Structuring sustainability science

It is urgent in science and society to address climate change and other sustainability challenges such as biodiversity loss, deforestation, depletion of marine fish stocks, global ill-health, land degradation, land use change and water scarcity. Sustainability science (SS) is an attempt to bridge the natural and social sciences for seeking creative solutions to these complex challenges. In this article, we propose a research agenda that advances the methodological and theoretical understanding of what SS can be, how it can be pursued and what it can contribute. The key focus is on knowledge structuring. For that purpose, we designed a generic research platform organised as a three-dimensional matrix comprising three components: core themes (scientific understanding, sustainability goals, sustainability pathways); cross-cutting critical and problem-solving approaches; and any combination of the sustainability challenges above. As an example, we insert four sustainability challenges into the matrix (biodiversity loss, climate change, land use changes, water scarcity). Based on the matrix with the four challenges, we discuss three issues for advancing theory and methodology in SS: how new synergies across natural and social sciences can be created; how integrated theories for understanding and responding to complex sustainability issues can be developed; and how theories and concepts in economics, gender studies, geography, political science and sociology can be applied in SS. The generic research platform serves to structure and create new knowledge in SS and is a tool for exploring any set of sustainability challenges. The combined critical and problem-solving approach is essential.     

Macroethical systems and sustainability science

The Industrial Revolution and associated economic, demographic, technological and cultural changes have resulted in what many scientists are beginning to refer to as “the Anthropocene” – roughly translated, the Age of Humans. One response to this development is the nascent field of “sustainability science,” a multidisciplinary and systemic attempt to perceive and understand this new era. In doing so, however, methodologies and intellectual frameworks must be developed which extend beyond existing, dominantly reductionist, approaches, and are intended to address emergent characteristics of complex systems that integrate cultural and social systems, the engineered and built environment and natural systems. In the area of ethics, this requires developing a capability for “macroethics,” or ethical systems and processes capable of addressing issues arising from the emergent behavior of the complicated systems that characterize the Anthropocene.     

Providing sound theoretical roots to sustainability science: systems science and (second-order) cybernetics

After its infant stage, a new science usually starts reflexing on its identity and theoretical roots. Sustainability science is not an exception, and the needs of self-reflection are even more pressing because of its inter- and trans-disciplinary characters, which involve a plenty of different approaches, theories and practices. In fact, such a variety does not provide a consistent ground for its future development. Without a solid grounding on a reliable base, the plethora of different theories that currently crowds its arena could in the near future produce a rejection from disciplinary specialized researchers, thus confining sustainability science to a scientific fad. Convincing theoretical roots can be found in systems science and cybernetics, and in particular second-order cybernetics, once amended from autopoiesis theory and radical constructivism, which raise serious doubts of validity and applicability. If sustainability science acknowledged its systemic and cybernetic nature and adopted second-order cybernetics in its amended version, it would gain a powerful reference paradigm and a theoretical common denominator and language to support its researchers and facilitate their knowledge exchange. From their part, systems science and cybernetics would be better understood and embraced as powerful sources of knowledge for understanding modern challenging problems, and second-order cybernetics, after decades of scarce relevance for other scientific disciplines, would be revitalized and would finally evolve adequately in a promising science and social practice.     

Educational initiative of Osaka University in sustainability science: mobilizing science and technology towards sustainability

One of the most important and yet difficult challenges that modern societies face is how to mobilize science and technology (S&T) to minimize the impact of human activities on the Earth’s life support systems. As the establishment of inter-disciplinary education programs is necessary to design a unified vision towards understanding the complexity of human nature, the Research Institute for Sustainability Science (RISS) launched a new program on sustainability science in April 2008. The program expects to address the issue of how to use knowledge more effectively to understand the dynamic interactions between nature and human society. This paper first offers an overview of international and Japanese initiatives on sustainability education in which we highlight the uniqueness of the attempt by the Integrated Research System for Sustainability Science (IR3S). The paper then introduces the RISS program for sustainability science, addressing the principles and curriculum design of the program. The paper discusses the main problems and constraints faced when developing the program, such as institutional barriers in building a curriculum and obtaining cooperation from faculty. To challenge these barriers and limitations, the RISS uses the program as a platform to disseminate the idea of sustainability science across the university. This attempt helps us to obtain the continuing cooperation necessary to improve and maintain the program.

