Increased pollution, obesity rates, or the COVID-19 pandemic are only a few examples of the numerous intertwined health-environmental challenges humanity is facing. The severity of these challenges strongly suggests that research in these fields is failing to generate evidence to support decisions and actions that can help address, mitigate or adapt to them. In this article, we look into some of the underlying assumptions underpinning mainstream research in the health and in the environmental sc…
Read moreIncreased pollution, obesity rates, or the COVID-19 pandemic are only a few examples of the numerous intertwined health-environmental challenges humanity is facing. The severity of these challenges strongly suggests that research in these fields is failing to generate evidence to support decisions and actions that can help address, mitigate or adapt to them. In this article, we look into some of the underlying assumptions underpinning mainstream research in the health and in the environmental sciences; specifically, we focus on the separation between knowledge and action, mechanistic worldviews, and value-neutrality of research. We show that these assumptions underpin what we call a modernist evidence regime that is embedded in certain socio-cultural contexts. When these assumptions are at work in empirical research, interconnected health-environmental challenges cannot be appropriately addressed. We suggest, instead, that to do so we need to move towards a radically pluralist evidence regime. Such a regime sees knowledge and action as inextricably entangled, is based on a complexity-based understanding of the world, embraces the non-neutrality of research, and makes space for multiple methodological approaches.