Abrir espacios para la construcción de conocimientos. Una experiencia desde la Universidad de la República en Uruguay.

Maria Goñi

doi:10.48160/18517072re54.219

Authors

Maria Goñi Universidad de la Republica (UDELAR) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6113-0798

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48160/18517072re54.219

Keywords:

Coproduction, transdiscipline, research processes in interaction

Abstract

The complexity of some problems – climate change, gender inequalities, food security, among many others – have triggered a series of transformations within science seeking to respond to them. One of these has to do with the integration and interaction between different actors – social and academic – that contribute diverse knowledge and experiences. With this, new roles of science in society and new ways of organizing the production and use of scientific knowledge are promoted. Studies in Science, Technology and Society (STS) - and more recently Studies on Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary (SIT) - provide a broad empirical-conceptual framework to recognize, analyze and problematize the transformations of these processes and practices of knowledge production. . The concept of co-production of knowledge and transdiscipline, among others, reflect a process of "cross-fertilization" between different areas of knowledge and heterogeneous actors, challenging, on the one hand, the practices and routines of knowledge production, provoking the design of strategies that they enable new connections and, on the other hand, situating the relevance of the knowledge and experiences of the group of actors - academic and social - for the creation of new knowledge. Both concepts - in the STS and SIT field - have a rich history of research and practice in multiple disciplines.

This article analyzes how a process of these characteristics is carried out based on the experience of a research group at the University of the Republic in Uruguay. Through the practices designed by this group, it is interesting to capture what are the learning experiences and tensions that these throw up, contributing towards their greater understanding.

References

Alcoff, L. (2000), “Phenomenology, Post-structuralism, and Feminist Theory on the Concept of Experience”, en Fisher, L. y L. Embree (eds.), Feminist Phenomenology, Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 39-56.

Arocena, R., y J. Sutz (2006), “El estudio de la Innovación desde el Sur y las perspectivas de un Nuevo Desarrollo”, CTS+I: Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología, Sociedad e Innovación, 3, (7).

Arocena, R. y J. Sutz (2016), Universidades para el desarrollo, Montevideo, UNESCO.

Cardeillac, J. y L. Rodríguez-Lezica (2018), “Exclusión en la inclusión por descalificación: análisis de la situación de las asalariadas rurales en Uruguay”, Revista NERA, 21, (41), pp. 138-164.

Cardeillac, J., et alli (2015), “Asalariados rurales, excepcionalidad y exclusión: un aporte para la superación de barreras a la inclusión social”, en Riella, A. y P. Mascheroni (comp.) Asalariados rurales en América Latina, Buenos Aires, Editorial CLACSO, pp. 289-312.

Crenshaw, K. (1989), “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics”, University of Chicago Forum, 1, pp. 139-167.

Dodson, L; Piatelli, D y L. Schmalzbauer (2007), “Researching Inequality Through Interpretive Collaborations: Shifting Power and the Unspoken Contract”, Qualitative Inquiry, 13, pp. 821-843.

DeVault, M. (1999), Liberating Methods: Feminism and Social Research, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

Funtowicz, S., y R. Jerome (1993), "Science for the Post-Normal Age", Perspectives on Ecological Integrity, en Westra, L. y J. Lemons (eds), Perspectives on Ecological Integrity, Dordrecht, Springer, pp.146-161.

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C. N., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., y M. Trow (1994), The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies, Londres, SAGE.

Haraway, D. (1991), Simians, Cyborgs and Nature, London, Free Association Books.

Harding, S. (2002). “¿Existe un método feminista?”, en Bartra, E. (comp.), Debates en torno a una metodología feminista, México, D.F., Univesridad Autónoma Metropolitana, Unidad Xochimilco y Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Hess, D. (2007), Alternative Pathways in Science and Technology: activism, innovation, and the environment in an era of globalization, Massachusetts, MIT Press.

Hidalgo, C. (2011), “Del entusiasmo al pragmatismo: cambios en las perspectivas de éxito en la investigación interdisciplinaria”, Revista Interciencia, 36, (2), pp. 113-120.

Collins, P. (2015) “Intersectionality's Definitional Dilemmas”, Annual Review of Sociology, 41, pp. 1-20

Hirsch Hadorn, G., et alli (2008), Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research, Dordrecht, Springer.

Jasanoff, S. (2003), "In a constitutional moment: Science and social order at the millennium", en Joerges, B y H. Nowotny (eds.) Social studies of science and technology: Looking back, ahead, yearbook of the sociology of the sciences, Dordrecht, Kluwer.

