Doctoral contract (M/F) : Learning Territories: Rethinking Environmental Data Pathways to Develop Territorial-Scale Action Frameworks

Job Description

Thesis Subject

Several studies show that knowledge alone is not sufficient to encourage action (Sturgis and Allum, 2004). There are several reasons for this. First, the decision that structures action is informed by many elements beyond scientific knowledge: the socio-political context, which can either promote or, conversely, hinder the integration of knowledge into action. A crisis may accelerate action and integration, as it can open a window of opportunity for certain actors, but other parameters may disrupt this process (Gobert and Rudolf, 2023; Ingold and Gavilano, 2019); the differentiated receptivity of actors and, more broadly, of actor systems to different types of knowledge and knowledges (Carlet, 2014; Rudolf, 2022); the power dynamics at play, or the deliberate choice not to act, as highlighted by agnotology research (Proctor and Schiebinger, 2008).

Furthermore, "knowledge" is a material first structured according to a representation of the world and often created for a specific type of actor. As such, knowledge is neither neutral nor assimilable under all conditions and in all contexts (Millet, 2003). Simply making acquired knowledge available and communicating it is not enough for knowledge to become transformative. It must be translated, transformed (Audoux, 2016; Callon, Lascoumes, and Barthe, 2001), and formatted in a way that enables reception. Yet, this reception is closely dependent on the recipient. To facilitate its dissemination, knowledge must pass through intermediaries. Hence the increasing call for: sustained efforts in terms of knowledge dissemination and science communication (a top-down movement) to share a certain body of knowledge, promote its uptake, and encourage action among actor collectives, including public actors; dialogue among situated, lay, expert, and experiential knowledges and literacies among the various producers, "operators," and disseminators of knowledge (a horizontal movement); co-construction of knowledge as a means to encourage action among "decision-makers."

Over the past decade, a global movement promoting the co-production of localized knowledge on climate change and adaptation solutions has emerged (Bremer and Meisch, 2017; Cvitanovic et al., 2015). This co-production requires structuring collective and situated processes of creation, validation, and integration of knowledge (Dewulf et al., 2020; Meah, 2019). It allows actors to engage within a specific framework and potentially decide on collective or individual actions (Burch et al., 2014; Nogueira, Bjørkan, and Dale, 2021). Co-production processes are a way to externalize research and action practices and contribute to the scientification of society (Beck, 2008; Joly and Kaufmann, 2013).

Within the framework of the NEO project, which is part of the PEPR VDBI program, the PhD candidate will work on the circulation, transformations, and uses of knowledge through the dynamics of learning territories.

The position falls under the Protection of Scientific and Technical Potential (PPST) sector and, in accordance with regulations, requires that your appointment be authorized by the competent authority of the MESR.

The learning territory concept is part of a reconfiguration of urban governance modes, where planning and public policies are no longer designed as top-down, rigid processes but as adaptive mechanisms based on the circulation and action-oriented co-construction of knowledge (Lundvall, B.-Å., Johnson, B., 1994; Morgan, K., 1997). Inspired by the "learning regions" (Florida, R., 1995) and territorial innovation systems (Cooke, P. et al., 1997), this perspective posits that collective learning capacity—through the integration of expert, lay, and experiential knowledge—is a key lever for addressing ecological transition challenges. In this context, the training of territorial agents can play a central role in structuring learning communities. By combining the acquisition of technical skills with the development of cross-cutting capacities (such as facilitating hybrid forums involving researchers, elected officials, and citizens), these mechanisms transform agents into mediators between scientific knowledge and local needs.

In this framework, data are no longer mere decision-support tools but "boundary objects" (Star and Griesemer, 1989) that structure interactions among actors. They enable dynamic adjustments to spatial planning strategies (e.g., PLU, PCAET) or resource management policies, such as urban greening initiatives. Research on adaptive governance (Folke et al., 2010) and organizational learning (Argyroudis et al., 2020) emphasizes that territories capable of metabolizing this knowledge—by transforming it into action through mediation devices (Callon, Lascoumes, and Barthe, 2001) or co-production processes (Dewulf et al., 2020)—develop enhanced reflexive capacity. This metabolization occurs through situated learning sequences, where agents learn to translate complex data into operational actions while leveraging field feedback to continuously refine public policies. Finally, inter-municipal exchange networks strengthen this dynamic by promoting the sharing of experiences and the co-construction of solutions tailored to local specificities, which is essential for managing complex transitions.

Key Questions:
Can the concept of a "learning territory" (i.e., a space where various knowledge flows are highlighted and shared) be operational? -How can data help drive public action or collective action? -What transformations, intermediations, and "digestions" must data undergo? -Is all data truly useful for transforming territories and structuring new trajectories for climate change mitigation and adaptation, resource reduction, biodiversity preservation, or chemical emission limitation? -What co-construction processes are needed with all actors and stakeholders? -The "careers" of data: How does data become knowledge, actionable insight, and decision-making? - How can knowledge flows be rethought at the territorial scale? -Is continuous training for operational actors, residents, and elected officials sufficient?

- Disciplines: Political Science / Public Policy Sociology / Education Sciences / Geography / Spatial Planning

- Methodology: Literature review on knowledge circuits, the territorialization of knowledge, and the link between knowledge and decision-making; analysis of grey literature illustrating knowledge production and transfer; Participant observation, interdisciplinary exploration, etc.; Semi-structured interviews (with researchers, local authorities, associations, local government agents, urban planners, etc.).

The PhD project will focus on one of the topics studied within the NEO project. It will likely address urban heat mitigation and the goal of summer thermal comfort. The analytical work will involve a comparative study of two metropolitan areas (Rennes, Dijon, or Nice). International mobility may be considered depending on the progress of the research (e.g., IRP Arizona, IRL Climoa).

Your Work Environment

The thesis will be primarily based at the LETG site in Rennes, with occasional travel to École nationale des Ponts (Champs-sur-Marne).

Constraints and risks

NAN

Compensation and benefits

Compensation

2300 € gross monthly

Annual leave and RTT

44 jours

Remote Working practice and compensation

Pratique et indemnisation du TT

Transport

Prise en charge à 75% du coût et forfait mobilité durable jusqu’à 300€

About the offer

About the CNRS

The CNRS is a major player in fundamental research on a global scale. The CNRS is the only French organization active in all scientific fields. Its unique position as a multi-specialist allows it to bring together different disciplines to address the most important challenges of the contemporary world, in connection with the actors of change.

CNRS

The research professions