On the road to ‘research municipalities’: analysing transdisciplinarity in municipal ecosystem services and adaptation planning

Transdisciplinary research and collaboration is widely acknowledged as a critical success factor for solution-oriented approaches that can tackle complex sustainability challenges, such as biodiversity loss, pollution, and climate-related hazards. In this context, city governments’ engagement in transdisciplinarity is generally seen as a key condition for societal transformation towards sustainability. However, empirical evidence is rare. This paper presents a self-assessment of a joint research project on ecosystem services and climate adaptation planning (ECOSIMP) undertaken by four universities and seven Swedish municipalities. We apply a set of design principles and guiding questions for transdisciplinary sustainability projects and, on this basis, identify key aspects for supporting university–municipality collaboration. We show that: (1) selecting the number and type of project stakeholders requires more explicit consideration of the purpose of societal actors’ participation; (2) concrete, interim benefits for participating practitioners and organisations need to be continuously discussed; (3) promoting the ‘inter’, i.e., interdisciplinary and inter-city learning, can support transdisciplinarity and, ultimately, urban sustainability and long-term change. In this context, we found that design principles for transdisciplinarity have the potential to (4) mitigate project shortcomings, even when transdisciplinarity is not an explicit aim, and (5) address differences and allow new voices to be heard. We propose additional guiding questions to address shortcomings and inspire reflexivity in transdisciplinary projects.     

Sustainability education and a new master’s degree, the master of sustainability science: the Graduate Program in Sustainability Science (GPSS) at the University of Tokyo

The University of Tokyo started its Graduate Program in Sustainability Science (GPSS), offering a master of sustainability science degree, in 2007. The GPSS curriculum consists of: (1) knowledge and concept oriented courses, which cover sustainability-related subjects from a holistic viewpoint; (2) experiential learning and skills oriented practical courses, which offer practical exercises to acquire the skills and sensibility required of future leaders; and (3) the Master’s thesis, for which students are encouraged to address complex sustainability problems through a transdisciplinary approach. Sustainability science is not a discipline that can be defined simply by the subjects it deals with, but is an academic field characterized by core principles that include holistic thinking, transdisciplinarity, and respect for diversity. The GPSS has been designed so that students may gain the capacity to understand and practice these principles. The present paper describes how the GPSS has defined sustainability education and designed its curriculum accordingly.     

An applied methodology for stakeholder identification in transdisciplinary research

In this paper we present a novel methodology for identifying stakeholders for the purpose of engaging with them in transdisciplinary, sustainability research projects. In transdisciplinary research, it is important to identify a range of stakeholders prior to the problem-focussed stages of research. Early engagement with diverse stakeholders creates space for them to influence the research process, including problem definition, from the start. However, current stakeholder analysis approaches ignore this initial identification process, or position it within the subsequent content-focussed stages of research. Our methodology was designed as part of a research project into a range of soil threats in seventeen case study locations throughout Europe. Our methodology was designed to be systematic across all sites. It is based on a snowball sampling approach that can be implemented by researchers with no prior experience of stakeholder research, and without requiring significant financial or time resources. It therefore fosters transdisciplinarity by empowering physical scientists to identify stakeholders and understand their roles. We describe the design process and outcomes, and consider their applicability to other research projects. Our methodology therefore consists of a two-phase process of design and implementation of an identification questionnaire. By explicitly including a design phase into the process, it is possible to tailor our methodology to other research projects.     

The contribution of the sciences,technology and innovation to sustainable development: the application of sustainability science from the perspective of UNESCO’s experience

