法论

The research reported in this paper was guided by two questions:
本文报告的研究以两个问题为指导：

(1) What kind of solutions do children propose in relation to forest degradation and waste? (2) What do children think their contribution should be in dealing with forest degradation and waste?
（1） 儿童在森林退化和浪费方面提出了什么样的解决方案？（2） 儿童认为他们在处理森林退化和浪费方面应该做出什么贡献？

The research reported in this paper provides results of one part of the study aimed at exploring: (a) young children’s (9-year-olds) mental models of collective and personal ways of addressing the issues of both forest destruction and waste; and (b) whether there are common factors in children’s thinking about the issues. A review of the relevant literature suggested that children have some knowledge about these issues, yet their understanding is, to some extent, imprecise and somewhat vague (Strommen 1995).
本文报告的研究提供了该研究的一部分的结果，旨在探讨：（a） 幼儿（9岁）处理森林破坏和浪费问题的集体和个人方法的心智模型;（b） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（b） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智模式;（c） 幼儿（9岁）的心智及（b）儿童在思考这些问题时，是否有共同的因素。对相关文献的回顾表明，儿童对这些问题有一定的了解，但他们的理解在某种程度上是不准确的，有些模糊的（Strommen，1995年）。

Participants
参与者

The students who participated in this study attended state schools located in a small city. The schools were selected because they were state schools with diverse socio-economic student populations, as is typical of state schools throughout Greece. Thirty 9-year-olds (15 boys and 15 girls) in the third grade of schooling participated in this research. This age group was selected because it represents the middle period of a child’s primary education in Greece, and also because these specific environmental issues are not covered in-depth, in an exclusively environmental way, other than being touched upon through the awarenessraising via the topics alluded to earlier, until the fourth grade. Therefore, it is less likely that the children would have substantial prior knowledge and understanding of the issues through their school education (although, of course, they may have some personal knowledge from other sources, such as the home context and the media).
参与这项研究的学生就读于位于一个小城市的公立学校。之所以选择这些学校，是因为它们是公立学校，拥有多元化的社会经济学生群体，这是希腊各地公立学校的典型特征。30 名 9 岁儿童（15 名男孩和 15 名女孩）参加了这项研究。之所以选择这个年龄组，是因为它代表了希腊儿童初等教育的中期，也因为这些特定的环境问题没有以完全环境的方式深入讨论，只是通过前面提到的主题提高认识来触及，直到四年级。因此，儿童通过学校教育对这些问题有充分的先验知识和理解的可能性较小（当然，他们可能从其他来源获得一些个人知识，例如家庭环境和媒体）。

Ethical considerations
道德考量

The Directorate of Primary Education granted the necessary permission for access to the schools. The teachers of the classes selected for the study were approached for consent, as were the parents of the pupils in their classes. The children involved were considered competent research subjects (Clark 2007) capable of agreeing or refusing to participate in
初等教育局批准了进入学校的必要许可。与被选中进行研究的班级的教师以及班级学生的家长进行了接触，以征得他们的同意。参与的儿童被认为是有能力的研究对象（Clark，2007年），能够同意或拒绝参与

the research (Farell 2005). Pseudonyms have been used throughout the paper, where necessary, to ensure the anonymity of the children.
研究（Farell 2005）。在必要时，整篇论文都使用了假名，以确保儿童的匿名性。

Data collection
数据采集

The researcher visited the school on two occasions to discuss and organise workshops on each environmental issue; namely, deforestation and waste. On the first visit, the pupils were asked to draw a picture related to ‘Deforestation’ and were subsequently interviewed individually. On the second visit, the same process was repeated for the theme of ‘Waste’.
研究人员曾两次访问学校，就每个环境问题讨论和组织研讨会;即森林砍伐和浪费。在第一次访问时，学生们被要求画一幅与“森林砍伐”有关的图片，然后进行单独采访。在第二次访问中，对“废物”主题重复了相同的过程。

The drawing activity was used in this part of the research primarily as a lead-in to the interviews. Consequently, analysis of these drawings was not considered at this point. The prompt given to the children to help them better express their ideas was a short and basic introduction to each issue. This ensured that the researcher would not influence their ideas before they drew the picture.
在这部分研究中，绘画活动主要用作访谈的引子。因此，此时没有考虑对这些图纸的分析。为了帮助他们更好地表达自己的想法，给孩子们的提示是对每个问题的简短而基本的介绍。这确保了研究人员在绘制图片之前不会影响他们的想法。

