communicologyКоммуникологияCommunicology2311-30652311-3332МАК10.21453/2311-3065-2024-12-2-25-36communicology-423Research ArticleМЕДИАКОММУНИКАЦИИ И ЖУРНАЛИСТИКАMEDIACOMMUNICATIONS AND JOURNALISMЭкологическая и научная коммуникации: соотнесение понятийEnvironmental and scientific communications: correlation of conceptshttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8782-3680ПановаЕ. В.PanovaE. V.

Панова Елена Васильевна – кандидат политических наук, руководитель Аппарата Комитета Госдумы России по экологии, природным ресурсам и охране окружающей среды, научный руководитель Центра устойчивого развития Российского государственного геологоразведочного университета имени Серго Орджоникидзе

103265,  Москва, ул. Охотный ряд, 1

Panova Elena Vasilievna – CandSc (Polit.), Head of the Office of the Russian State Duma Committee on Ecology, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, scientific director of the Center for Sustainable Development of the Russian State Geological Prospecting University

103265, Russia, Moscow, Okhotny Ryad, 1

karrypoupe@gmail.comГосударственная дума Российской ФедерацииРоссияState Duma of the Russian FederationRussian Federation2024270620241222536Copyright © Панова Е.В., 20242024Панова Е.В.Panova E.V.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.communicology.ru/jour/article/view/423

Человек воспринимает окружающий мир через коммуникативные и когнитивные процессы, где знания, эмоции, социальные нормы влияют на восприятие информации об экологических проблемах. По нашему мнению, умелое сочетание научной и экологической коммуникации позволяет не только повышать качество коммуникации, но и менять отношение к окружающей среде. Данную гипотезу мы проверили через соотнесение понятие экологической и научной коммуникации, представленных в российской и зарубежной научной литературе, проведение сравнения их основных характеристик, выявления особенностей взаимодействия. По результатам исследования автор приходит к выводу о важности партнерства научной и экологической коммуникации, что позитивно влияет на эффективность управления и сохранение устойчивости окружающей среды, поведенческие намерения граждан. Научная составляющая усиливает экологическую коммуникацию за счет компетентности знаний, взвешенности решений, что отражается на легитимизации проводимых изменений. В завершении мы также предлагаем различные стратегии действий и модели коммуникации, выбор которых зависит от целей субъектов и текущей ситуации.

A person perceives the surrounding world through communicative and cognitive processes, where knowledge, emotions, and social norms influence the perception of information about environmental problems. In our opinion, a skillful combination of scientific and environmental communication allows not only to improve the quality of communication, but also to change attitudes towards the environment. We tested this hypothesis by correlating the concepts of environmental and scientific communication presented in Russian and foreign scientific literature, comparing their main characteristics, and identifying the features of interaction. Based on the results of the study, the author comes to the conclusion about the importance of partnership between scientific and environmental communication, which has a positive effect on the effectiveness of management and the preservation of environmental sustainability, and the behavioral intentions of citizens. The scientific component strengthens environmental communication due to the competence of knowledge and balanced decisions, which is reflected in the legitimization of the changes being carried out. Finally, we also propose different action strategies and communication models, the choice of which depends on the goals of the subjects and the current situation.