The contribution of scientific knowledge and innovation to sustainability is demonstrated. Theory, discoveries, programmes and activities in both the natural as well as social sciences fields have greatly helped with the environmental, economic and social challenges of the past and current centuries, especially in the past 50 years or so. Nowadays, we increasingly realize the intimate link between science and society, and the need not only for science to inform policy but also to address requests by governments and the multiple stakeholders confronted with the challenge to achieve sustainable development. Current barriers to how science is conceived and related education is delivered hamper true interdisciplinarity, and the emerging field of sustainability science attempts inter alia to clarify how ‘a new generation of science’ can be designed so as to promote more integrated thinking to tackle complex societal issues. At the international level, and more specifically in the context of the United Nations, the practice of science has always entailed the need to solve problems such as climate change, ozone depletion, disaster risk, lack of food security, biodiversity loss, social instability and ineffective governance—to cite a few. In this regard, science in an intergovernmental context is by definition science that has to assist with the struggle for sustainability. Yet, a higher level of integration and cross-fertilization among disciplines as well as of participation among concerned stakeholders in the design and implementation of science-based programmes and activities carried out by the United Nations (and, in this article, the specific case of its Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization—UNESCO—is presented) seems to be needed. The debate on sustainability science carried out in the academic circle and the experience of UNESCO in this area can be mutually supportive in further elucidating how, practically, the approach of sustainability science can enhance the achievement of sustainable development at multiple scales.     

Promoting integration and cooperation for sustainability views from the symposium held at UNESCO headquarters September 19, 2013

This public symposium explored ways to integrate knowledge about and strengthen cooperation on complex and interconnected global sustainability issues. (The symposium was organized by the United Nations University (UNU), The University of Tokyo Integrated Research System for Sustainability Science (IR3S), as well as UNESCO. Co-organizers were the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology-Japan (MEXT) and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). Participants included representatives from key institutes and UNESCO’s programs in the areas of water, ocean and ecological sciences as well as social and natural sciences, UNESCO Member states, scholars and policymakers. The symposium program and list of speakers is attached. See also www.isp.unu.edu). The central question put to symposium deliberations was one that many policy- and decision-makers as well as academic scholars struggle with today: how can we overcome barriers to action that will put societies around the world on a path to a more stable and sustainable future? This article examines the presentations made during the symposium and draws upon them to explore opportunities for sustainability scientists to help meet this challenge. The paper is divided into three parts: Part I provides a brief introduction that places the symposium in context of current debates on sustainability science and discusses (a) the role of UNESCO and (b) the relevance of sustainability science to policy- and decision-making for sustainable development. Part II examines three steps that can be taken now to overcome barriers to sustainability and the role of sustainability science in each (a) building societal and environmental resilience; (b) increasing collaboration across geographical and disciplinary boundaries as well as between scientists and decision-makers; and (c) enhancing education for sustainable development (ESD). The paper concludes with a review of why these keys are essential and steps that can be taken in the future to facilitate their widespread application at multiple scales.     

Structuring complexity for tailoring research contributions to sustainable development: a framework

Research aiming at generating effective contributions to sustainable development faces particular complexity related challenges. This article proposes an analytical framework disentangling and structuring complexity issues with which research for sustainable development is confronted. Based on theoretical conceptions from fields like policy sciences and transdisciplinary research as well as on an in-depth analysis of the concept of sustainable development, three meta-perspectives on research for sustainable development are introduced and elaborated. The first perspective focuses on notions of sustainable development, sorting out the problem of unclear or ambiguous interpretations of the general sustainability objectives in specific contexts. The second perspective introduces a broad conception of the policy process representing the way societal change towards sustainable development is brought about. It supports identifying those academic and non-academic actors and stakeholders that are relevant for coming up with effective knowledge contributions. The third perspective identifies different forms of knowledge that are needed to tackle sustainability problems as well as the significance of their mutual interrelations. How the framework perspectives support reflecting on the fundamental complexity issues research for sustainable development is confronted with is illustrated using a case example from natural scientific research in the field of land use. We argue that meeting the complexity inherent in the concept of sustainable development requires joint learning in policy processes, working out shared visions being in line with the core objectives of sustainable development and generating knowledge about empirical, normative and pragmatic aspects.     

Sustainable architecture evaluation method in an African context: transgressing discipline boundaries with a systems approach

This paper presents a method for poverty-inclusive evaluation of architectural sustainability. Existing evaluation tools largely ignore poverty—an omission that renders them inadequate for use in a developing country context. Methodological challenges arise from the complexity due to inclusion of poverty alongside numerous other sustainability aspects. Moreover, the shared transdisciplinary nature of architecture and sustainability coupled with inherent scale polarities add to the complexity. The evaluation method discussed here adopts concepts from systems theory to develop a framework that addresses the above challenges. It yields credible results in a developing country context with a dearth of research precedents and databases. The method was applied in an empirically based study of the sustainability performance of earth walling techniques in Uganda. The study showed that, from a sustainability viewpoint, wattle-and-daub performs best, followed by adobe, whereas the most popular brick was only better than compressed earth blocks. In their transparency, the evaluation method and results here presented can stand conventional academic scrutiny. But the conclusions point to the need for greater acceptance of transdisciplinary approaches to knowledge conceptualism if the holistic disposition of sustainability, architecture and sustainable architecture is to be accommodated.     

