in

A pluralistic and integrated approach to action-oriented knowledge for sustainability

  • 1.

    Ferrier, S. et al. IPBES Summary for Policymakers of the Methodological Assessment of Scenarios and Models of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, 2019).

  • 2.

    Ripple, W. J., Wolf, C., Newsome, T. M., Barnard, P. & Moomaw, W. R. World scientists’ warning of a climate emergency. BioScience 70, 8–12 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  • 3.

    IPCC in Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) Summary for Policymakers (WMO, 2018).

  • 4.

    Díaz, S. et al. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366, eaax3100 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • 5.

    Fazey, I. et al. Ten essentials for action-oriented and second order energy transitions, transformations and climate change research. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 40, 54–70 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  • 6.

    Steffen, W. et al. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347, 1259855 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • 7.

    Turnhout, E., Metze, T., Wyborn, C., Klenk, N. & Louder, E. The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 42, 15–21 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  • 8.

    Wolfram, M. Conceptualizing urban transformative capacity: a framework for research and policy. Cities 51, 121–130 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • 9.

    Etzion, D. Management for sustainability. Nat. Sustain. 1, 744–749 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  • 10.

    Ostrom, E. A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 15181–15187 (2007).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 11.

    Jerneck, A. et al. Structuring sustainability science. Sustain. Sci. 6, 69–82 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • 12.

    Kates, R. W. What kind of a science is sustainability science? Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 19449–19450 (2011).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 13.

    Cash, D. W. et al. Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 8086–8091 (2003).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 14.

    Cumming, G. S., Olsson, P., Chapin, F. S. & Holling, C. S. Resilience, experimentation, and scale mismatches in social-ecological landscapes. Landsc. Ecol. 28, 1139–1150 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • 15.

    Mitchell, S. D. Unsimple Truths: Science, Complexity, and Policy (Univ. Chicago Press, 2009).

  • 16.

    Davidson, D. Actions, reasons, and causes. J. Philos. 60, 685–700 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  • 17.

    Anscombe, G. E. M. Intention (Harvard Univ. Press, 1957).

  • 18.

    Dewey, J. The Quest for Certainty: A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action (Minton, Balch, 1929).

  • 19.

    Lubchenco, J. Entering the century of the environment: a new social contract for science. 279, 491–497 (1998).

  • 20.

    Nowotny, H., Scott, P., Gibbons, M. & Scott, P. B. Re-thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty (SciELO Argentina, 2001).

  • 21.

    Ravetz, J. R. What is post-normal science. Futures 31, 647–653 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • 22.

    König, A. Sustainability Science: Key Issues (Routledge, 2018).

  • 23.

    Wyborn, C. et al. Co-producing sustainability: reordering the governance of science, policy, and practice. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 44, 319–346 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • 24.

    Lang, D. J. et al. Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain. Sci. 7, 25–43 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • 25.

    Umpleby, S. A. Second-order cybernetics as a fundamental revolution in science. Constr. Found. 11, 455–465 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • 26.

    Irwin, E. G. et al. Bridging barriers to advance global sustainability. Nat. Sustain. 1, 324–326 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  • 27.

    Norström, A. V. et al. Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nat. Sustain. 3, 182–190 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  • 28.

    Scoones, I. et al. Transformations to sustainability: combining structural, systemic and enabling approaches. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 42, 65–75 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  • 29.

    Clark, W. C., van Kerkhoff, L., Lebel, L. & Gallopin, G. Crafting usable knowledge for sustainable development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4570–4578 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 30.

    Norton, B. G. Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management (Univ. Chicago Press, 2005).

  • 31.

    Popa, F., Guillermin, M. & Dedeurwaerdere, T. A pragmatist approach to transdisciplinarity in sustainability research: from complex systems theory to reflexive science. Futures 65, 45–56 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • 32.

    Ansell, C. K. & Bartenberger, M. Varieties of experimentalism. Ecol. Econ. 130, 64–73 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • 33.

    Caniglia, G. et al. Experiments and evidence in sustainability science: a typology. J. Clean. Prod. 169, 39–47 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  • 34.

    Wiek, A., Ness, B., Schweizer-Ries, P., Brand, F. S. & Farioli, F. From complex systems analysis to transformational change: a comparative appraisal of sustainability science projects. Sustain. Sci. 7, 5–24 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • 35.

    Preiser, R., Biggs, R., De Vos, A. & Folke, C. Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: organizing principles for advancing research methods and approaches. Ecol. Soc. 23, 46 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  • 36.

    Grunwald, A. Working towards sustainable development in the face of uncertainty and incomplete knowledge. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 9, 245–262 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  • 37.

    Bratman, M. Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason (Harvard Univ. Press, 1987).

  • 38.

    Midgley, G. in Systemic Intervention 113–133 (Springer, 2000).

  • 39.

    Tengö, M., Brondizio, E. S., Elmqvist, T., Malmer, P. & Spierenburg, M. Connecting diverse knowledge systems for enhanced ecosystem governance: the multiple evidence base approach. Ambio 43, 579–591 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • 40.

    Sperling, G. B., Winthrop, R., Kwauk, C. & Yousafzai, M. What Works in Girls’ Education (The Brookings Institution, 2016).

  • 41.

    Jones, T. M. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: an issue-contingent model. Acad. Manag. Rev. 16, 366–395 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • 42.

    Pelenc, J., Bazile, D. & Ceruti, C. Collective capability and collective agency for sustainability: a case study. Ecol. Econ. 118, 226–239 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • 43.

    Farjoun, M., Ansell, C. & Boin, A. PERSPECTIVE—Pragmatism in organization studies: meeting the challenges of a dynamic and complex world. Organ. Sci. 26, 1787–1804 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • 44.

    Djoudi, H. et al. Beyond dichotomies: gender and intersecting inequalities in climate change studies. Ambio 45, 248–262 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • 45.

    Schlüter, M. et al. Capturing emergent phenomena in social-ecological systems: an analytical framework. Ecol. Soc. 24, 11 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • 46.

    von Wirth, T., Fuenfschilling, L., Frantzeskaki, N. & Coenen, L. Impacts of urban living labs on sustainability transitions: mechanisms and strategies for systemic change through experimentation. Eur. Plan. Stud. 27, 229–257 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • 47.

    Luederitz, C. et al. Learning through evaluation – a tentative evaluative scheme for sustainability transition experiments. J. Clean. Prod. 169, 61–76 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  • 48.

    Berkhout, F. et al. Sustainability experiments in Asia: innovations shaping alternative development pathways? Environ. Sci. Policy 13, 261–271 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • 49.

    Freeth, R. & Caniglia, G. Learning to collaborate while collaborating: advancing interdisciplinary sustainability research. Sustain. Sci. 15, 247–261 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  • 50.

    Polanyi, M. The Tacit Dimension (Univ. Chicago Press, 2009).

  • 51.

    Lansing, J. S. Priests and Programmers: Technologies of Power in the Engineered Landscape of Bali (Princeton Univ. Press, 2009).

  • 52.

    Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation (Oxford Univ. Press, 1995).

  • 53.

    Lam, D. P. M. et al. Indigenous and local knowledge in sustainability transformations research: a literature review. Ecol. Soc. 25, 3 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  • 54.

    Ryle, G. Knowing how and knowing that: the presidential address. Proc. Aristot. Soc. 46, 1–16 (1945).

    Google Scholar 

  • 55.

    Sahni, U. From Learning Outcomes to Life Outcomes: What Can You Do and Who Can You Be? A Case Study in Girls’ Education in India (Center for Universal Education at Brookings, 2012).

  • 56.

    Luederitz, C., Abson, D. J., Audet, R. & Lang, D. J. Many pathways toward sustainability: not conflict but co-learning between transition narratives. Sustain. Sci. 12, 393–407 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  • 57.

    Messerli, P. et al. Expansion of sustainability science needed for the SDGs. Nat. Sustain. 2, 892–894 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • 58.

    Balvanera, P. et al. Key features for more successful place-based sustainability research on social-ecological systems: a programme on ecosystem change and society (PECS) perspective. Ecol. Soc. 22, 14 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  • 59.

    Schäpke, N. et al. Jointly experimenting for transformation? Shaping real-world laboratories by comparing them. GAIA 27, 85–96 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  • 60.

    Brundiers, K., Wiek, A. & Redman, C. L. Real-world learning opportunities in sustainability: from classroom into the real world. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 11, 308–324 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • 61.

    Ploum, L., Blok, V., Lans, T. & Omta, O. Toward a validated competence framework for sustainable entrepreneurship. Organ. Environ. 31, 113–132 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  • 62.

    Blok, V., Gremmen, B. & Wesselink, R. Dealing with the wicked problem of sustainability in advance. Bus. Prof. Ethics J. https://doi.org/10.5840/bpej201621737 (2016).


  • Source: Ecology - nature.com

    Phylogeny resolved, metabolism revealed: functional radiation within a widespread and divergent clade of sponge symbionts

    Geologists raise the speed limit for how fast continental crust can form