Climate change research is hampered by the gap between 2 styles of research, raising fundamental issues of standpoint. Interpretive-style researchers see themselves as at the center of the environment, experiencing it from within; their involvement is what allows them to gain knowledge. Descriptive-style researchers see themselves as outside the environment they analyze; their distance is what allows them to gain knowledge. This fundamental difference in standpoint indicates that attempts to meld the 2 styles of research in articulating global-local links are unrealistic and doomed to failure. Instead, we should look for complementarities and attempt to bring the differently achieved knowledge to bear on global problems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Malone et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: