Curated Theme: Making academic practices in linguistics more sustainable: reducing negative impact on the environment and society: Difference between revisions

From Sustainable linguistics
Jump to navigationJump to search
(first thoughts written down, not structured yet)
 
mNo edit summary
 
(17 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
not finished
== General questions to ask oneself about practices in academia ==


== Problem definition ==
* What academic practices could/should have a reduction of impact?
* What matters to people? What matters to linguists? What are the interests of all parties? (How) is it possible to combine all of these?
* Who has expertise? on what? How can we combine the expertise of different people to have a positive impact together?
* Who decides on the topics that are researched on? Who <u>should</u> take these decisions?


==== Academic practices in linguistics ====
== On the impact of linguistics on the environment and society ==
Do we want to reduce negative impacts, or to increase positive impacts?


* academia
=== Reduce negative impacts ===
** reduce flights (e.g. [[Conferencing|conferences]]), see Rodriguez et al 2019
** use of open source programs
** disciplinarity (vs. inter- or multidisciplinarity. compartementalization of academia)
* linguistics
* sustainability / sustainable: SDG
* environment
* society


* [[Working proposal on sustainable linguistics]]


For which academic practices could/should their impact be reduced?
*[[Human ethics proposal]]
*[[Conferencing#Reasons%20why%20conferences%20nowadays%20are%20often%20not%20sustainable|Reasons why conferences nowadays are often not sustainable]]
*[[Sustainability in linguistics]]
=== Increase positive impacts ===
Probably the most important way to increase the positive impacts of linguistic work - and academic work in general - is to use [[Sustainability in linguistics#Interdisciplinarity, multidisciplinarity and linguistics|interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary methods]]. Another very important point is the [[representativity and inclusivity]] of people and opinions.


==== Positive / negative impact ====
See also the [[Curated theme: Making academic practices in linguistics more sustainable: collaborating within and beyond disciplines.|Curated theme: Making academic practices in linguistics more sustainable: collaborating within and beyond disciplines]]
Do we want to reduce the negative impact, or increase positive impacts?


If we want to increase positive impacts, this can be done by including more diversity in the origin, medium and structure of the sources used in academic research. <HC: add a few terms and sources of IND-311, e.g. pluralism> frameworks, theories, interdisciplinarity, representativity, inclusivity of people and views, collaborative work. the solutions are not waiting on a university desk. acknowledge one's own background
See also the [[Curated Theme: Making academic practices in linguistics more sustainable: practical examples of sustainable practices in linguistics]]
=== Impact on society ===
* Fieldwork ethics
* Find the relevance of linguistics for people // What does society gain from our linguistic research?
* [[Language Revitalization]] can also have a positive impact on the prestige of minority languages and attitudes towards them.
* others relevant issues relate to:
** the choice of research topics,
** the points of view that we include in the research and publications,
** the funding opportunities
** power & hierarchies
** pressure to publish


Other people outside of traditional "Western" linguistics have points of view and methods of research that are also valuable to the research of language - i.e. linguistics.
=== Impact on environment ===
* [[conferencing]]
* [[publishing]]
* [[archiving and data access]]
* [[research tools]]


e.g. considering nature and society as two different things (which the SDG do) is a eurocentric thought. 
[[Sustainability in linguistics]]
 
[[Category:Collaborative approach]]
impact on prestige of minority languages and attitudes towards them
[[Category:Fieldwork ethics]]
 
[[Category:Inclusion]]
The positive impact of linguistic fieldwork can be increased by collaboration with the speaker community and their decisions about what shall be the results of of the work of a linguist in their community. For example, this can take the form of the creation of educational material in their language.
[[Category:Traditional knowledge]]
 
[[Category:SDG]]
* social justice, political reasons to stop speaking a language.
[[Category:Environment]]
* epistemic sustainability: "A dying language is a burning library of knowledge"
* indigenous wellbeing / wellbeing of minorities (not only language minorities but minorities in general)
* what matters to people? what matters to linguists? is it possible to combine both? what are the interests of all parties?
* Who has expertise? on what? How can we combine the expertise of different people to have a positive impact together?
 
====== Impact on society ======
 
* fieldwork ethics
* find the relevance of linguistics through what it brings to people and society.
 
====== Impact on environment: ======
 
*
 
== Concrete solutions ==
 
== Possible pages and categories to link ==
specific SDG's

Latest revision as of 04:40, 25 January 2023

General questions to ask oneself about practices in academia[edit | edit source]

  • What academic practices could/should have a reduction of impact?
  • What matters to people? What matters to linguists? What are the interests of all parties? (How) is it possible to combine all of these?
  • Who has expertise? on what? How can we combine the expertise of different people to have a positive impact together?
  • Who decides on the topics that are researched on? Who should take these decisions?

On the impact of linguistics on the environment and society[edit | edit source]

Do we want to reduce negative impacts, or to increase positive impacts?

Reduce negative impacts[edit | edit source]

Increase positive impacts[edit | edit source]

Probably the most important way to increase the positive impacts of linguistic work - and academic work in general - is to use interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary methods. Another very important point is the representativity and inclusivity of people and opinions.

See also the Curated theme: Making academic practices in linguistics more sustainable: collaborating within and beyond disciplines

See also the Curated Theme: Making academic practices in linguistics more sustainable: practical examples of sustainable practices in linguistics

Impact on society[edit | edit source]

  • Fieldwork ethics
  • Find the relevance of linguistics for people // What does society gain from our linguistic research?
  • Language Revitalization can also have a positive impact on the prestige of minority languages and attitudes towards them.
  • others relevant issues relate to:
    • the choice of research topics,
    • the points of view that we include in the research and publications,
    • the funding opportunities
    • power & hierarchies
    • pressure to publish

Impact on environment[edit | edit source]

Sustainability in linguistics

Retrieved from "https://susling.participationgrammar.net/index.php?title=Curated_Theme:_Making_academic_practices_in_linguistics_more_sustainable:_reducing_negative_impact_on_the_environment_and_society&oldid=1152"