scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "Sustainability Science in 2018"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The paper discusses the future potential, barriers and opportunities for applying the approach in scientific research, in policy making and in bridging the two through a global SDG Interactions Knowledge Platform as a key mechanism for assembling, systematizing and aggregating knowledge on interactions.
Abstract: Pursuing integrated research and decision-making to advance action on the sustainable development goals (SDGs) fundamentally depends on understanding interactions between the SDGs, both negative ones (“trade-offs”) and positive ones (“co-benefits”). This quest, triggered by the 2030 Agenda, has however pointed to a gap in current research and policy analysis regarding how to think systematically about interactions across the SDGs. This paper synthesizes experiences and insights from the application of a new conceptual framework for mapping and assessing SDG interactions using a defined typology and characterization approach. Drawing on results from a major international research study applied to the SDGs on health, energy and the ocean, it analyses how interactions depend on key factors such as geographical context, resource endowments, time horizon and governance. The paper discusses the future potential, barriers and opportunities for applying the approach in scientific research, in policy making and in bridging the two through a global SDG Interactions Knowledge Platform as a key mechanism for assembling, systematizing and aggregating knowledge on interactions.

344 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper presents an approach to assessing systemic and contextual interactions of SDG targets, using a typology for scoring interactions in a cross-impact matrix and using network analysis techniques to explore the data.
Abstract: How the sustainable development goals (SDGs) interact with each other has emerged as a key question in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, as it has potentially strong implications for prioritization of actions and their effectiveness. So far, analysis of interactions has been very basic, typically starting from one SDG, counting the number of interactions, and discussing synergies and trade-offs from the perspective of that issue area. This paper pushes the frontier of how interactions amongst SDG targets can be understood and taken into account in policy and planning. It presents an approach to assessing systemic and contextual interactions of SDG targets, using a typology for scoring interactions in a cross-impact matrix and using network analysis techniques to explore the data. By considering how a target interacts with another target and how that target in turn interacts with other targets, results provide a more robust basis for priority setting of SDG efforts. The analysis identifies which targets have the most and least positive influence on the network and thus guides, where efforts may be directed (and not); where strong positive and negative links sit, raising warning flags to areas requiring extra attention; and how targets that reinforce each others' progress cluster, suggesting where important cross-sectoral collaboration between actors is merited. How interactions play out is context specific and the approach is tested on the case of Sweden to illustrate how priority setting, with the objective to enhance progress across all 17 SDGs, might change if systemic impacts are taken into consideration.

312 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a systematic approach to analyse the degree to which key implementation stages and approaches recommended in the expert literature are being adopted and applied to support national SDG implementation on-the-ground.
Abstract: The global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) commenced in 2016 and provide an evidence-based framework for sustainable development planning and programming until 2030. There is emerging international practice and a growing catalogue of related reviews, assessments, guidelines and publications. While the expert community is clearly emphasising the need to adopt evidence- and science-based approaches to SDG implementation, policymakers now face the challenge of implementing the SDGs simultaneously in a coherent and integrated manner. Regular systematic reviews of national progress and approaches to implementing the SDGs are advisable to ensure that emerging science and knowledge is effectively informing national practice. This paper reviews the recent academic and expert literature as well as national experience in implementing the SDGs in 26 countries. It uses a systematic approach to analyse the degree to which key implementation stages and approaches recommended in the expert literature are being adopted and applied to support national SDG implementation on-the-ground. The review highlights that while progress has been made in some initial planning stages, key gaps remain in terms of the assessment of interlinkages, trade-offs and synergies between targets. Gaps are also clearly evident in the adoption of systems thinking and integrated analytical approaches and models. This is problematic as it may undermine effective implementation and the transformative potential of the SDGs. As more countries turn their attention to the SDGs, the review underscores the considerable risk that they will pursue the same ‘siloed’ or ‘linear’ approaches to sustainable development that have met with limited success in the past.

276 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is discussed how reconnecting people with nature can function as a treatment for the global environmental crisis and the emerging concept of ‘leverage points’—places in complex systems to intervene to generate change—and examples of how actions to reconnect people withnature can help transform society towards sustainability.
Abstract: Calls for humanity to ‘reconnect to nature’ have grown increasingly louder from both scholars and civil society Yet, there is relatively little coherence about what reconnecting to nature means, why it should happen and how it can be achieved We present a conceptual framework to organise existing literature and direct future research on human–nature connections Five types of connections to nature are identified: material, experiential, cognitive, emotional, and philosophical These various types have been presented as causes, consequences, or treatments of social and environmental problems From this conceptual base, we discuss how reconnecting people with nature can function as a treatment for the global environmental crisis Adopting a social–ecological systems perspective, we draw upon the emerging concept of ‘leverage points’—places in complex systems to intervene to generate change—and explore examples of how actions to reconnect people with nature can help transform society towards sustainability

214 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A mapping of the existing resource policy framework in the EU is undertaken and used as a basis for identifying policy areas that have been less prominent in influencing material resource efficiency, and a potential policy mix is presented to outline a possible pathway for transitioning to Circular Economy policy making.
Abstract: Material resources exploitation and the pressure on natural ecosystems have raised concerns over potential future resource risks and supply failures worldwide. Interest in the concept of Circular Economy has surged in recent years among policy makers and business actors. An increasing amount of literature touches upon the conceptualisation of Circular Economy, the development of ‘circular solutions’ and circular business models, and policies for a Circular Economy. However, relevant studies on resource efficiency policies mostly utilise a case-by-case or sector-by-sector approach and do not consider the systemic interdependencies of the underlying operational policy framework. In this contribution, a mapping of the existing resource policy framework in the European Union (EU) is undertaken, and used as a basis for identifying policy areas that have been less prominent in influencing material resource efficiency. Employing a life cycle approach, policies affecting material efficiency in the production and consumption stages of a product have been found to be poorly utilised so far in the EU. Taking this as a point of departure, three policy areas that can contribute to closing material loops and increasing resource efficiency are thoroughly discussed and their application challenges are highlighted. The three policy areas are: (1) policies for reuse, repair and remanufacturing; (2) green public procurement and innovation procurement; and (3) policies for improving secondary materials markets. Finally, a potential policy mix, including policy instruments from the three mentioned policy areas—together with policy mixing principles—is presented to outline a possible pathway for transitioning to Circular Economy policy making.

213 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The SDGs represent a partial and inadequate conceptualisation of SCP which will hamper implementation and some suggestions on how governments and other actors involved in SDGs operationalisation could more effectively pursue SCP from a systemic standpoint and use the transformation of systems of consumption and production as a lever for achieving multiple sustainability objectives are provided.
Abstract: The United Nations formulated the sustainable development goals (SDGs) in 2015 as a comprehensive global policy framework for addressing the most pressing social and environmental challenges currently facing humanity. In this paper, we analyse SDG 12, which aims to “ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns.” Despite long-standing political recognition of this objective, and ample scientific evidence both on its importance and on the efficacy of various ways of promoting it, the SDGs do not provide clear goals or effective guidance on how to accomplish this urgently needed transformation. Drawing from the growing body of research on sustainable consumption and production (SCP), the paper identifies two dominant vantage points—one focused on promoting more efficient production methods and products (mainly through technological improvement and informed consumer choice) and the other stressing the need to consider also overall volumes of consumption, distributional issues, and related social and institutional changes. We label these two approaches efficiency and systemic. Research shows that while the efficiency approach contains essential elements of a transition to sustainability, it is by itself highly unlikely to bring about sustainable outcomes. Concomitantly, research also finds that volumes of consumption and production are closely associated with environmental impacts, indicating a need to curtail these volumes in ways that safeguard social sustainability, which is unlikely to be possible without a restructuring of existing socioeconomic arrangements. Analysing how these two perspectives are reflected in the SDGs framework, we find that in its current conception, it mainly relies on the efficiency approach. On the basis of this assessment, we conclude that the SDGs represent a partial and inadequate conceptualisation of SCP which will hamper implementation. Based on this determination, this paper provides some suggestions on how governments and other actors involved in SDGs operationalisation could more effectively pursue SCP from a systemic standpoint and use the transformation of systems of consumption and production as a lever for achieving multiple sustainability objectives.

194 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that boundary spanning has the potential to increase the efficiency by which useful research is produced, foster the capacity to absorb new evidence and perspectives into sustainability decision-making, enhance research relevance for societal challenges, and open new policy windows.
Abstract: Cultivating a more dynamic relationship between science and policy is essential for responding to complex social challenges such as sustainability. One approach to doing so is to “span the boundaries” between science and decision making and create a more comprehensive and inclusive knowledge exchange process. The exact definition and role of boundary spanning, however, can be nebulous. Indeed, boundary spanning often gets conflated and confused with other approaches to connecting science and policy, such as science communication, applied science, and advocacy, which can hinder progress in the field of boundary spanning. To help overcome this, in this perspective, we present the outcomes from a recent workshop of boundary-spanning practitioners gathered to (1) articulate a definition of what it means to work at this interface (“boundary spanning”) and the types of activities it encompasses; (2) present a value proposition of these efforts to build better relationships between science and policy; and (3) identify opportunities to more effectively mainstream boundary-spanning activities. Drawing on our collective experiences, we suggest that boundary spanning has the potential to increase the efficiency by which useful research is produced, foster the capacity to absorb new evidence and perspectives into sustainability decision-making, enhance research relevance for societal challenges, and open new policy windows. We provide examples from our work that illustrate this potential. By offering these propositions for the value of boundary spanning, we hope to encourage a more robust discussion of how to achieve evidence-informed decision-making for sustainability.

171 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is concluded that mindfulness can contribute to understanding and facilitating sustainability, not only at the individual level, but sustainability at all scales, and should, thus, become a core concept in sustainability science, practice, and teaching.
Abstract: This paper explores the current role of mindfulness in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. Based on a qualitative literature review that is complemented by an experimental learning lab, we sketch the patterns and core conceptual trajectories of the mindfulness–sustainability relationship. In addition, we assess this relationship within the field of climate change adaptation and risk reduction. The results highlight that notions such as ‘sustainability from within’, ‘ecological mindfulness’, ‘organizational mindfulness’, and ‘contemplative practices’ have been neglected in sustainability science and teaching. Whilst little sustainability research addresses mindfulness, there is scientific support for its positive influence on: (1) subjective well-being; (2) the activation of (intrinsic/ non-materialistic) core values; (3) consumption and sustainable behavior; (4) the human–nature connection; (5) equity issues; (6) social activism; and (7) deliberate, flexible, and adaptive responses to climate change. Most research relates to post-disaster risk reduction, although it is limited to the analysis of mindfulness-related interventions on psychological resilience. Broader analyses and foci are missing. In contrast, mindfulness is gaining widespread recognition in practice (e.g., by the United Nations, governmental and non-governmental organizations). It is concluded that mindfulness can contribute to understanding and facilitating sustainability, not only at the individual level, but sustainability at all scales, and should, thus, become a core concept in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. More research that acknowledges positive emotional connections, spirituality, and mindfulness in particular is called for, acknowledging that (1) the micro and macro are mirrored and interrelated, and (2) non-material causation is part of sustainability. This paper provides the first comprehensive framework for contemplative scientific inquiry, practice, and education in sustainability.

153 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Global Atlas of Environmental Justice as discussed by the authors is a unique global inventory of cases of socio-environmental conflicts built through a collaborative process between academics and activist groups which includes both qualitative and quantitative data on thousands of conflictive projects as well as on the social response.
Abstract: The environmental movement may be “the most comprehensive and influential movement of our time” (Castells 1997: 67), representing for the ‘post-industrial’ age what the workers’ movement was for the industrial period. Yet while strike statistics have been collected for many countries since the late nineteenth century (van der Velden 2007),1 until the present no administrative body tracks the occurrence and frequency of mobilizations or protests related to environmental issues at the global scale, in the way that the World Labour Organization tracks the occurrence of strike action.2 Thus until the present it has been impossible to properly document the prevalence and incidence of contentious activity related to environmental issues or to track the ebb and flow of protest activity. Such an exercise is necessary because if the twentieth century has been the one of workers struggles, the twenty-first century could well be the one of environmentalists. This Special Feature presents the results from such an exercise—The Global Atlas of Environmental Justice— a unique global inventory of cases of socio-environmental conflicts built through a collaborative process between academics and activist groups which includes both qualitative and quantitative data on thousands of conflictive projects as well as on the social response. This Special Feature applies the lenses of political ecology and ecological economics to unpack and understand these socio-environmental conflicts, otherwise known as ‘ecological distribution conflicts’, (hereafter EDCs, Martinez-Alier 1995, 2002). The contributions in this special feature explore the why, what, how and who of these contentious processes within a new comparative political ecology. The articles in this special issue underline the need for a politicization of socio-environmental debates, whereby political refers to the struggle over the kinds of worlds the people want to create and the types of ecologies they want to live in. We put the focus on who gains and who loses in ecological processes arguing that these issues need to be at the center of sustainability science. Secondly, we demonstrate how environmental justice groups and movements coming out of those conflicts play a fundamental role in redefining and promoting sustainability. We contend that protests are not disruptions to smooth governance that need to be managed and resolved, but that they express grievances as well as aspirations and demands and in this way may serve as potent forces that can lead to the transformation towards sustainability of our economies, societies and ecologies.

147 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A conceptual framework is presented that schematically maps out the linkages between patterns of (unsustainable) social metabolism, the emergence of ecological distribution conflicts, the rise of environmental justice movements, and their potential contributions for sustainability transitions.
Abstract: Can ecological distribution conflicts turn into forces for sustainability? This overview paper addresses in a systematic conceptual manner the question of why, through whom, how, and when conflicts over the use of the environment may take an active role in shaping transitions toward sustainability. It presents a conceptual framework that schematically maps out the linkages between (a) patterns of (unsustainable) social metabolism, (b) the emergence of ecological distribution conflicts, (c) the rise of environmental justice movements, and (d) their potential contributions for sustainability transitions. The ways how these four processes can influence each other are multi-faceted and often not a foretold story. Yet, ecological distribution conflicts can have an important role for sustainability, because they relentlessly bring to light conflicting values over the environment as well as unsustainable resource uses affecting people and the planet. Environmental justice movements, born out of such conflicts, become key actors in politicizing such unsustainable resource uses, but moreover, they take sometimes also radical actions to stop them. By drawing on creative forms of mobilizations and diverse repertoires of action to effectively reduce unsustainabilities, they can turn from ‘victims’ of environmental injustices into ‘warriors’ for sustainability. But when will improvements in sustainability be lasting? By looking at the overall dynamics between the four processes, we aim to foster a more systematic understanding of the dynamics and roles of ecological distribution conflicts within sustainability processes.

137 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The main factors (and challenges) behind application rates are identified, which enables discussion of mitigation pathways, and six proximate factors are identified: vulnerability to bacterial disease, AM access, disease diagnostic capacity, AMR, target markets and food safety regulations, and certification.
Abstract: Global seafood provides almost 20% of all animal protein in diets, and aquaculture is, despite weakening trends, the fastest growing food sector worldwide. Recent increases in production have largely been achieved through intensification of existing farming systems, resulting in higher risks of disease outbreaks. This has led to increased use of antimicrobials (AMs) and consequent antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in many farming sectors, which may compromise the treatment of bacterial infections in the aquaculture species itself and increase the risks of AMR in humans through zoonotic diseases or through the transfer of AMR genes to human bacteria. Multiple stakeholders have, as a result, criticized the aquaculture industry, resulting in consequent regulations in some countries. AM use in aquaculture differs from that in livestock farming due to aquaculture’s greater diversity of species and farming systems, alternative means of AM application, and less consolidated farming practices in many regions. This, together with less research on AM use in aquaculture in general, suggests that large data gaps persist with regards to its overall use, breakdowns by species and system, and how AMs become distributed in, and impact on, the overall social-ecological systems in which they are embedded. This paper identifies the main factors (and challenges) behind application rates, which enables discussion of mitigation pathways. From a set of identified key mechanisms for AM usage, six proximate factors are identified: vulnerability to bacterial disease, AM access, disease diagnostic capacity, AMR, target markets and food safety regulations, and certification. Building upon these can enable local governments to reduce AM use through farmer training, spatial planning, assistance with disease identification, and stricter regulations. National governments and international organizations could, in turn, assist with disease-free juveniles and vaccines, enforce rigid monitoring of the quantity and quality of AMs used by farmers and the AM residues in the farmed species and in the environment, and promote measures to reduce potential human health risks associated with AMR.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a conceptual framework for understanding transformations through a power analysis that aims to confront and subvert hegemonic power relations is proposed, that is, multi-dimensional and intersectional; balancing ecological concerns with social, economic, cultural and democratic spheres; and is multi-scalar, and mindful of impacts across place and space.
Abstract: A transformation to sustainability calls for radical and systemic societal shifts. Yet what this entails in practice and who the agents of this radical transformation are require further elaboration. This article recenters the role of environmental justice movements in transformations, arguing that the systemic, multi-dimensional and intersectional approach inherent in EJ activism is uniquely placed to contribute to the realization of equitable sustainable futures. Based on a perspective of conflict as productive, and a “conflict transformation” approach that can address the root issues of ecological conflicts and promote the emergence of alternatives, we lay out a conceptual framework for understanding transformations through a power analysis that aims to confront and subvert hegemonic power relations; that is, multi-dimensional and intersectional; balancing ecological concerns with social, economic, cultural and democratic spheres; and is multi-scalar, and mindful of impacts across place and space. Such a framework can help analyze and recognize the contribution of grassroots EJ movements to societal transformations to sustainability and support and aid radical transformation processes. While transitions literature tends to focus on artifacts and technologies, we suggest that a resistance-centred perspective focuses on the creation of new subjectivities, power relations, values and institutions. This recenters the agency of those who are engaged in the creation and recuperation of ecological and new ways of being in the world in the needed transformation.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a database of 220 dam-related environmental conflicts, retrieved from the Global Atlas on Environmental Justice (EJAtlas), and based on knowledge co-production between academics and activists, is analyzed.
Abstract: The present article analyses a unique database of 220 dam-related environmental conflicts, retrieved from the Global Atlas on Environmental Justice (EJAtlas), and based on knowledge co-production between academics and activists. Despite well-known controversial, social, and environmental impacts of dams, efforts to increase renewable energy generation have reinstated the interest into hydropower development globally. People affected by dams have largely denounced such ‘unsustainabilities’ through collective non-violent actions. Nevertheless, we found that repression, criminalization, violent targeting of activists and assassinations are recurrent features of conflictive dams. Violent repression is particularly high when indigenous people are involved. Indirect forms of violence are also analysed through socio-economic, environmental, and health impacts. We argue that increasing repression of the opposition against unwanted energy infrastructures does not only serve to curb specific protest actions, but also aims to delegitimize and undermine differing understanding of sustainability, epistemologies, and world views. This analysis cautions that allegedly sustainable renewables such as hydropower often replicates patterns of violence within a frame of an ‘extractivism of renewables’. We finally suggest that co-production of knowledge between scientists, activists, and communities should be largely encouraged to investigate sensitive and contentious topics in sustainability studies.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that there is now a new and distinct generation of sustainability scholars that start their careers with interdisciplinary training, as opposed to only engaging in interdisciplinary research once strong disciplinary foundations have been built.
Abstract: The establishment of interdisciplinary Master’s and PhD programs in sustainability science is opening up an exciting arena filled with opportunities for early-career scholars to address pressing sustainability challenges. However, embarking upon an interdisciplinary endeavor as an early-career scholar poses a unique set of challenges: to develop an individual scientific identity and a strong and specific methodological skill-set, while at the same time gaining the ability to understand and communicate between different epistemologies. Here, we explore the challenges and opportunities that emerge from a new kind of interdisciplinary journey, which we describe as ‘undisciplinary.’ Undisciplinary describes (1) the space or condition of early-career researchers with early interdisciplinary backgrounds, (2) the process of the journey, and (3) the orientation which aids scholars to address the complex nature of today’s sustainability challenges. The undisciplinary journey is an iterative and reflexive process of balancing methodological groundedness and epistemological agility to engage in rigorous sustainability science. The paper draws upon insights from a collective journey of broad discussion, reflection, and learning, including a survey on educational backgrounds of different generations of sustainability scholars, participatory forum theater, and a panel discussion at the Resilience 2014 conference (Montpellier, France). Based on the results from this diversity of methods, we suggest that there is now a new and distinct generation of sustainability scholars that start their careers with interdisciplinary training, as opposed to only engaging in interdisciplinary research once strong disciplinary foundations have been built. We further identify methodological groundedness and epistemological agility as guiding competencies to become capable sustainability scientists and discuss the implications of an undisciplinary journey in the current institutional context of universities and research centers. In this paper, we propose a simple framework to help early-career sustainability scholars and well-established scientists successfully navigate what can sometimes be an uncomfortable space in education and research, with the ultimate aim of producing and engaging in rigorous and impactful sustainability science.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the expanding geography of wind energy conflicts by analyzing 20 case studies from across the Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe, focusing on how land pressures and patterns of uneven development emerge as two features of the current expansion of wind farms.
Abstract: Wind power is expanding globally. Simultaneously, a growing number of conflicts against large-scale wind farms are emerging in multiple locations around the world. As these processes occur, new questions arise on how electricity from wind is being generated, how such energy is flowing within societies, and how these production-flows are being shaped by specific power structures. The present paper explores the expanding geography of wind energy conflicts by analyzing 20 case studies from across the Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe. Based on the Environmental Justice Atlas database, it reflects on how land pressures and patterns of uneven development emerge as two features of the current expansion of wind farms. Following a relational analysis, these patterns are examined to interpret the plural instances of opposition emerging throughout the rural spaces of the world. The article argues that previously unexplored forms of collective action are expanding the scope and content of the “wind energy debate”. In addition to the claims of “landscape” and “wildlife protection” addressed by the existing literature, this study sheds light on the rural/peripheral contexts where opposition emerges through the defense of indigenous territories, local livelihoods and communal development projects. The study contends that these “emerging storylines” embrace an environmental justice perspective when challenging the socially unequal and geographically uneven patterns reproduced by the ecological modernization paradigm. From this lens, cases of local opposition are not interpreted as selfish forces blocking a low-carbon transition, but instead, are understood as political instances that enable a wider discussion about the ways such transition should take place.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The concept of a circular economy has become a significant school of thought in sustainable economics over the last 10 years as mentioned in this paper, and the key principles underpinning the concept of the circular economy, specifically examining the thermodynamic and ecological foundations upon which these principles are apparently rooted.
Abstract: The concept of a circular economy has become a significant school of thought in sustainable economics over the last 10 years. This paper critically analyses the key principles underpinning the concept of the circular economy, specifically examining the thermodynamic and ecological foundations upon which these principles are apparently rooted. We examine issues related to recycling, biological and technical nutrients, restoration, energy use, elimination of waste, eco-efficiency, product lifetime and economic growth under three headings: the pyramid of waste, short cycles and eco-inefficiency. We reflect on how the economy of nature is based on an open system, not a closed system, that nature operates using short cycles, not extended lifetimes, that nature is sub-optimal, not optimal and that nature is eco-inefficient, not eco-efficient. Findings are then discussed, and we explore what we can learn from the natural world in terms of sustainability.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The article touches upon two of the challenges to achieving healthy sustainable diets for a global population, i.e., reduction on the yield and nutritional quality of crops due to climate change; and trade-offs between food production and industrial crops.
Abstract: Malnutrition in all forms, ranging from undernourishment to obesity and associated diet-related diseases, is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, while food systems often have major environmental impacts. Rapid global population growth and increases in demands for food and changes in dietary habits create challenges to provide universal access to healthy food without creating negative environmental, economic, and social impacts. This article discusses opportunities for and challenges to sustainable food systems from a human health perspective by making the case for avoiding the transition to unhealthy less sustainable diets (using India as an exemplar), reducing food waste by changing consumer behaviour (with examples from Japan), and using innovations and new technologies to reduce the environmental impact of healthy food production. The article touches upon two of the challenges to achieving healthy sustainable diets for a global population, i.e., reduction on the yield and nutritional quality of crops (in particular vegetables and fruits) due to climate change; and trade-offs between food production and industrial crops. There is an urgent need to develop and implement policies and practices that provide universal access to healthy food choices for a growing world population, whilst reducing the environmental footprint of the global food system.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that mixed-method research designs—in this case orientated around a number of cases studies—are best suited to understanding and addressing real-world nexus challenges, with their inevitable complex, non-linear system characteristics.
Abstract: The water–energy–food (WEF) nexus has become a popular, and potentially powerful, frame through which to analyse interactions and interdependencies between these three systems. Though the case for transdisciplinary research in this space has been made, the extent of stakeholder engagement in research remains limited with stakeholders most commonly incorporated in research as end-users. Yet, stakeholders interact with nexus issues in a variety of ways, consequently there is much that collaboration might offer to develop nexus research and enhance its application. This paper outlines four aspects of nexus research and considers the value and potential challenges for transdisciplinary research in each. We focus on assessing and visualising nexus systems; understanding governance and capacity building; the importance of scale; and the implications of future change. The paper then proceeds to describe a novel mixed-method study that deeply integrates stakeholder knowledge with insights from multiple disciplines. We argue that mixed-method research designs—in this case orientated around a number of cases studies—are best suited to understanding and addressing real-world nexus challenges, with their inevitable complex, non-linear system characteristics. Moreover, integrating multiple forms of knowledge in the manner described in this paper enables research to assess the potential for, and processes of, scaling-up innovations in the nexus space, to contribute insights to policy and decision making.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Work may be a panacea for poverty but the world of work in 2018 is characterised by "Working Poverty" including poor wages as mentioned in this paper, with empirical evidence on how they might do so being scarce.
Abstract: Work may be a panacea for poverty but the world of work in 2018 is characterised by ‘Working Poverty,’ including poor wages. Living wages are a contested idea for resolving the paradox, with empirical evidence on how they might do so being scarce. Theoretically, a living wage enables people to escape from poverty traps, indicated by qualitative improvements in quality of work and life beyond a set income. Alternatively, diminishing marginal returns suggest that any wage is a good wage, particularly at low pay levels. We explored these possibilities with almost 900 low-income workers across two diverse countries, New Zealand and South Africa, on reliable indicators of workplace justice, job quality, and life satisfaction. A coherent pattern occurred: trap-rise-pause-rise. At wages below ± $2000 per month, workers felt trapped in injustice, disengagement and dissatisfaction; above, they reported the opposite. This rise was starker in South Africa, where income inequality was highest. After a pause in satisfaction level (rising aspiration/relative deprivation), levels rose, with diminishing marginal returns. This pattern of trap-rise-pause-rise links two ‘competing’ theories of sustainable livelihood. Each matters but at different points on one wage spectrum. Wages may become ‘living’ only once they get ahead of a cusp in a wages-wellbeing curve, at a point or range determined empirically. Replicating this pattern across two very different countries suggests robustness, and may be a promising step towards a science of sustainable livelihood. However, we still require more systematic sampling, across more countries and groups, before the findings may be generalized.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that systematic reflection about these six criteria can enable tailoring stakeholder interaction processes according specific project goals and context conditions and be beneficial depending on each project’s intended contribution to sustainability.
Abstract: Stakeholder interactions are increasingly viewed as an important element of research for sustainable development. But to what extent, how, and for which goals should stakeholders be involved? In this article, we explore what degrees of stakeholder interaction show the most promise in research for sustainable development. For this purpose, we examine 16 research projects from the transdisciplinary research programme NRP 61 on sustainable water management in Switzerland. The results suggest that various degrees of stakeholder interaction can be beneficial depending on each project’s intended contribution to sustainability, the form of knowledge desired, how contested the issues are, the level of actor diversity, actors’ interests, and existing collaborations between actors. We argue that systematic reflection about these six criteria can enable tailoring stakeholder interaction processes according specific project goals and context conditions.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a new definition of sustainability is offered, anchored in the interaction of a population and the carrying capacity of its environment, and five core sustainability principles are derived, along with their respective policy and operational implications.
Abstract: A systems perspective is used to discuss the concept of sustainability. From this perspective, it is argued, sustainability can be regarded as a system state that is mediated by specific structures. This is fundamentally different from regarding sustainability merely as a normative goal, as it is presently regarded by most. Insight into the kinds of structures which mediate a system’s state open the door to proactive design of new structures and mechanisms, which are necessary for yielding effective change: in this case, promoting the sustainability agenda. The kind of change required to transform the prevailing trajectory of human affairs is presented as a second order change: a change that requires a major shift, and a complete transformation of the system itself, not only in a few aspects of its behavior. A new definition of sustainability is offered, anchored in the interaction of a population and the carrying capacity of its environment. From this definition, five core sustainability principles are derived, along with their respective policy and operational implications. Together, these principles prescribe the conditions that must be met to attain sustainability as an enduring state. The principles themselves form an integrated, systemic set, which requires them to be acted on simultaneously. A piecemeal approach—focusing on one aspect while neglecting others—is not likely to yield effective results for the whole.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The challenges of knowledge transfer in TD research are specified by distinguishing TD research for policy from conventional evidence-based policy, which relies on generalizing findings, such as randomized controlled trials, and the functions that cases fulfil in other types of research that include basic, applied and ideographic research are compared.
Abstract: Transdisciplinary (TD) research is increasingly suggested as a means of tackling wicked problems by providing knowledge on solutions that serve as pathways towards sustainable development. In contrast to research striving for generalizable findings, TD research produces insights for a particular case and context. TD researchers, who build on other TD projects’ results, need to know under what conditions knowledge gained from their case can be transferred to and applied in another case and context. Knowledge transfer between researchers and stakeholders is extensively discussed in the literature. However, a more profound understanding and management of the challenges related to knowledge transfer across cases, as it applies to TD research, are missing. We specify the challenges of knowledge transfer in TD research by distinguishing TD research for policy from conventional evidence-based policy, which relies on generalizing findings, such as randomized controlled trials. We also compare the functions that cases fulfil in other types of research that include basic, applied and ideographic research. We propose to conceptualize transferability of knowledge across cases as arguments by analogy. Methodologically, this would imply explicit consideration on whether the cases in question are sufficiently similar in relevant aspects while not dissimilar in other additional relevant aspects. On the one hand, this approach calls for explicit material considerations that are needed to learn about which aspects of cases are relevant. On the other hand, formal considerations on how to weigh perceived relevant similarities and dissimilarities of the cases at hand for transferability of knowledge, are needed. Empirical research on how projects in TD research deal with this problem is called for.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is concluded that mindfulness has the potential to facilitate adaptation at all scales and should, therefore, become a core element in climate and associated sustainability research.
Abstract: It is becoming clear that increasingly complex global challenges cannot simply be solved by new technology or governments alone. We also need to develop new social practices and encourage a broader cultural shift towards sustainability. Against this background, this paper explores the role of mindfulness in adapting to increasing risk and climate change. Based on a literature review, it assesses current research on ‘mindful climate adaptation’, and explores how individual mindfulness is linked to climate adaptation. While in practice mindfulness-based approaches to climate adaptation have gained widespread recognition (e.g., by the United Nations), the results show that related research is scarce and fragmented. There is almost no research into the role of mindfulness in climate adaptation. At the same time, new scientific domains are opening up in cognate fields that illuminate the mindfulness–adaptation nexus from certain perspectives. These fields include: (1) disaster management; (2) individual well-being; (3) organisational management; (4) environmental behaviour; (5) social justice; and (6) knowledge production. As new concepts and approaches emerge, they require critical construct validation and empirical testing. The importance of further investigation is supported by a complementary empirical study, which shows that individual mindfulness disposition coincides with increased motivation to take (or support) climate adaptation actions. The paper concludes that mindfulness has the potential to facilitate adaptation at all scales (through cognitive, managerial, structural, ontological, and epistemological change processes) and should, therefore, become a core element in climate and associated sustainability research. Finally, it sketches the conceptual trajectories of the mindfulness–adaptation nexus and presents a pioneering, comprehensive framework for ‘mindful climate adaptation’.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a conceptual framework for resilience research in an interdisciplinary perspective is presented. But not many studies have been taken to synthesize resilience as an inter-disciplinary concept being applied across different disciplines and to investigate the common issues among them.
Abstract: Resilience thinking has been widely used as a tool for interdisciplinary studies in addressing disturbance and change. However, not many studies have been taken to synthesize resilience as an interdisciplinary concept being applied across different disciplines and to investigate the common issues among them. This paper explores a conceptual framework for resilience research in an interdisciplinary perspective. In doing so, we first illustrate the academic landscape for resilience research according to the citation network of publications. After that, we categorize resilience studies into ten core research domains by their inner citation relationships. And then, we propose a framework which synthesizes principles of resilience from different research fields embracing key components (behaviors, capacities, influencing factors, interventions, and system dynamics). Based on four theoretical features—conceptions, characteristics, influencing factors, and intervention strategies, we extract key points from each domain. As resilience is a creative theory for sustainability science, this study is expected to contribute to sustainability science by generalizing resilience as an interdisciplinary concept.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There is an urgent need for sustainability scientists to develop more holistic or inclusive models to explain and integrate socio-cultural mechanisms of change at both individual and institutional levels to inform sustainability policy solutions that can be applied cross-culturally and in divergent contexts.
Abstract: Human activity at multiple scales is the primary driver of the environmental challenges humanity faces (Steffen et al. 2007). Numerous scholars have argued that addressing environmental problems will require large-scale change in human behavior and the institutional, social and cultural forces that shape behavior (Princen 2003; Speth 2008; Beddoe et al. 2009; Assadourian 2010; Kinzig et al. 2013). In fact, most definitions of sustainability and sustainable development implicitly or explicitly recognize the need for changes in human perspectives, aspirations, technologies, norms, or worldviews—in short, culture1. However, calls for cultural change often stop short of proposing the precise mechanisms through which such change may occur precisely because the relevant mechanisms of behavioral and cultural change are not known. The multiple disciplines that comprise the social sciences and humanities have different and, often competing, theories of cultural change that operate at multiple levels of human organization. These disciplinary differences have been a challenge for sustainability science (Gardner 2013), and the absence of a robust, non-disciplinary, theoretical framework hinders progress towards a deeper understanding of when and how sustainable social-ecological systems emerge (Levin and Clark 2010). Recently, sustainability scientists have been explicit about the need to incorporate mechanisms of cultural change in their research (Beddoe et al. 2009; Caldas et al. 2015) and to clarify the exact mechanisms involved (Ehrlich and Levin 2005; Waring et al. 2015). Importantly, cultural evolution theory offers an integrative approach to studying the dynamics of cultural change based on causal models of the mechanisms through which individual and population processes interact. Despite many examples of sustainable resource management, exploitative and unsustainable resource management are common (Steffen et al. 2007). However, cultural change may be important for driving the proliferation of sustainable practices. This is because, although evolved genetic mechanisms, ecological processes, and socio-cultural mechanisms all influence resource use, social conditions often change more quickly than ecological conditions and cultural evolution is more rapid than genetic evolution (Perreault 2012). As such, there is an urgent need for sustainability scientists to develop more holistic or inclusive models to explain and integrate socio-cultural mechanisms of change at both individual and institutional levels (Borgerhoff Mulder and Coppolillo 2005). Such models are needed to inform sustainability policy solutions that can be applied cross-culturally and in divergent contexts. Currently, however, the dynamics of cultural change are not well understood in the context of sustainability. By focusing on applications of cultural evolution, we view this special issue as a starting point for determining how we can harness processes of cultural change Applying Cultural Evolution to Sustainability Challenges

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is contended that urban living labs can connect a sense of change with a sense-of- place by co-creating new narratives of place,By co-producing knowledge on new practices and new relations between people and place, and by allowing the co-design or (re)establishment of places with symbolic meaning.