Towards an umbrella science of sustainability

Sustainability research has gained scholarly attention since the 1980s as the new science investigating the changes in social, environmental and economic systems and their impacts on the future of planetary life support systems. Whilst broad literature on sustainability has expanded significantly over the past decades, academic literature developing sustainability as a distinct science has received little attention. After more than two decades of sustainability research, the time has come for us to begin asking reflective questions about what sort of science we call sustainability science. How has the broader research on sustainability contributed to developing sustainability science as a unique discipline within the past two decades? How has the label science promoted or hindered the interdisciplinary project of integrating the natural and social sciences as well as arts and humanities in addressing human nature problems? I argue in this review paper that special efforts need to be made towards the building and positioning of sustainability as an umbrella science for global sustainability research. The benefits of the new sustainability science advocated for in this paper are that; a) it offers a universal definition of sustainability that accounts for both the needs of life and the capacity of planetary life support systems to provide for those needs and b) proposes ways of bridging gaps among different research traditions, facilitating cross disciplinary communication and addressing the challenge of multiple meanings and definitions of concepts facing sustainability research today.     

Sustainability science: an ecohealth perspective

Sustainability science is emerging as a transdisciplinary effort to come to grips with the much-needed symbiosis between human activity and the environment. While there is recognition that conventional economic growth must yield to policies that foster sustainable development, this has not yet occurred on any broad scale. Rather, there is clear evidence that the Earth’s ecosystems and landscapes continue to degrade as a consequence of the cumulative impact of human activities. Taking an ecohealth approach to sustainability science provides a unique perspective on both the goals and the means to achieve sustainability. The goals should be the restoration of full functionality to the Earth’s ecosystems and landscapes, as measured by the key indicators of health: resilience, organization, vitality (productivity), and the absence of ecosystem distress syndrome. The means should be the coordinated (spatially and temporally) efforts to modify human behaviors to reduce cumulative stress impacts. Achieving ecosystem health should become the cornerstone of sustainability policy—for healthy ecosystems are the essential precondition for achieving sustainable livelihoods, human health, and many other societal objectives, as reflected in the Millennium Development Goals.     

可持续性科学:基于对象—过程—主体的分析模型

2015年9月,联合国通过了未来15年即2016-2030年的全球可持续发展目标(SDGs),这意味着可持续发展将进一步成为指导全球经济社会发展的核心概念和中轴原理。基于这个背景,对可持续发展的理论和方法加强整合性的研究,已经成为具有战略性意义的任务。本文提出基于对象-主体-过程的可持续性科学的分析模型,对理论研究和政策分析中的一些经常碰到的关键问题进行辨析:在对象维度,强调可持续发展是在生物物理极限内的经济社会发展,指出环境、社会、经济三个方面有重要的包含互补关系而不是简单的并列替代关系;在过程维度,强调可持续发展将适应性治理和源头性预防结合起来,运用压力-状态-响应即PSR方法进行全过程管理,而不是应对其中一个环节;在主体维度,强调利益相关者参与影响着可持续发展的理论和实践,不能脱离合作治理研究可持续发展。作为案例应用,讨论了可持续性科学视角下的绿色经济的对象、过程、主体问题及其意义。     

Research core and framework of sustainability science

This paper reviews recent achievements in sustainability science and discusses the research core and framework of sustainability science. We analyze and organize papers published in three selected core journals of sustainability science: Sustainability Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, and Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy. Papers are organized into three categories: sustainability and its definition, domain-oriented research, and a research framework for sustainability science. First, we provide a short history and define the basic characteristics of sustainability; then we review current efforts in the following research domains: climate, biodiversity, agriculture, fishery, forestry, energy and resources, water, economic development, health, and lifestyle. Finally, we propose a research framework for sustainability science that includes the following components: goal setting, indicator setting, indicator measurement, causal chain analysis, forecasting, backcasting, and problem–solution chain analysis. We emphasize the importance of this last component for improving situations and attaining goals.     

Visioneering: an essential framework in sustainability science

The science of sustainability has inevitably emerged as a vibrant field of research and education that transcends disciplinary boundaries and focuses increasingly on understanding the dynamics of social-ecological systems (SES). Yet, sustainability remains an elusive concept, and its nature seems unclear for the most part. In order to truly mobilize people and nations towards sustainability, we place emphasis on the necessity of understanding the nature, cost and principles of ‘visioneering’—the engineering of a clear vision. In SES, purpose is the most important pillar, which gives birth to vision—the key to fulfilling the systems’ mission. Such a systems perspective leads us to redefine resilience as jumping back to the original purpose, for which SES do not necessarily retain the same structures and functioning after disturbances. A sustainable future will require purpose-driven transformation of society at all scales, guided by the best foresight, with insight based on hindsight that science can provide. Visioneering with resilience-based systems thinking will provide communities with a logical framework for understanding their interconnections and purposes, envisioning a sustainable web of life, and eventually dancing with the systems.     