On completion of the drawings, each child was interviewed individually. A semi-structured interview was selected as the main method for the data collection process because it is ‘a flexible and adjustable way of finding things out ″ (Robson 1993, 229). The researcher can elicit more complete answers by asking sub-questions whenever children have difficulty in understanding what they are asked for. These interviews lasted approximately 15 min and were recorded by the researcher.
在完成绘画后，每个孩子都接受了单独采访。半结构化访谈被选为数据收集过程的主要方法，因为它是“一种灵活且可调整的发现方式”（Robson 1993,229）。每当孩子难以理解他们被问到什么时，研究人员可以通过提出子问题来获得更完整的答案。这些访谈持续了大约 15 分钟，并由研究人员记录下来。

Data analysis
数据分析

All the interviews were transcribed verbatim and qualitative analysis was undertaken using a qualitative analysis software programme; MAXQDA (2007). A second researcher was enlisted to read through all the transcripts. Double coding was applied to support reliability between raters (Miles and Huberman 1984). The interrater reliability coefficient was 0.80 to 0.89. Substantial searches were carried out in order to identify common patterns as well as marked differences.
所有访谈均逐字转录，并使用定性分析软件程序进行定性分析;MAXQDA（2007年）。第二名研究人员被招募来阅读所有的成绩单。应用双重编码来支持评估者之间的可靠性（Miles 和 Huberman，1984 年）。评分者间信度系数为0.80至0.89。为了确定共同的模式以及明显的差异，进行了大量的搜索。

A framework for the analysis of the data were provided by the two subject areas of ‘forest destruction’ and ‘waste’, which were used to code and disclose themes in the data. The responses collected from the children were analysed separately for each thematic area using content analysis in an inductive way (Cohen and Manion 1994). Core concepts (codes) were identified in the responses after the first reading and were subsequently revised after the second reading. Core concepts emerging from the responses were used to construct descriptive themes. Two sub-themes – ‘collective actions’ and ‘individual contributions’ – emerged. Essentially, these sub-themes were easily identified as they came from the responses to the two questions posed: namely, how people could address the problems and how the problems could be addressed by the children themselves. The codes
“森林破坏”和“浪费”这两个主题领域为数据分析提供了一个框架，用于编码和披露数据中的主题。从儿童那里收集的答复使用归纳方式进行内容分析，针对每个主题领域分别进行了分析（Cohen 和 Manion，1994 年）。核心概念（代码）在一读后在答复中确定，随后在二读后进行了修订。从答复中得出的核心概念被用来构建描述性主题。出现了两个子主题——“集体行动”和“个人贡献”。从根本上说，这些次主题很容易确定，因为它们来自对所提出的两个问题的答复：即人们如何解决这些问题以及儿童自己如何解决这些问题。代码

were put into categories and the categories were grouped into typologies reflecting the children’s mental models. This data were analysed for similarities and differences (Shepardson et al. 2007).
被分类，类别被分组为反映儿童心智模式的类型。对这些数据的相似性和差异性进行了分析（Shepardson 等人，2007 年）。

Subsequently, the responses with the corresponding codes were counted separately for each theme; every answer correlated to more than one code. Comparisons were made between the main thematic areas (i.e. forest, waste) and between the two sub-thematic areas (collective actions, individual involvement) within each theme. This meant that it was possible to identify potential connections and links regarding the children’s ways of addressing forest destruction and waste, as well as their personal contributions.
随后，对每个主题的带有相应代码的响应进行单独计数;每个答案都与多个代码相关。对主要专题领域（即森林、废物）和每个主题内的两个次主题领域（集体行动、个人参与）进行了比较。这意味着有可能确定有关儿童处理森林破坏和浪费问题的方式以及他们个人贡献的潜在联系和联系。

Results
结果

In the sections below, the main findings from the analysis are described. For both themes – i.e. ‘forest destruction’ and ‘waste’, findings are separated into the two sub-themes of ‘collective actions’ and ‘individual involvement’. Illustrative quotations, translated into English from the data, are included to illuminate key points.
在以下各节中，描述了分析的主要发现。对于“森林破坏”和“浪费”这两个主题，调查结果分为“集体行动”和“个人参与”两个子主题。包括从数据翻译成英文的说明性引文，以阐明关键点。

Issue 1: ‘forest destruction’
问题1：“森林破坏”