Creating a Place for Environmental Communication Research in Sustainability Science

Environmental communication scholarship is critical to the success of sustainability science. This essay outlines three pressing areas of intersection between the two fields. First, environmental communication scholarship on public participation processes is essential for sustainability science's efforts to link knowledge with action. Second, sustainability science requires collaborations across diverse institutional and disciplinary boundaries. Environmental communication can play a vital role in reorganizing the production and application of disciplinary knowledge. Third, science communication bridges environmental communication and sustainability science and can move communication processes away from one-way transmission models toward engaged approaches. The essay draws on Maine's Sustainability Solutions Initiative to illustrate key outcomes of a large project that has integrated environmental communication into sustainability science.     

Coevolving Ostrom’s social–ecological systems (SES) framework and sustainability science: four key co-benefits

Research on social–ecological systems (SES) is scattered across many disciplines and perspectives. As a result, much of the knowledge generated between different communities is not comparable, mutually aggregate or easily communicated to nonspecialists despite common goals to use academic knowledge for advancing sustainability. This article proposes a conceptual pathway to address this challenge through outlining how the SES research contributions of sustainability science and researchers using Elinor Ostrom’s diagnostic SES framework (SESF) can integrate and co-benefit from explicitly interlinking their development. From a review of the literature, I outline four key co-benefits from their potential to interlink in the following themes: (1) coevolving SES knowledge types, (2) guiding primary research and assessing sustainability, (3) building a boundary object for transdisciplinary sustainability science, and (4) facilitating comparative analysis. The origins of the SESF include seminal empirical work on common property theory, self-organization, and coupled SES interactions. The SESF now serves as a template for diagnosing sustainability challenges and theorizing explanatory relationships on SES components, interactions, and outcomes within and across case studies. Simultaneously, sustainability science has proposed transdisciplinary research agendas, sustainability knowledge types, knowledge coproduction, and sustainability assessment tools to advance transformative change processes. Key challenges for achieving co-beneficial developments in both communities are discussed in relation to each of the four themes. Evident pathways for advancing SES research are also presented along with a guideline for designing SES research within this co-aligned vision.     

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.     

The scientific challenge of bridging the gap from the local to the earth system level: lessons from the study of mangroves and people in North Brazil

This article aims to address the challenges of sustainable earth system governance from a multi-scale level perspective. The local to regional system level reviews findings from a social–ecological system approach of a mangrove ecosystem in North Brazil. Seven challenges (Glaser et al. in Mangrove dynamics and management in North Brazil. Ecological studies series. Springer, Berlin, pp 307–388, 2010) that could provide relevant knowledge to society were identified. Their respective justification and recommendations are presented here. Further, these “challenges from the field” are linked and discussed with those challenges on earth system level elaborated by the International Council for Science in 2010. There it was stressed that sustainability problems are increasingly caused by drivers from multiple spatial and institutional levels in a single global human–nature system. The comparison between the global and local to regional challenges shows that most of these are reappearing disregarding the level of analysis, indicating that there is a universal core of global change problems. However, there are gaps visible which hamper the effective connections across the different spatial levels. These pertain to the subjects of knowledge generation and stakeholder inclusion. The final section elaborates on these recognized gaps and their science–policy dimensions. The article closes with the identification of a number of factors which currently impede global sustainability efforts: shortcomings in inter- and transdisciplinary research practice, lack of consistent structures for earth system governance and shortcomings in dealing with upscaling challenges whilst remaining locally relevant. A blueprint for a globally focused but regionally informed social–ecological analysis framework remains to be worked out.     

