The debate on realism and constructionism has transferred to environment and science studies a long-standing philosophical controversy over the constitution of, and human cognitive access to, nature. Quite lively years ago, the dispute has been gradually sidestepped by approaches that, without merging into a full-fledged theory, counter the subject/object dichotomy and argue about the mutual constitution of knowledge and reality. As earlier, analysis and critique, academic questions and ‘public’ concerns, are closely intertwined. Co-production scholarship has addressed a number of issues at the crossroads of science and policy, offering a reply to the alleged weaknesses of constructionism. Cutting-edge approaches, with special reference to ‘new materialism’, are now moving forward, making a case for the liveliness and full agential role of matter. They build on different areas of scientific inquiry, where distinctions between living and non-living, material and symbolic entities are increasingly blurring. They tend, however, also to align with an emergent way of regulating the interface with the material world, which can be ascribed to the neoliberal rationality of government.