Children’s conceptions of collective actions for addressing the problem of forest destruction Every child involved in the research suggested at least 1 way of addressing forest destruction; there were 40 responses. The vast majority of the children’s suggestions were coded as proactive actions. From the inductive analysis of the data, we identified 14 codes or concepts that we grouped into 5 different categories of response. Next, we grouped the five categories into two typologies that reflected these students’ conceptions of the ways of addressing forest degradation (Table 1):
儿童对解决森林破坏问题的集体行动的构想 参与研究的每个儿童都提出了至少一种解决森林破坏问题的方法，共有 40 种答复。孩子们的绝大多数建议都被编码为积极行动。通过对数据的归纳分析，我们确定了 14 个代码或概念，我们将其分为 5 个不同的响应类别。接下来，我们将这五个类别分为两种类型，反映了这些学生对解决森林退化问题的方法的概念（表1）：

direct action is needed in addressing the problem
在解决这一问题时需要采取直接行动

proactive actions are appropriate for facing up to the problem.
积极主动的行动对于正视问题是适当的。

that mirrored the two conceptions identified in ‘collective action’ above, i.e. ‘direct action’ and ‘proactive action’ (Table 2).
这反映了上述“集体行动”中确定的两个概念，即“直接行动”和“积极行动”（表2）。

Description of ‘direct action’
'direct action' 的描述

Direct action was reflected in students’ conceptions that forest destruction due to the fires would be addressed if the students called for the fire brigade, extinguished the fire by themselves or told somebody to extinguish it. This model was based on only one category: ‘extinguish the fire’, and consisted of four codes: (1) call the fire brigade, (2) tell an adult call the fire brigade, (3) tell an adult to extinguish the fire and (4) put it out by myself. Direct action was reflected in six of the responses.
直接行动反映在学生们的观念中，即如果学生呼叫消防队、自己灭火或告诉某人灭火，火灾造成的森林破坏就会得到解决。该模型仅基于一个类别：“灭火”，由四个代码组成：（1）呼叫消防队，（2）告诉成年人呼叫消防队，（3）告诉成年人灭火，（4）自己灭火。其中6份答复反映了直接行动。

Description of ‘proactive actions’
“主动行动”的描述

The proactive approach consisted of the same categories for the collective actions except that here there is no punishment category. The category of ‘protection’ was reflected in 14 of the responses and consisted of three codes: (1) ‘I don’t cut down the trees’, (2) ‘I keep the forest clean’ and (3) ‘I don’t kill animals’. The next category of ‘prohibition’ was reflected in eight of the responses. This category comprised four codes: ‘no litter’, ‘no cigarettes’, ‘no logging’ and ‘no fires’. The category of ‘management’ was reflected in one of the responses and consisted of one code: ‘recycling’.
积极主动的方法由集体行动的相同类别组成，只是这里没有惩罚类别。14份答复反映了“保护”类别，由三个代码组成：（1）“我不砍伐树木”，（2）“我保持森林清洁”和（3）“我不杀死动物”。下一类“禁止”一词反映在8份答复中。该类别包括四个代码：“禁止乱扔垃圾”、“禁止吸烟”、“禁止伐木”和“禁止火灾”。“管理”类别反映在一份答复中，由一个代码组成：“回收”。

Analysis of the data shows that the children seemed to believe they could contribute to addressing forest destruction even at a young age, but there was a difference. Although they suggested the solution to the problem – i.e. extinguish the fires – when they referred to their personal contribution, they suggested proactive actions such as collecting the rubbish or protecting the animals. Perhaps, this was because these actions were considered to be easier for them to do. We suggest that this finding could helpfully be taken into consideration when teaching this topic to young children and could be highlighted as a way of preventing forest destruction. Furthermore, in contrast with the findings that emerged in the study conducted by Barraza and Pineda (2003), it was apparent that the children considered themselves as agents of change. The translated discussion between the researcher (R) and 9-year-old Lydia (L) is given below and illustrates responses coded as ‘proactive actions’ (‘protection’, ‘prohibition’):
对数据的分析表明，这些儿童似乎认为，即使在很小的时候，他们也可以为解决森林破坏问题做出贡献，但两者之间存在差异。尽管他们提出了解决问题的方法——即灭火——但当他们提到自己的个人贡献时，他们建议采取积极行动，例如收集垃圾或保护动物。也许，这是因为这些行动被认为对他们来说更容易做到。我们建议，在向幼儿教授这一主题时，可以有益地考虑这一发现，并可以强调作为防止森林破坏的一种方式。此外，与Barraza和Pineda（2003年）进行的研究结果形成鲜明对比的是，儿童显然认为自己是变革的推动者。研究人员 （R） 和 9 岁的 Lydia （L） 之间的翻译讨论如下，并说明了编码为“主动行动”（“保护”、“禁止”）的反应：