Identification and analysis of the highly cited knowledge base of sustainability science

We investigated the interdisciplinary ‘pillars’ of scientific knowledge on which the emerging field of sustainability science is founded, using a bibliometric approach and data from the Web of Science database. To find this scientific basis, we first located publications that represent a relevant part of sustainability science and then extracted the set of best cited publications, which we called the highly cited knowledge base (HCKB). To find the research orientation in this set, we inspected the occurrence of fields and contrasted this with the occurrence of fields in other publication sets relevant to sustainability science. We also created a network of co-cited HCKB publications using the seed set citations, extracted communities or clusters in this network and visualised the result. Additionally, we inspected the most cited publications in these HCKB clusters. We found that themes related to the three pillars of sustainable development (environment, economy and sociology) are all present in the HCKB, although social science (not including economics) is less visible. Finally, we found increasing diversity of fields and clusters in the citations of the seed set, indicating that the field of sustainability science is not yet moving into a more transdisciplinary state.     

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.     

Evaluating knowledge integration and co-production in a 2-year collaborative learning process with smallholder dairy farmer groups

Although knowledge integration and co-production are integral to transdisciplinary approaches to foster sustainable change in social–ecological systems, this type of research is usually not evaluated based on assessments of the learning process. While participants are meant to be central in such approaches, too often, their perspectives are not central to the evaluation. Moreover, there is limited empirical information about how new knowledge is transformed into action. We respond to these knowledge gaps by analyzing (A) farmers’ perspectives on the collaborative learning process and (B) how farmers’ new knowledge can serve as the basis for changed actions. Theoretically, we are guided by second-order cybernetics and have integrated the Control Loop Model with Learning Loops to extend Kirkpatrick (Evaluating training programs: the four levels, 2nd edn. Berrett-Koehler Publisher, San Francisco, 1998) four-level evaluation scheme. We apply this to evaluate a 2-year collaborative learning process with two smallholder dairy farmer groups in Nakuru County, Kenya that aimed to co-develop local sustainable pathways to reduce milk losses. Results showed that farmers learned by (1) implementing corrective actions based on known cause–effect relations (single-loop learning); (2) discovering new cause–effect relations and testing their effect (double-loop learning); and (3) further questioning and changing their aims (triple-loop learning). Highlighting the importance of knowledge integration and co-production, this collaboration between farmers, researchers, and field assistants improved the farmers’ ability to respond, adapt, and intentionally transform their farming system in relation with complex sustainability challenges. Results demonstrate that the potential of our evaluation scheme to better reflect learning and empowerment experienced by actors involved in transdisciplinary research for sustainability.     

How researchers frame scientific contributions to sustainable development: a typology based on grounded theory

Given that research on sustainable development usually relates to real-world challenges, it requires researchers to align scientific knowledge production with concrete societal problem situations. To empirically explore how researchers frame scientific contributions when designing and planning projects, we conducted a qualitative study on land use–related projects based on the methodology of grounded theory. We identified major influence factors and various types of research design. Among the factors that influence project framing, scientific considerations were found to be more important than expected. Core characteristics of project framings concerned (a) type of scientific contributions envisaged; (b) real-world sustainability challenges addressed, and (c) researchers’ conceptions of how knowledge would reach its addressees. Three different types of project framing were found, suggesting that framing strongly depends on (the researchers’ perception of) how well a real-world problem situation is understood scientifically and how strongly are societal actors aware of the problem and act upon it. The spectrum of how researchers planned that knowledge would reach its addressees comprised communicating results to interactive conceptions allowing for mutual learning throughout the research process. The typology reveals a variety of useful and promising project framings for sustainable development research. The typology may serve to reconcile conceptual ideals and expectations with researchers’ realities.     

Contributions of sustainability science to the study of environmental health problems

From the ontological point of view, environmental health problems do not differ from problems of unsustainability. This leads us to think that sustainability science could contribute to resolve important questions that studies on environmental health are not resolving. A literature review was made in order to analyse the scope and limitations of studies on environmental health problems. Based on the characteristics of environmental health studies, we highlighted some examples of questions that are being ignored and analysed four contributions that sustainability science could make to solve them. These contributions come from three key components of sustainability science: (1) the unit of analysis—social–ecological systems, (2) a theory—resilience theory and, specifically, social–ecological resilience, (3) and the approaches of complex systems and transdisciplinarity. From a sustainability science perspective, four contributions could be made: environmental health problems are redefined as social–ecological systems; environmental health is assumed to be the result of adaptation processes; the environment and society are recognized as systems, not as matrices of factors; and human action acquires content and structure and, in turn, explains the behaviour of environmental health problems.     

