Examining the International Union of Forest Research Organizations （IUFRO） and its research on forest-water relations, the article investigates the relation between scientific internationalism and national expertise...Examining the International Union of Forest Research Organizations （IUFRO） and its research on forest-water relations, the article investigates the relation between scientific internationalism and national expertise. It juxtaposes existing arguments regarding the paradigmatic character of 19th century arguments about deforestations. In particular, in 1999, Christian Pfister and Daniel Br^indli argued that, in Switzerland during the second half of the 19th century, forestry administrators forged an argument that deforestations in mountainous regions lead to floods in the valleys. As this argument helped to install new Swiss forest legislation in 1876, forbidding deforestations in the mountains, Pfister and Brandli called it a ＂deforestation paradigm＂. In contrast, sources of the IUFRO provide a different picture. At IUFRO meetings, i.e., at the international level of debate, no such paradigm existed. Instead, IUFRO participants discussed various conclusions that could be drawn fi＇om research on deforestations. Regarding the outcome of IUFRO projects, participants reported partly in opposing ways about the results of the research projects in forestry journals in their respective countries. Exploring these reports, the article provides an explanation for these different national representations of international research projects.展开更多
文摘Examining the International Union of Forest Research Organizations （IUFRO） and its research on forest-water relations, the article investigates the relation between scientific internationalism and national expertise. It juxtaposes existing arguments regarding the paradigmatic character of 19th century arguments about deforestations. In particular, in 1999, Christian Pfister and Daniel Br^indli argued that, in Switzerland during the second half of the 19th century, forestry administrators forged an argument that deforestations in mountainous regions lead to floods in the valleys. As this argument helped to install new Swiss forest legislation in 1876, forbidding deforestations in the mountains, Pfister and Brandli called it a ＂deforestation paradigm＂. In contrast, sources of the IUFRO provide a different picture. At IUFRO meetings, i.e., at the international level of debate, no such paradigm existed. Instead, IUFRO participants discussed various conclusions that could be drawn fi＇om research on deforestations. Regarding the outcome of IUFRO projects, participants reported partly in opposing ways about the results of the research projects in forestry journals in their respective countries. Exploring these reports, the article provides an explanation for these different national representations of international research projects.