Jahn, T., Bergmann, M., y F. Keil (2012), "Transdisciplinarity: between mainstreaming and marginalization", Ecol. Econ., 79, pp. 1–10.

Juncal, A; Carámbula, M y D. Piñeiro (2015), “Mapas y trayectos de ciudadanía de las organizaciones sindicales de los asalariados agropecuarios del Uruguay”, en Pucci, F; Piñeiro, D; Juncal, A y S. Nión (coords.), Sindicalización y negociación en los sectores rural y doméstico, Montevideo, Universidad de la República, pp. 87-106.

Lara, S. M. (1992), “La flexibilidad del mercado de trabajo rural: una propuesta que involucra a las mujeres”, Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 54, (1), pp. 29-48.

Lang, D.J., et alli (2012), "Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges", Sustainability Science, 7, pp. 25–43.

Lemos, M.C., y B.J. Morehouse (2005), "The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments", Global Environmental Change, 15, pp. 57–68.

Migliaro, A., et alli (2019), "Los sindicatos rurales tienen género: un abordaje organizacional y feminista de un sindicato rural uruguayo", ReAlER. Revista Latinoamericana de estudios rurales, 4, (7), pp. 113-133.

Naidorf, J. (2014), "Knowledge Utility: from Social Relevance to Knowledge Mobilization". Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22 (70).

Naidorf, J., y D. Perrotta (2015), "La ciencia social politizada y móvil de una nueva agenda latinoamericana orientada a prioridades", Revista de la Educación Superior, 44, pp. 19-46.

Nowotny, H., Scott, P., y M. Gibbons (2001), Rethinking science: knowledge in an age of uncertainty, Cambridge, Polity.

Nowotny, H. (1993), "Socially distributed knowledge: five spaces for science to meet the public", Public Understanding of Science, 2, (4), pp. 307–319.

Piñeiro, D., Vitelli, R., y J. Cardeillac (2013), Relaciones de género en el medio rural uruguayo: inequidades "a la intemperie", Montevideo, Universidad de la República.

O'Brien, L., Marzano, M., y R. White (2013), “Participatory interdisciplinarity’: Towards the integration of disciplinary diversity with stakeholder engagement for new models of knowledge production”, Science and Public Policy, 40, pp. 51–61

Pohl, C., Klein, J., Hoffmann, S., Mitchell, C. y D. Fam (2021), “Conceptualising transdisciplinary integration as a multidimensional interactive process”, Environmental Science and Policy, 118, pp. 18–26

Pohl, C., y G. Hirsch Hadorn (2007), Principles for designing transdisciplinary research, Munich, Oekom.

Pohl, C., van Kerkhoff, L., Hirsch Hadorn, G., y G. Bammer (2008), "Integration", en Hirsch Hadorn, G. (eds.), Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research, Bern, Springer. pp. 411–424.

Regeer, B., y J. Bunders (2009), Knowledge co-creation: interaction between science and society: a transdisciplinary approach to complex societal issues, Amsteram, RMNO.

Repko, A.F. (2008), Interdisciplinary Research Process and Theory, Los Angeles, Sage.

Rodríguez Lezica, L. (2018), "¿Y las mujeres dónde están? Una otra mirada al sindicalismo rural en Uruguay", Revista Interdisciplinaria de Estudios Agrarios, 49, pp. 5-34.

Rodríguez Lezica, L; Migliaro, A. y J. Krapovickas (2018), "Del papel al barro: metodología feminista para el abordaje de las desigualdades de género en sindicatos rurales uruguayos", Revista Latinoamericana de Antropología del Trabajo, 2, (4), pp. 1-27.

Rodríguez Lezica, L. y M. Carámbula (2015), "Las olvidadas de la tierra: asalariadas rurales del Uruguay. Clase y género en cuestión", Revista Agrociencia, 19, 2, pp. 93-100.

Rodríguez Lezica, L. (2014), Entre la inclusión y el olvido. La cuestión de género en el trabajo asalariado rural: el caso de la citricultura uruguaya, Tesis de Maestría. FLACSO. Ecuador.

Tuana, N. (2006), “The Speculum of Ignorance: The Women's Health Movement and Epistemologies of Ignorance”, Hypatia, 21, (3), pp. 1-19.

Vessuri, H. (2004), “La Hibridización del Conocimiento. La Tecnociencia y los Conocimientos Locales a la Búsqueda del Desarrollo Sustentable”, Convergencia. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 11, (35), pp. 171-191.