Integrating Media Studies of Climate Change into Transdisciplinary Research: Which Direction Should We Be Heading?

Research in the area of media coverage on climate change communication represents one of the most prolific areas of inquiry within communication and mass communication studies. This body of literature, which ranges from empirical to critical studies, continues to expand. Much research has focused on representations of climate change causes, effects, and human actions, while some has assessed the impacts of these representations. What is broadly missing from this literature, however, is a discussion of how we might integrate media analysis into transdisciplinary collaborative research aimed at creating solutions to the social, environmental, and economic issues intertwined with climate change. Given the magnitude of problems the society and science are currently grasping with, it behooves us to understand how media studies can contribute most effectively to characterizing and solving problems. We maintain that the move toward integrating media studies into transdisciplinary collaborative research marks an essential transition for environmental communication in general, but climate change communication in particular, given the urgency and magnitude of creating meaningful adaptation and mitigation strategies to address this pressing, complex challenge. Drawing on our work as part of a large transdisciplinary sustainability science team, we provide a case study for understanding what collaborations are key to moving media studies into a transdisciplinary context and the key opportunities and barriers that come along with that move. We argue that media studies must increasingly engage directly in collaboration with other researchers, stakeholders, and communities to serve on-the-ground decision-making and enhance society's ability to take action.     

Evidence for the prevalence of the sustainability concept in European corporate responsibility reporting

This paper empirically examines the terminology used in the titles of corporate social responsibility (CSR)/sustainability reports in Europe. Our data supports the claim of the rise of the sustainability concept in corporate communication in comparison to other concepts. In detail this research analysed CSR/sustainability reports to support Matten and Moon’s [Acad Manage Rev 33(2):404–424, 2008] hypothesis regarding a recent European trend towards a more voluntary and explicit CSR practice. The second and main objective of the research was to describe statistically significant trends in the use of terms and concepts in CSR/sustainability reporting to better understand how European companies interpret CSR and sustainability and how they communicate it to their stakeholders. To this end, a content analysis was conducted on 329 CSR/sustainability reports from 50 leading European companies from Euro Stoxx 50 that were published between the beginning of online CSR/sustainability reporting in 1998 and 2010. Our data analysis clearly indicates that the use of social and environment-related terms occurred more frequently in the past and demonstrates the establishment of sustainability in corporate non-financial reporting. Based on the results of our empirical research, the final discussion explores the development and diffusion of the sustainability concept in both the academic and business fields and examines economic, environmental, and social implications. Different propositions are presented to explain the recent rise of the sustainability concept in European CSR/sustainability reporting, adding to the formation of sustainability as a concept and as a science.     

Framing natural assets for advancing sustainability research: translating different perspectives into actions

Sustainability is a key challenge for humanity in the context of complex and unprecedented global changes. Future Earth, an international research initiative aiming to advance global sustainability science, has recently launched knowledge–action networks (KANs) as mechanisms for delivering its research strategy. The research initiative is currently developing a KAN on “natural assets” to facilitate and enable action-oriented research and synthesis towards natural assets sustainability. ‘Natural assets’ has been adopted by Future Earth as an umbrella term aiming to translate and bridge across different knowledge systems and different perspectives on peoples’ relationships with nature. In this paper, we clarify the framing of Future Earth around natural assets emphasizing the recognition on pluralism and identifying the challenges of translating different visions about the role of natural assets, including via policy formulation, for local to global sustainability challenges. This understanding will be useful to develop inter-and transdisciplinary solutions for human–environmental problems by (i) embracing richer collaborative decision processes and building bridges across different perspectives; (ii) giving emphasis on the interactions between biophysical and socioeconomic drivers affecting the future trends of investments and disinvestments in natural assets; and (iii) focusing on social equity, power relationships for effective application of the natural assets approach. This understanding also intends to inform the scope of the natural asset KAN’s research agenda to mobilize the translation of research into co-designed action for sustainability.