R: What can be done to prevent the destruction of the forest?
R：可以做些什么来防止森林遭到破坏？

L: We have to protect the forest (protection); to forbid people from going into the forest.
L：我们必须保护森林（protection）;禁止人们进入森林。

(prohibition)
（禁止）

R: What do you think you could do to address the problem of deforestation?
R：你认为你可以做些什么来解决森林砍伐的问题？

L: I can put a sign saying: ‘Hunting is forbidden.’ (prohibition). By not throwing litter down; keeping it clean (protection).
L：我可以挂一个牌子，上面写着：'禁止狩猎。 （禁止）。不扔垃圾;保持清洁（保护）。

Children’s conceptions of individual involvement for addressing the problem of waste Apart from two children who said they did not know, the majority conceptualised their personal contribution in alignment with the solutions they were aware of. Overall, there were 29 responses. As before, the data were analysed and this led to the identification of the responses as representative of ‘direct action’ or ‘proactive actions’ (Table 4).
儿童对个人参与解决废物问题的概念 除了两个孩子说他们不知道外，大多数孩子都把他们的个人贡献与他们所知道的解决方案相一致。总共有 29 份回复。与以前一样，对数据进行了分析，从而确定了代表“直接行动”或“积极行动”的回应（表4）。

Description of ‘direct action’
'direct action' 的描述

‘Direct action’ was based on only one category: throwing the waste into the rubbish bin (as reflected in seven of the responses). As one child suggested: ‘I can throw the waste into a rubbish bin’.
“直接行动”仅基于一个类别：将废物扔进垃圾桶（如七份答复所反映的那样）。正如一个孩子建议的那样：“我可以把垃圾扔进垃圾桶”。

Description of ‘proactive actions’
“主动行动”的描述

‘Proactive actions’ consisted of two categories: firstly, ‘management’, which encompassed what are known as the ‘3 Rs’ (i.e. reuse – recycle – reduce). This category was reflected in 13 of the responses. Secondly, the category we called ‘addressing figures of authority’ (e.g. adults, the municipality), was reflected in nine of the responses. It is interesting to note that, in this category, the children appeared to consider others (i.e. the municipality or adults in general) as responsible for addressing the problem. Even though this finding connects with the findings from other studies with older students (Malandrakis 2008), it is noteworthy that the rest of the children considered themselves as being agents of change (Iliopoulou 2011).
“积极行动”由两类组成：第一类是“管理”，包括所谓的“3R”（即再利用-回收-减少）。这一类别反映在13份答复中。其次，我们称之为“称呼权威人士”的类别（例如成年人、市政当局）反映在九份答复中。有趣的是，在这一类中，儿童似乎认为其他人（即市政当局或一般成年人）应对解决这一问题负责。尽管这一发现与其他针对高年级学生的研究结果有关（Malandrakis 2008），但值得注意的是，其他儿童认为自己是变革的推动者（Iliopoulou 2011）。

Excerpts from interviews with two children, Mary and Odysseas, are transcribed below, to illustrate their thoughts and indicate the coding (in brackets).Excerpt from interview with Mary (M):
下面转录了对两个孩子玛丽和奥德修斯的采访摘录，以说明他们的想法并指出编码（在括号中）。玛丽（M）访谈摘录：

R: What can be done to reduce waste?
R：可以做些什么来减少浪费？

M: We can recycle (management/recycle)
M：我们可以回收（管理/回收）

R: What do you think you could do to address the problem of waste?
R：你认为你能做些什么来解决浪费问题？

M: I have been recycling at home (management/recycling). I can help by not throwing the rubbish on the street (direct/into the bin) and the papers which I don’t need anymore, but if I need them for something I’ll take them and make something (management / reusing).
M：我一直在家回收（管理/回收）。 我可以帮忙，不把垃圾扔在街上（直接/扔进垃圾桶）和我不再需要的纸张，但如果我需要它们来做一些事情，我会拿走它们并做一些东西（管理/重复使用）。

Excerpt from interview with Odysseas (O):
摘自对Odysseas（O）的采访：

R: What we could do in order not have much rubbish?
R：我们能做些什么来避免垃圾的浪费？

O: Ehh …. to throw it (direct/into the bin).
O：呃....扔掉它（直接/扔进垃圾桶）。

R: What do you think you could do?
R：你觉得你能做什么？

O: I should not buy a lot of things (management/reduce consumption).
O：我不应该买很多东西（管理/减少消耗）。

