RESULTADOS DE LA MODELACIÓN

Common-sense ‘knowledge’ rather than ‘ideas’ must be the central focus for the sociology of knowledge. It is precisely this ‘knowledge’ that constitutes the fabric of meanings without which no society could exist. The sociology of knowledge, therefore, must concern itself with the social construction of reality. (Berger and Luckmann, 1966, p. 27)

SCT emerged as part of a 'post-positivist', if not 'post-modern’, critique of knowledge systems (Carle, 2007). Post-modernism is generally considered to have emerged since the 1960s; although Crotty (1998) claims that post-modernist concepts had been entertained long before that. Postmodernism in general is largely a reaction to scientific and claimed objective efforts to explain reality (Aylesworth, 2012). The concept of constructivism emerged from two larger fields, sociology and psychology, and has evolved (and is still evolving) through different applications; applications which, according to Hacking (1999), are sometimes misappropriated (Hacking, 1999). One main component of constructivism, stemming from sociology, was found in symbolic interactionism.

3.3.1

Symbolic interactionism (SI)

SI was introduced by Herbert Blumer in 1937 (Blumer, 1969). The three principles that SI focus on which were subsequently borrowed to establish constructivism are: i) human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that the things have for them in their daily lives, ii) that the meaning of such things is derived from, or arises out of, the social interaction that one has with one's fellows, and iii) that these meanings are handled in, and modified through, an interpretative process used by the person in dealing with the things he/she encounters (Blumer, 1969).

Symbolic interactionism posits the idea that we each have a self that we interact with in a social way (not a psychological way), like a soliloquy. This conversation with our ‘self’ is how we confirm or adjust our own personal meanings with that of others in the relevant social group. But we need to know the whole script, not just our own part, in order to understand the social group/institution perspective. Just as the individual may adjust meanings, so too can this individually adjusted meaning then feedback and alter the group meaning. In this way knowledge and meaning is both individually and socially constructed (McFarlane, 2011, p. 13).

As McFarlane (2011) argues, this concept leads into social construction theory. Individuals, as a part of a collective group develop social norms and relevant meanings for the world around them. In other words, they socially construct their own reality in relation to others. A key message drawn from symbolic interactionism that relates to Cambodians’ interpretation of nature conservation and the subsequent actions taken toward nature is that, according to Blumer’s (1969) conceptual perspective, people act toward things on the basis of the meanings they have for them. Depending on how individuals socially construct an object or concept or idea impacts the action that will be taken towards it, and these meanings are derived through social interaction and expressed symbolically through language and iterative talk or discourse.

3.3.2

Ethnomethodology

Ethnomethodology is an ethnographic approach to sociological inquiry introduced by the American sociologist Harold Garfinkel. Ethnomethodology's research interest is the study of the everyday methods that people use for the production of social order. Ethnomethodology's goal is to document the methods and practices through which society's members make sense of their world (Garfinkel, 1967).

Ethnomethodology attends to the commonsense practices, procedures, and resources that persons use to produce and recognize mutually intelligible objects and actions in the life world. (Garfinkel 1967, Heritage 1984 cited in Holstein, 1993, p. 14)

Ethnomethodology can be applied as part of a social constructivist project. Aspects of the ethnomethodological perspective are found in the work of Spector and Kitsuse with social problems. These studies in particular focus on the talk and interaction related to social problems. As discussed in Holstein (1993, p. 16)

[e]thnomethodological studies include in-depth, ethnographic studies of interaction in social institutions, highly detailed analyses of transcripts of conversations, and abstract studies of such issues as the natural attitude, the documentary method of interpretation, and reflexivity.

These principles are applicable to the study of how Cambodians conceptualize nature conservation in their community, by allowing for an ethnographic exploration into how these factors influence responses related to the topic.

3.3.3

Ontology and epistemology

Ontology, as briefly stated in Hinchcliffe (2007), is ways of being, or enacting what is. Epistemology as noted in Hinchcliffe (2007) is ways of looking, what is known about something. Ontology therefore deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist. Epistemology questions what knowledge is, how it is acquired, and the possible extent to which a given subject or entity can be shown. These two philosophical principles are typically combined because once one is asking questions about what exists (ontology) the question lends itself to investigate how that knowledge about what exists is acquired.

Ontology is different to epistemology because it aims to focus on the underlying causes and structures of change. But questions of ontology will inevitably also have to consider questions of epistemology in seeking an explanation of physical changes (Forsyth, 2003, p. 15).

Fundamentally, when examining how something is constructed we are investigating the ontologies and epistemologies behind the subject. What these concepts mean for this research is that every culture and indeed even every individual potentially has differing ontologies, alongside varieties of ways of knowing. Part of unearthing meaning involves the exploration of these philosophies.

3.3.4

What is Social Construction Theory?

SCT can be most clearly understood through its theoretical approaches. As Hacking (1999) summarizes, there are four (or sometimes three as 1 and 2 below can be combined) levels of what social construction theories attempt to reveal about a topic (X):

1) In the present state of affairs X is taken for granted; X appears to be inevitable.

Social constructivist texts regularly begin with something that is regarded as self-evident, a taken-for granted truth. The very point of social constructivism is then to prick a hole in this self-evidence by going further and showing that:

2) X need not have existed, or need not be at all as it is. X, or X as it is at present, is not determined by the nature of things; it is not inevitable.

This gives the ‘aha experience’ which is the main point of social constructivists texts. Many – though far from all – social constructivist texts then take one or two steps further, first to observe that:

3) X is quite bad as it is. And then to:

4) We would be much better off if X were done away with, or at least radically transformed.

In Hacking's outline of the social construction, he gives three categories of what X might be: objects (such as people), ideas (such as classifications of those people), and elevator words (things that bring discussions to a different level than words for objects such as truth, reality and knowledge) (Hacking, 1999 cited in Berngartt, 2004).