Quality criteria for visions and visioning in sustainability science

Envisioning how a desirable future might look is a long-standing effort in human evolution and social change. Utopian thought and visions provide direction for actions and behavior; more so, they create identity and community. Accordingly, the discourse on sustainability and sustainable development has recognized that positive visions about our societies’ future are an influential, if not indispensable, stimulus for change. Visioning is, thus, considered a key method in sustainability research and problem solving, for instance, in transformational sustainability science or in planning for urban sustainability. Yet, quality criteria for sustainability visions and guidelines on how to rigorously craft such visions are scattered over different strands of the literature and some are insufficiently developed. The goal of this article is to review and synthesize such quality criteria and design guidelines to inform sustainability visioning methodology. The review provides a concise reference framework for sustainability students, researchers, and professionals on how to enhance their sustainability visioning practices.     

Sustainability science: the changing landscape of sustainability research

Sustainability science is a rapidly expanding field, particularly given the current ecological crises facing many parts of the globe today. To generate a snapshot of the state of sustainability science, we analyzed the current status of sustainability research using citation and text analysis. By reflecting social needs on sustainability science and the increasing number of publications in this field, the landscape is expected to change during the last decade. Our results indicate that previously separated research clusters investigating discipline-focused issues are becoming integrated into those studying coupled systems. We also found the existence of hub clusters bridging different clusters like socio-ecological systems and transition management. We also observed a variety of other emerging research clusters, especially in energy issues, technologies, and systems. Overall, our analysis suggests that sustainability science is a rapidly expanding and diversifying field, which has affected many disparate scientific disciplines and has the potential to feed scientific understanding on socio-ecological systems and to drive society toward transition for sustainability.     

Constructing sustainability science: emerging perspectives and research trajectories

Over the last decade, sustainability science has emerged as an interdisciplinary and innovative field attempting to conduct problem-driven research that links knowledge to action. As the institutional dimensions of sustainability science continue to gain momentum, this article provides an analysis of emerging research agendas in sustainability science and an opportunity for reflection on future pathways for the field. Based on in-depth interviews with leading researchers in the field and a content analysis of the relevant literature, this article examines how sustainability scientists bound the social, political and normative dimensions of sustainability as they construct research agendas and look to link knowledge to social action. Many scientists position sustainability science as serving universal values related to sustainability and providing knowledge that is crucial to societal decision-making. The implications of these findings are discussed with an eye towards creating a space for a more democratic and reflexive research agenda for sustainability.     

Typology of scientific reflections needed for sustainability science development

Sustainability science is at an early stage of development. Among many other obstacles, there are two prominent issues hindering its advance. There is both a lack of a set of principles for knowledge construction, and a need to implement research to solve real problems. This paper proposes a typology of scientific reflections for meeting these two challenges and contributing to sustainability science development. This typology is made up of four kinds of reflection: practical, instrumental-methodological, theoretical-conceptual, and onto-epistemological. Each kind of reflection is based on a different type of question and gives shape to its respective type of research.     

Toward knowledge structuring of sustainability science based on ontology engineering

In sustainability science (SS), it is difficult to identify what needs to be solved, and it is also not clear how to solve the problems that are identified. There has been no consensus on the underlying question of “What is structuring knowledge in SS?” This paper focuses on knowledge structuring accompanied by supporting of thinking. It addresses the key challenges associated with knowledge structuring in SS, identifies the requirements for the structuring of knowledge, proposes a reference model, and develops an ontology-based mapping tool as a solution to one layer of the reference model. First, we identify the important requirements for SS knowledge structuring. Second, we develop a reference model composed of five layers based on three of the requirements. Third, we develop an ontology-based mapping tool at Layer 2 of the reference model for meeting the two major challenges for SS, namely, identifying what problems should be addressed in SS itself and proposing solutions for those problems. The tool is designed to store and retrieve information regarding SS, to provide access to a prototype ontology for SS, and to create multiple maps of conceptual chains depending on a user’s interests and perspectives. Finally, we assess whether the developed tool successfully realizes the targeted part of the reference model for SS by examining the tool’s conformity to the reference model, as well as its usability, effectiveness, and constraints. Although several issues were identified in the prototype ontology and the mapping tool, the study concluded that the mapping tool is useful enough to facilitate the function of Layer 2. In particular, the mapping tool can support thinking about SS from the viewpoint of: (a) finding new potentials and risks of technological countermeasures studied in SS; (b) helping users to get a more comprehensive picture of problems and their potential solutions; and (c) providing an effective opportunity to come up with new ideas that might not be thought of without such a tool.