Discussion and implications for teaching and learning
讨论及其对教学的启示

It is important to acknowledge that the descriptions of children’s conceptions presented in this paper are based on analysis of children’s responses as a group. It is of course possible
重要的是要承认，本文中提出的对儿童概念的描述是基于对儿童作为一个群体的反应的分析。这当然是可能的

that an individual student, in a different context, might express different conceptions (Shepardson et al. 2007). The descriptions presented in this study offer a general picture of the conceptions children have of both collective actions and individual involvement as possible ways of addressing particular environmental problems. It is hoped that this may support practice by providing practitioners with insight into ‘the varied ways in which students make sense of the environment’ (Shepardson et al. 2007, 342).
在不同的背景下，个别学生可能会表达不同的概念（Shepardson 等人，2007 年）。本研究中的描述提供了儿童对集体行动和个人参与作为解决特定环境问题的可能方式的观念的一般情况。希望这可以通过为从业者提供对“学生理解环境的各种方式”的见解来支持实践（Shepardson 等人，2007 年，342 年）。

The study indicated that, for both of the specific environmental problems (‘deforestation’ and ‘waste’) it was possible to differentiate the children’s responses according to whether they represented (1) ‘direct action’: – that is, concrete or short-term actions aimed at dealing with the problems once the problems exist or (2) ‘proactive actions’: in other words, the longterm/preventative actions aimed at addressing these problems in a sustainable way.
该研究表明，对于这两个具体的环境问题（“森林砍伐”和“浪费”），可以根据它们是否代表（1）“直接行动”来区分儿童的反应：即，旨在处理问题存在的具体或短期行动，或（2）“积极行动”：换句话说，旨在以可持续方式解决这些问题的长期/预防性行动。

In terms of their conceptions of ‘collective actions’, it was possible to subcategorise the proactive actions into the notions of ‘protection’, ‘management’, ‘prohibition’ or ‘punishment’, as these were suggested by the children as ways of preventing the problems in order to create a more sustainable environment. It is interesting to note that the children tended to focus on ‘prohibition’ and ‘punishment’ as ways of deterring others from causing problems. This may perhaps be due to their level of maturity and understanding of the world and it would be interesting to determine how this might develop as they mature.
就他们的“集体行动”概念而言，可以将积极行动细分为“保护”、“管理”、“禁止”或“惩罚”等概念，因为儿童认为这些是预防问题的方法，以便创造一个更可持续的环境。有趣的是，孩子们往往把重点放在“禁止”和“惩罚”上，以此作为阻止他人造成问题的方法。这也许是由于他们的成熟程度和对世界的理解，确定随着他们的成熟而如何发展将是有趣的。

Personal contribution
个人贡献

In terms of individual actions, the children in our sample seemed to believe that they were able to reduce waste through their daily habits. However, this was not the case with the forest issue. The pupils felt that deforestation was not something they could deal with; it was unlike that of the problem of waste in that it was not something they had experience of on a daily basis. The analysis of data also suggested that the solutions the students had, and suggested, for addressing the environmental problems were also considered by them to be ways of personally dealing with the problems. In terms of teaching and learning, this highlights the potential benefits of a problem-solving and action-oriented curriculum, which children can directly apply their thinking to concrete experiences. In this way, the children can learn how they can become competent at making decisions and taking action as active participants (Jensen 2002). […]
就个人行为而言，我们样本中的儿童似乎认为他们能够通过日常习惯减少浪费。然而，森林问题并非如此。学生们认为森林砍伐不是他们能够处理的事情;这与浪费问题的不同之处在于，这不是他们每天都经历过的事情。对数据的分析还表明，学生们为解决环境问题而提出的解决方案也被他们认为是个人处理问题的方式。在教学和学习方面，这突出了解决问题和以行动为导向的课程的潜在好处，孩子们可以直接将他们的思维应用于具体的经验。通过这种方式，孩子们可以学习如何成为积极的参与者，有能力做出决定和采取行动（Jensen 2002）。[…]

