actors who exchange trust and legitimacy, and are therefore the product of this
co-construction.
When the programme first started, the original focus was on hydrological processes (the link between river and alluvial aquifer), certain chemical pollutants
(e.g. heavy metals) and certain biogeochemical methods of monitoring water quality
(e.g. oxygen balance downstream of Paris, excessive algal growth). Today, the
programme objective is to understand and quantify as far as possible the socioecosystem over a well-defined territory, a river basin on which multiple and varying
social practices have been taking place for centuries, and to evaluate its possible
future through prospective scenarios of basin evolution and its river response.
This chapter considers the way science is produced by using the paradigm
developed by Gibbons et al. [2] on knowledge production and scientific discovery.
‘Mode 1’, which is very common, separates science and policy, and its sole purpose
is the pursuit of scientific knowledge (science for the sake of science) and is defined
by the domination of disciplinary science, strong internal hierarchy among disciplines and a strong sense of scientific autonomy. ‘Mode 2’, on the other hand, is
described by Notwotny et al. [3] as socially distributed, application-oriented, transdisciplinary, diverse and heterogeneous in terms of sources and types of knowledge
production, highly reflexive and subject to multiple accountabilities.
When applying Hatchuel’s analysis of the position of scientists [4], it appears that
PIREN-Seine knowledge production has evolved over 30 years from monodisciplinary process-based studies in the field and/or laboratory, which are characteristic of the original environmental sciences (e.g. environmental chemistry), to
deterministic modelling (e.g. Seine water quality within the Parisian sector with the
ProSe model), enabling technical proposals to territorial problems, and to a pluridisciplinary understanding in which the actors’ rationales, decision-making and
action procedures are a matter of knowledge in itself, eventually integrated into
scenarios. These three stages, their potential and their limitations and perspectives in
the PIREN-Seine programme are described here.
2 Observing the Functioning of the Seine Hydrosystem
Under Anthropogenic Pressures
The scientific field studies of the PIREN-Seine do not aim only to describe the river
state over the whole basin but also to fully identify and quantify the multiple
hydrological, biogeochemical and ecological processes that control it. From the
outset of the programme, the researchers considered these natural processes to be
modified and sometimes regulated by present and past human activities and that their
interactions with natural processes are always present in their research. Here, we
describe the spatial and temporal scales used for this purpose.
River Basin Visions: Tools and Approaches from Yesterday to Tomorrow
383
co-construction.
When the programme first started, the original focus was on hydrological processes (the link between river and alluvial aquifer), certain chemical pollutants
(e.g. heavy metals) and certain biogeochemical methods of monitoring water quality
(e.g. oxygen balance downstream of Paris, excessive algal growth). Today, the
programme objective is to understand and quantify as far as possible the socioecosystem over a well-defined territory, a river basin on which multiple and varying
social practices have been taking place for centuries, and to evaluate its possible
future through prospective scenarios of basin evolution and its river response.
This chapter considers the way science is produced by using the paradigm
developed by Gibbons et al. [2] on knowledge production and scientific discovery.
‘Mode 1’, which is very common, separates science and policy, and its sole purpose
is the pursuit of scientific knowledge (science for the sake of science) and is defined
by the domination of disciplinary science, strong internal hierarchy among disciplines and a strong sense of scientific autonomy. ‘Mode 2’, on the other hand, is
described by Notwotny et al. [3] as socially distributed, application-oriented, transdisciplinary, diverse and heterogeneous in terms of sources and types of knowledge
production, highly reflexive and subject to multiple accountabilities.
When applying Hatchuel’s analysis of the position of scientists [4], it appears that
PIREN-Seine knowledge production has evolved over 30 years from monodisciplinary process-based studies in the field and/or laboratory, which are characteristic of the original environmental sciences (e.g. environmental chemistry), to
deterministic modelling (e.g. Seine water quality within the Parisian sector with the
ProSe model), enabling technical proposals to territorial problems, and to a pluridisciplinary understanding in which the actors’ rationales, decision-making and
action procedures are a matter of knowledge in itself, eventually integrated into
scenarios. These three stages, their potential and their limitations and perspectives in
the PIREN-Seine programme are described here.
2 Observing the Functioning of the Seine Hydrosystem
Under Anthropogenic Pressures
The scientific field studies of the PIREN-Seine do not aim only to describe the river
state over the whole basin but also to fully identify and quantify the multiple
hydrological, biogeochemical and ecological processes that control it. From the
outset of the programme, the researchers considered these natural processes to be
modified and sometimes regulated by present and past human activities and that their
interactions with natural processes are always present in their research. Here, we
describe the spatial and temporal scales used for this purpose.
River Basin Visions: Tools and Approaches from Yesterday to Tomorrow
383