Paper short abstract:

We use Fleck's (1935) 'thought styles' to characterise the relationship between practitioners' thinking and knowledges in urban heat adaptation, and 'thought collectives' to understand fluidity and tension when knowledge crosses thought collectives.

Paper long abstract:

How do local and scientific knowledges circulate among different communities of practice? What influences its uptake or resistance? Using Ludwik Fleck's (1935) concept of 'thought styles' (Denkstil) and 'thought collectives' (Denkkollektiv), we trace how knowledges on urban heat is reframed, reviewed, negotiated and reconfigured moving from one thought collective to another. We judge adaptation to urban heat as a good study object for local knowledges, as conflict of aims are inevitable in a densely populated space, making coordination and stakeholder participation necessary. What, then, is the role of knowledge in this process? Barrier or facilitator? What knowledge is stabilised and accepted across thought collectives, and why?

Essentially, we use Ludwik Fleck's concepts in two ways. One, we take Fleck's 'thought styles' to analyse stakeholders' particular relationship between knowledge and thinking in more detail. Here we triangulate documentary materials and semi-structured interviews, focusing on the way knowledge guides problem-framing and anticipated solutions. Preliminary findings indicate that e.g. ecologists' thinking is driven more by the ethical-moral principle of biodiversity conservation, whereas environmental consultants' thinking is influenced more by 'facts' and the project's deliverables. Two, using Fleck's 'thought collectives' we explore how knowledge is stabilised within and across communities of practice. In addition to the analysis of interviews and documentary materials, we run a series of transdisciplinary workshops with selected members of thought collectives to observe their interactions. Through this research intervention, we want to gain deeper insight in the role of knowledge as a mediator or barrier between thought collectives.