An implication of the present study is that that the children displayed an insufficient understanding of the specific problems (‘forest destruction’ and ‘waste’): as some were not able to suggest important ways of addressing the problems (such as rubbish collection and forest thinning for fire protection, or consumption reduction for addressing the waste issue). We would argue that it would be beneficial, therefore, to teach environmental topics
本研究的一个含义是，儿童对具体问题（“森林破坏”和“浪费”）的理解不足：因为有些儿童无法提出解决这些问题的重要方法（例如为防火而收集垃圾和砍伐森林，或为解决废物问题而减少消耗）。我们认为，因此，教授环境主题将是有益的

holistically and systemically, starting in kindergarten and increasing in sophistication and abstract levels of thought year by year as the cognitive maturity of children increases with age.
从整体性、系统性上看，从幼儿园开始，随着儿童认知成熟度的提高，思维的复杂程度和抽象程度逐年提高。

Limitations and suggestions for further research
局限性及进一步研究的建议

This research was conducted with only a small sample and concerned two-specific environmental topics. Consequently, there is a need for further research covering other environmental issues as well, and involving a broader sample in order that conclusions can be drawn in terms of some socio-demographic factors such as gender, age, school, and place of residence or socio-economic conditions. Longitudinal studies of how students build mental models would be valuable to determine the influence of schooling and sociocultural interactions on students’ conceptualisations of environmental topics.
这项研究仅使用一小部分样本进行，涉及两个特定的环境主题。因此，有必要对其他环境问题进行进一步研究，并涉及更广泛的样本，以便能够根据性别、年龄、学校、居住地或社会经济条件等一些社会人口因素得出结论。对学生如何建立心智模型的纵向研究对于确定学校教育和社会文化互动对学生环境主题概念化的影响很有价值。

Conclusion
结论

This small-scale study offers a contribution to the understanding of children’s conceptualisation of crucial environmental problems. It is hoped more broadly that the insights can be used to support the development of education programmes, with the aim of better preparing students to become competent citizens who can tackle the environmental challenges of the present and future.
这项小规模的研究有助于理解儿童对关键环境问题的概念化。更广泛地说，希望这些见解可以用于支持教育方案的制定，目的是使学生更好地培养成为有能力的公民，能够应对现在和未来的环境挑战。

Disclosure statement
披露声明

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
提交人没有报告任何潜在的利益冲突。

References
引用

Alerby, E. 2000. “A Way of Visualizing Children’s and Young People’s Thoughts about the Environment: A Study of Drawings.” Environmental Education Research 6 (3): 205–222.
Alerby， E. 2000 年。“一种将儿童和年轻人对环境的想法可视化的方式：绘画研究。” 环境教育研究6（3）：205-222。

Barraza, L. 1999. “Children’s Drawings about the Environment.” Environmental Education Research 5 (1): 49–67.
巴拉扎，L. 1999 年。“关于环境的儿童绘画。” 环境教育研究5（1）：49-67。

Barraza, L., and J. Pinedα. 2003. “How Young People See Forests in Mexico: A Comparison of Two Rural Communities.” Unasylva 213 (54): 10–17.
Barraza， L. 和 J. Pinedα。2003. “年轻人如何看待墨西哥的森林：两个农村社区的比较。” Unasylva 213（54）：10-17。

Bowker, R. 2007. “Children’s Perceptions and Learning about Tropical Rainforests: An Analysis of Their Drawings.” Environmental Education Research 13 (1): 75–96.
鲍克，R. 2007 年。“儿童对热带雨林的感知和学习：对他们的绘画的分析。” 环境教育研究13（1）：75-96。

Clark, A. 2007. “A Hundred Ways of Listening. Gathering Children’s Perspectives of Their Early Childhood Environment.” Young Children 62 (3): 76–81.
克拉克，A. 2007 年。“一百种倾听方式。收集儿童对他们幼儿环境的看法。 幼儿62（3）：76-81。

Cohen, L., and L. Manion. 1994. Educational Research Methodology. Athens: Metaixmio.
Cohen， L. 和 L. Manion。1994. 教育研究方法.雅典：梅塔克米奥。

Davis, J. 2010. Young Children and the Environment. Early Education for Sustainability. Sydney: Cambridge University Press.
戴维斯，J. 2010 年。 幼儿与环境。可持续发展的早期教育。悉尼：剑桥大学出版社。

DEPPS. 2003. Cross Curriculum Framework and Curricula (APS) of Compulsory Education. Athens: Ministry of Education FEK 1374, B’, 18/10/2001.
德普斯。2003. 义务教育的跨课程框架和课程（APS）。雅典：教育部FEK 1374，B'，2001年10月18日。

Driver, R., A. Squires, R. Rushworth, and V. Wood-Robinson. 1994. Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into Children’s Ideas. London: Routledge.
司机，R.，A. Squires，R. Rushworth 和 V. Wood-Robinson。1994. 理解中学科学：儿童思想研究。伦敦：劳特利奇。