экологическая коммуникациянаучная коммуникациямодели коммуникациистратегиифункцииenvironmental communicationscientific communicationcommunication modelsstrategiesfunctionsReferencesБулавинова М.П. (2018). Научная коммуникация: факторы развития // Наука и общество: современные зарубежные исследования. Сб. обзоров и рефератов / РАН. ИНИОН. Центр науч.-информ. исслед. по науке, образованию и технологиям; отв. ред. Гребенщикова Е.Г.; ред.-сост. Булавинова М.П. Москва. С. 51-62.Akerlof K.L., Bromser-Kloeden T., Timm K., Rowan K.E., Olds J.L., Clarke C. et al. (2021). Categorizing Professionals’ Perspectives on Environmental Communication with Implications for Graduate Education. Environ. Commun. No. 15. P. 447–464. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2020.1862890.Вахрамеева З.В. (2018). СМИ, наука, общество // Знак: проблемное поле медиаобразования. № 3. С. 154-167.Besley J.C., Dudo A, Yuan S. (2018). Scientists’ views about communication objectives. Public Understanding of Science. No. 27(6). P. 708-730. DOI: 10.1177/0963662517728478 PMID: 28841818.Гавра Д.П. (2011). Основы теории коммуникации. Спб.: Питер.Besley J.C., Dudo A. (2017). Scientists’ Views about Public Engagement and Science Communication in the Context of Climate Change. In: The Oxford Encyclopedia of Climate Change Communication.Евсеева Я.В. (2022). Научная коммуникация в современном мире // Социальные и гуманитарные науки. Отечественная и зарубежная литература. Сер. 11, Социология: Реферативный журнал. № 2. С. 12-23. DOI: 10.31249/rsoc/2022.02.02.Brown P., Altinay Z. (2014). Interviews with Environmental Psychologists: Identifying Best Practices in Environmental Communication. Manship School of Mass Communication, Louisiana State University [available at]: https://www.academia.edu/94464565/Interviews_with_Environmental_Psychologists_Identifying_Best_Practices_in_Environmental_Communication?email_work_card=title (accessed 02.05.2024).Зинкин Е.А. (2019). Приложения, социальные сети и мессенджеры как платформы распространения новостного контента СМИ // Огарёв-Online. № 1(122). С. 5. EDN HIOPFO.Bucchi M. (2021). The challenges of science communication 2.0: quality, credibility and expertise: opening address. In: B. Schiele, Xuan Liu, M.W. Bauer (eds) Science cultures in a diverse world: knowing, sharing, caring. Beijing: China science and technology press. P. XXV-XXXI.Маклюэн М. (2007). Понимая медиа: внешнее расширение человека / Пер. с англ. М.: Кучково поле.Bulavinova M.P. (2018). Scientific communication: factors of development. In: Science and society: modern foreign studies. Reviews and abstracts. RAS INION. Center for Scientific Information research on science, education and technology; eds Grebenshchikova E.G.; Bulavinova M.P. Moscow. P. 51-62 (in Rus.).Панова Е.В. (2023). Влияние информационных технологий на развитие экологической коммуникации // Коммуникология. Том 11. № 2. С. 91-114.Burns T.W., O’Conner D.J., Stocklmayer S.M. (2003). Science communication: A contemporary definition. Public understanding of science. Vol. 12. No. 2. P. 183-202.Панова Е.В. (2022). Категория экологической коммуникации: подходы к определению, этапы становления и развития» // Вестник ВГУ. Серия: История. Политология. Социология. № 4. С. 5-11.Chapter: 9. IGI Global [available at]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355344433_Strategic_Communication_for_Sustainable_Environmental_Development_in_the_Northern_Nigerian_Arid_Zone_Toward_Mitigating_the_Impact_of_Climate_Change/link/616ac7c0039ba268444aa4ba/download (accessed: 02.05.2024).Тао Л. (2011). Экологическая коммуникация: дискурс риторики и политики. М.: Изд. Пекинского университета.Cox R.J. (2010). Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere. California: Sage Publications.Akerlof K.L., Bromser-Kloeden T., Timm K., Rowan K.E., Olds J.L., Clarke C. et al. (2021). Categorizing Professionals’ Perspectives on Environmental Communication with Implications for Graduate Education. Environ. Commun. No. 15. P. 447–464. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2020.1862890.Etta N. (2018). A quick look at environmental communication as a paradigm for environmental sustainability. International Journal of Humanities & Social Science: Insights & Transformations. Vol. 3, Issue 1.Besley J.C., Dudo A, Yuan S. (2018). Scientists’ views about communication objectives. Public Understanding of Science. No. 27(6). P. 708-730. DOI: 10.1177/0963662517728478 PMID: 28841818.Evseeva Ya.V. (2022). Scientific communication in the modern world. Social and humanitarian sciences. Ser. 11, Sociology. No. 2. P. 12-23. DOI: 10.31249/rsoc/2022.02.02 (in Rus.).Besley J.C., Dudo A. (2017). Scientists’ Views about Public Engagement and Science Communication in the Context of Climate Change. In: The Oxford Encyclopedia of Climate Change Communication.Flor A.G. (2003). Environmental Communication. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Diliman.Brown P., Altinay Z. (2014). Interviews with Environmental Psychologists: Identifying Best Practices in Environmental Communication. Manship School of Mass Communication, Louisiana State University [available at]: https://www.academia.edu/94464565/Interviews_with_Environmental_Psychologists_Identifying_Best_Practices_in_Environmental_Communication?email_work_card=title (accessed 02.05.2024).Gavra D.P. (2011). Fundamentals of communication theory. St. Petersburg: Peter (in Rus.).Bucchi M. (2021). The challenges of science communication 2.0: quality, credibility and expertise: opening address. In: B. Schiele, Xuan Liu, M.W. Bauer (eds) Science cultures in a diverse world: knowing, sharing, caring. Beijing: China science and technology press. P. XXV-XXXI.Kim I., Wan H., Wang B., Yang T. (2019). Institutional Investors and Corporate Environmental, Social, and Governance Policies: Evidence from Toxics Release Data. Management Science. Vol. 65 (10). P. 4901-4926.Burns T.W., O’Conner D.J., Stocklmayer S.M. (2003). Science communication: A contemporary definition. Public understanding of science. Vol. 12. No. 2. P. 183-202.McLuhan M. (2007). Understanding media: external expansion of man (transl.). M.: Kuchkovo pole (in Rus.).Chapter: 9. IGI Global [available at]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355344433_Strategic_Communication_for_Sustainable_Environmental_Development_in_the_Northern_Nigerian_Arid_Zone_Toward_Mitigating_the_Impact_of_Climate_Change/link/616ac7c0039ba268444aa4ba/download (accessed: 02.05.2024).Panova E.V. (2022). Category of environmental communication: approaches to definition, stages of formation and development. Vestnik VSU. Series: History. Political science. Sociology. No. 4. P. 5-11 (in Rus.).Cox R.J. (2010). Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere. California: Sage Publications.Panova E.V. (2023). The impact of information technologies on the development of environmental communication. Communicology. Vol. 11. No. 2. P. 91-114 (in Rus.).Etta N. (2018). A quick look at environmental communication as a paradigm for environmental sustainability. International Journal of Humanities & Social Science: Insights & Transformations. Vol. 3, Issue 1.Rui A. (2022). Strategic Communication for Sustainable Environmental Development in the Northern Nigerian Arid Zone: Toward Mitigating the Impact of Climate Change. In: Handbook of Research on Sustainable Development Goals, Climate Change, and Digitalization.Flor A.G. (2003). Environmental Communication. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Diliman.Tao L. (2011). Environmental communication: discourse of rhetoric and politics. M.: Publishing house of Peking University (in Rus.).Kim I., Wan H., Wang B., Yang T. (2019). Institutional Investors and Corporate Environmental, Social, and Governance Policies: Evidence from Toxics Release Data. Management Science. Vol. 65 (10). P. 4901-4926.Tyson B., Unson C. (2006). Environmental communication strategies: when is what appropriate? Connecticut State University, USA. In: WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment. Vol. 99. WIT Press.Rui A. (2022). Strategic Communication for Sustainable Environmental Development in the Northern Nigerian Arid Zone: Toward Mitigating the Impact of Climate Change. In: Handbook of Research on Sustainable Development Goals, Climate Change, and Digitalization.Vakhrameeva Z.V. (2018). Media, science, society. Sign: problem field of media education. No. 3. P. 154-167 (in Rus.).Tyson B., Unson C. (2006). Environmental communication strategies: when is what appropriate? Connecticut State University, USA. In: WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment. Vol. 99. WIT Press.VanDyke M., Lee N.M. (2020). Science public relations: The parallel, interwoven, and contrasting trajectories of public relations and science communication theory and practice. Public Relations Review. Vol. 46. P. 101953. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101953.VanDyke M., Lee N.M. (2020). Science public relations: The parallel, interwoven, and contrasting trajectories of public relations and science communication theory and practice. Public Relations Review. Vol. 46. P. 101953. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101953.Villar M.E. (2021). Community engagement and co-creation of strategic health and environmental communication: collaborative storytelling and game-building. Journal of Science Communication. Vol. 20(01). DOI: 10.22323/2.20010308.Villar M.E. (2021). Community engagement and co-creation of strategic health and environmental communication: collaborative storytelling and game-building. Journal of Science Communication. Vol. 20(01). DOI: 10.22323/2.20010308.Zinkin E.A. (2019). Applications, social networks and messengers as platforms for distributing news media content. Ogarev-Online. No. 1 (122). P. 5. EDN HIOPFO (in Rus.).

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.