Abstract: Experimentation as a means of governance for sustainability transitions has been advocated for years by transition scholars and geography scholars. We propose that examining the impact of experimentation requires an understanding of its embeddedness in place as a socio-spatial context. This notion of embeddedness, which conceptually aligns well with the understanding of sense of place, is under-examined in sustainability transitions literature. By conjoining the sense of place and sustainability transition literatures, we conceptualize that sense of place can be one outcome of experimentation fostering sustainability transitions. We examine urban living labs as an open format of urban experimentation, where multiple actors interact with the aim to co-design, test, and implement governance innovations. From the literature, we have distilled three phenomena that relate to a sense of place as mechanisms for transformation: a symbolic understanding or meaning of place; a narrative of place that connects to a transformative vision; and new types of relations between people and place. With this conceptual lens, we analyze our case study, an urban living lab called The Resilience Lab in a neighborhood of the city of Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Drawing from a longitudinal case study research, we contend that urban living labs can connect a sense of change (transformation) with a sense of place by co-creating new narratives of place, by co-producing knowledge on new practices and new relations between people and place, and by allowing the co-design or (re)establishment of places with symbolic meaning. As such, urban living labs facilitate urban sustainability transitions.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this analysis of 26 European and 13 Japanese cases, it is found that place-based food networks are typically located in heterogeneous landscapes, are driven by civil society (and less by markets), and act at a local scale.
Abstract: Many Japanese and European landscapes harbor biocultural diversity that has been shaped by human agency over centuries. However, these landscapes are threatened by widespread land abandonment, land-use changes, and urbanization. The aim of this study is to use a “solution scanning” method to identify place-based food networks in Europe and Japan that reinforce linkages between biological and cultural diversity in landscapes. In our analysis of 26 European and 13 Japanese cases, we find that place-based food networks are typically located in heterogeneous landscapes, are driven by civil society (and less by markets), and act at a local scale. Regional identity is the most frequently addressed societal issue. Scenery, rural tourism, and nature conservation are more important motivations in Europe, and physical well-being and revitalization of local economies are more relevant in Japan. European models are typically associated with achieving biodiversity conservation and socio-cultural tradition outcomes, and Japanese models more with public health and nutrition outcomes. We discuss the potential for transfer of approaches from Japan to Europe (e.g., models that tackle the aging of rural societies), and from Europe to Japan (e.g., models that build explicit connections between food production and biodiversity conservation). We conclude with a list of recommended policy measures, e.g., the creation of a flexible legal framework that protects the interests of and reduces political constraints for collaborative efforts to biocultural diversity in landscapes.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors focus on direct, structural, cultural, slow, and ecological forms of violence in environmental conflicts in Central America and find that violence can reach not only environmental defenders, but also communities, nature, and the sustainability of their relations.
Abstract: Although studies on environmental conflicts have engaged with the subject of violence, a multidimensional approach has been lacking. Using data from 95 environmental conflicts in Central America, we show how different forms of violence appear and overlap. We focus on direct, structural, cultural, slow, and ecological forms of violence. Results suggest that the common understanding of violence in environmental conflicts as a direct event in time and space is only the tip of the iceberg and that violence can reach not only environmental defenders, but also communities, nature, and the sustainability of their relations.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Sustainability competences through the eyes of professional practitioners in the field of sustainability is investigated and empirical data that have been created using an action research approach are presented.
Abstract: This paper investigates sustainability competences through the eyes of professional practitioners in the field of sustainability and presents empirical data that have been created using an action research approach. The design of the study consists of two workshops, in which professional practitioners in interaction with each other and the facilitators are invited to explore and reflect on the specific knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviours necessary to conduct change processes successfully towards sustainability in a variety of business and professional contexts. The research focuses on the competences associated with these change processes to devise, propose and conduct appropriate interventions that address sustainability issues. Labelled ‘intervention competence’, this ability comprises an interlocking set of knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviours that include: appreciating the importance of (trying to) reaching decisions or interventions; being able to learn from lived experience of practice and to connect such learning to one’s own scientific knowledge; being able to engage in political-strategic thinking, deliberations and actions, related to different perspectives; the ability for showing goal-oriented, adequate action; adopting and communicating ethical practices during the intervention process; being able to cope with the degree of complexity, and finally being able to translate stakeholder diversity into collectively produced interventions (actions) towards sustainability. Moreover, this competence has to be practised in contexts of competing values, non-technical interests and power relations. The article concludes with recommendations for future research and practice.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work examines the process of designing MetaMAP: an interactive graphic tool for collaborating to understand social–ecological systems and design well-integrated solutions and discusses design principles and opportunities for integrating design thinking with sustainability science to help achieve Sustainable Development Goals.
Abstract: Design disciplines have a long history of creating well-integrated solutions to challenges which are complex, uncertain and contested by multiple stakeholders. Society faces similar challenges in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals, so design methods hold much potential. While principles of good design are well established, there has been limited integration of design thinking with sustainability science. To advance this integration, we examine the process of designing MetaMAP: an interactive graphic tool for collaborating to understand social–ecological systems and design well-integrated solutions. MetaMAP was created using Research through Design methods which integrate creative and scientific thinking. By applying design thinking, researchers and practitioners from different backgrounds undertook multiple cycles of problem framing, solution development, testing and reflection. The testing was highly collaborative involving over 150 people from diverse disciplines in workshops, case studies, interviews and critique. Reflecting on this process, we discuss design principles and opportunities for integrating design thinking with sustainability science to help achieve Sustainable Development Goals.