Edwards-Leis, C. E. 2012. “Challenging Learning Journeys in the Classroom: Using Mental Model Theory to Inform How Pupils Think When They Are Generating Solutions.” In Technology Education in the 21^st Century, edited by T. Ginner, J. Hallstrom, and M. Hulten, 153–162. Stockholm: PATT26 Conference.
爱德华兹-莱斯，CE 2012。“课堂上具有挑战性的学习之旅：使用心智模型理论来告知学生在产生解决方案时如何思考。”在 《21世纪的技术教育》中，由T. Ginner，J. Hallstrom和M. Hulten编辑，第153-162页。斯德哥尔摩：PATT26 会议。

Ergazaki, M., and E. Andriotou. 2010. “From ‘Forest Fires’ and ‘Hunting’ to Disturbing ‘Habitats’ and ‘Food Chains’: Do Young Children Come up with Any Ecological Interpretations of Human Interventions within a Forest?” Research in Science Education 40 (2): 187–201.
Ergazaki， M. 和 E. Andriotou。2010. “从'森林火灾'和'狩猎'到令人不安的'栖息地'和'食物链'：幼儿是否对森林内的人类干预提出了任何生态学解释？ 科学教育研究40（2）：187-201。

Farell, A. 2005. Ethical Research with Children. Berkshire: Open University Press.
法雷尔，A. 2005 年。 与儿童的伦理研究。伯克希尔：开放大学出版社。

Fien, J. 2004. “Education for Sustainability.” In Studying Society and Environment: A Guide for Teachers, edited by R. Gilbert, 184–200. South Melbourne: Thomson.
费恩，J. 2004 年。“可持续发展教育。”在《研究社会与环境：教师指南》中，由R.吉尔伯特编辑，第184-200页。南墨尔本：汤姆森。

Gentner, D., and A. L. Stevens. 1983. Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
根特纳，D. 和 AL 史蒂文斯。1983. 心智模型.新泽西州希尔斯代尔：劳伦斯·埃尔鲍姆协会。

Glazar, S. A., M. Vrtacnik, and A. Bacnik. 1998. “Primary School Children’s Understanding of Municipal Waste Processing.” Environmental Education Research 4 (3): 299–308.
格拉扎尔，SA，M. Vrtacnik 和 A. Bacnik。1998. “小学生对城市废物处理的理解”。 环境教育研究4（3）：299-308。

Greca, M. I., and A. Moreira. 2000. “Mental Models, Conceptual Models, and Modeling.” International Journal of Science Education 22 (1): 1–11.
格雷卡，密歇根州和 A. 莫雷拉。2000. “心智模型、概念模型和建模。” 国际科学教育杂志22（1）：1-11。

Grodzinska-Jurczak, M., A. Stepska, and K. Nieszporek. 2006. “Perception of Environmental Problems among Pre-School Children in Poland.” International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 15 (1): 62–76.
Grodzinska-Jurczak，M.，A. Stepska 和 K. Nieszporek。2006. “波兰学龄前儿童对环境问题的看法。” 国际地理与环境教育研究15（1）：62-76。

Halford, S. G. 2014. Children’s Understanding: The Development of Mental Models. USA: Psychology Press.
哈尔福德，SG 2014。 儿童的理解：心智模型的发展。美国：心理学出版社。

Iliopoulou, I. 2011. Preschool and First Grade Children’s Conceptions of Various Dimensions of Environmental Issues Such as: Forest, Waste, Air and Sea Pollution, Water and Electricity Consumption. PhD dissertation, University of Thessaly, Greece. (in Greek)
伊利奥普卢，I. 2011 年。 学龄前和一年级儿童对环境问题各个方面的概念，例如：森林、废物、空气和海洋污染、水和电的消耗。 博士论文，希腊色萨利大学。（希腊文）

Iliopoulou, I. 2016. “How Young Children Think They Can Act for the Environment: The Case of Forest and Waste.” Education, 3–13. doi:10.1080/03004279.2016.1236829.
伊利奥普卢，I. 2016 年。“年幼的孩子如何认为他们可以为环境采取行动：森林和废物的案例。” 教育， 3–13. doi：10.1080/03004279.2016.1236829.

Jenkins, K. 2009. “Linking Theory to Practice: Education for Sustainability and Learning and Teaching.” In Education for Sustainability in the Primary Curriculum. a Guide for Teachers, edited by M. Littledyke, N. Taylor, and C. Eames, 29–38. South Yarra: Palgrave Macmillan.
詹金斯，K. 2009 年。“将理论与实践联系起来：可持续性教育与学习与教学。”在《小学课程的可持续性教育中》。 教师指南，由 M. Littledyke、N. Taylor 和 C. Eames 编辑，第 29-38 页。南亚拉：帕尔格雷夫麦克米伦。

Jensen, B. B. 2002. “Knowledge, Action and pro-Environmental Behaviour.” Environmental Education Research 8 (3): 325–334.
詹森，BB 2002 年。“知识、行动和环保行为。” 环境教育研究8（3）：325-334。

Jensen, B. B., and K. Schnack. 2006. “The Action Competence Approach in Environmental Education.” Environmental Education Research 12 (3–4): 471–486.
Jensen， BB 和 K. Schnack。2006. “环境教育中的行动能力方法。” 环境教育研究12（3-4）：471-486。

Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1983. Mental Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
约翰逊-莱尔德，PN 1983 年。 心智模型。剑桥：剑桥大学。

Keliher, V. 1997. “Children’s Perceptions of Nature.” International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 6 (3): 240–243.
Keliher，V. 1997 年。“儿童对自然的感知。” 国际地理与环境教育研究 6（3）：240-243。

Kokkotas, P., D. Alexopoulou, A. Malamitsa, G. Mantas, M. Palamara, and P. Panagiotaki. 2006.
科科塔斯，P.，D.亚历克索普卢，A.马拉米察，G.曼塔斯，M.帕拉马拉和P.帕纳吉奥塔基。2006.

Environmental Studies, C Grade Teacher’s Book. Athens: Ministry of Education.
环境研究，C级教师用书。雅典：教育部。

Kurtz, A. 2008. Mental Models – a Theory Critique. http://mcs.open.ac.uk/yr258/ment_mod/.
库尔茨，A. 2008 年。 心智模型——理论批判。http://mcs.open.ac.uk/yr258/ment_mod/.

Loughland, T., A. Reid, and P. Petocz. 2002. “Young People’s Conceptions of Environment: A Phenomenographic Analysis.” Environmental Education Research 8 (2): 187–197.
拉夫兰，T.，A. Reid 和 P. Petocz。2002. “年轻人的环境观念：现象学分析。” 环境教育研究8（2）：187-197。

Malandrakis, G. 2008. “Children’s Understandings Related to Hazardous Household Items and Waste.” Environmental Education Research 14 (5): 579–601.
马兰德拉基斯，G. 2008 年。“儿童对危险家居用品和废物的理解。” 环境教育研究14（5）：579-601。

MAXQDA. 2007. MAX Qualitative Data Analysis. Germany: Verbi Software.
MAXQDA的。2007. MAX定性数据分析.德国：Verbi Software。

Miles, M. B., and A. M. Huberman. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications Inc.
迈尔斯，MB和AM胡伯曼。1984. 定性数据分析：新方法的原始资料。加利福尼亚州千橡市：Sage publications Inc.

Norman, D. A. 1983. “Some Observations on Mental Models.” In Mental Models, edited by D. Gentnerand and A. L. Stevens, 7–14. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
诺曼，DA 1983 年。“关于心智模型的一些观察。”在心智模型中，由 D. Gentnerand 和 AL Stevens 编辑，7-14。新泽西州希尔斯代尔：埃尔鲍姆。

Palmer, J. A., J. Suggate, and J. Matthews. 1996. “Environmental Cognition: Early Ideas and Misconceptions at the Ages of Four and Six.” Environmental Education Research 2 (3): 301– 329.
帕尔默，JA，J.萨格盖特和J.马修斯。1996. “环境认知：四岁和六岁的早期想法和误解。” 环境教育研究2（3）：301-329。

Payne, P. 1998. “Children’s Conceptions of Nature.” Australian Journal of Environmental Education 14: 19–26.
佩恩，P. 1998。“儿童的自然观。” 澳大利亚环境教育杂志14：19-26。

Rickinson, M. 2001. “Learners and Learning in Environmental Education: A Critical Review of the Evidence.” Environmental Education Research 7 (3): 207–320.
里金森，M. 2001 年。“环境教育中的学习者和学习：对证据的批判性审查。” 环境教育研究7（3）：207-320。

Robson, C. 1993. Real World Research. Oxford: Blackwell.
罗布森，C. 1993 年。 真实世界研究。牛津：布莱克威尔。