The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research agenda

Over the last decade, sustainability science has been at the leading edge of widespread efforts from the social and natural sciences to produce use-inspired research. Yet, how knowledge generated by sustainability science and allied fields will contribute to transitions toward sustainability remains a critical theoretical and empirical question for basic and applied research. This article explores the limitations of sustainability science research to move the field beyond the analysis of problems in coupled systems to interrogate the social, political and technological dimensions of linking knowledge and action. Over the next decade, sustainability science can strengthen its empirical, theoretical and practical contributions by developing along four research pathways focused on the role of values in science and decision-making for sustainability: how communities at various scales envision and pursue sustainable futures; how socio-technical change can be fostered at multiple scales; the promotion of social and institutional learning for sustainable development.     

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.     

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.     

Advancing sustainability science: report on the International Conference on Sustainability Science (ICSS) 2009

As a new discipline, sustainability science poses a challenge to researchers focused on issues in sustainable development world wide. Although definitions vary, three characteristics appear to be fundamental: sustainability science is transdisciplinary, provides integrated analysis, and is aimed at action. There is clearly a need for such a science to address complex contemporary issues. Yet the question remains how to go about advancing this new integrated approach. The ICSS2009 conference was organized to address this question. This article, based on the conference report, provides a summary of the deliberations and highlights recommendations to advance this new science including creation of a global network of networks in sustainability science.     

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.     

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.     

The social dimension as a driver of sustainable development: the case of family farms in southeast Spain

The social pillar has often been treated as an ‘add on’ in sustainable development studies, and analyses of its ‘proactivity’ in economic, environmental, and social transformations to sustainability outcomes are scant. The present paper looks at the social dimension as a key driver of sustainable development. Social factors in the farming system in southeast Spain are analyzed to show how family farms and their networks can integrate socio-economic and eco-social goals, promoting the generation of synergies and trade-offs between the dimensions of sustainability. This study contributes to existing debate on the role of family farms in the framework of European rural development.     

Social-ecological system resonance: a theoretical framework for brokering sustainable solutions

Sustainability science is a solution-oriented discipline. Yet, there are few theory-rich discussions about how this orientation structures the efforts of sustainability science. We argue that Niklas Luhmann’s social system theory, which explains how societies communicate problems, conceptualize solutions, and identify pathways towards implementation of solutions, is valuable in explaining the general structure of sustainability science. From Luhmann, we focus on two key concepts. First, his notion of resonance offers us a way to account for how sustainability science has attended and responded to environmental risks. As a product of resonance, we reveal solution-oriented research as the strategic coordination of capacities, resources, and information. Second, Luhmann’s interests in self-organizing processes explain how sustainability science can simultaneously advance multiple innovations. The value logic that supports this multiplicity of self-organizing activities as a recognition that human and natural systems are complex coupled and mutually influencing. To give form to this theoretical framework, we offer case evidence of renewable energy policy formation in Texas. Although the state’s wealth is rooted in a fossil-fuel heritage, Texas generates more electricity from wind than any US state. It is politically antagonistic towards climate-change policy, yet the state’s reception of wind energy technology illustrates how social and environmental systems can be strategically aligned to generate solutions that address diverse needs simultaneously. This case demonstrates that isolating climate change—as politicians do as a separate and discrete problem—is incapable of achieving sustainable solutions, and resonance offers researchers a framework for conceptualizing, designing, and communicating meaningfully integrated actions.     

Developing joint educational programs in sustainability science across different universities: a case study from Japan

The challenge for sustainability educational programs lies in how to imbue students with the strong motivation necessary to move the world in a more sustainable direction. Five universities in Japan have mutually collaborated in the design and development of a unique curriculum and education system for sustainability science since 2008. Specifically, they have developed a common and remote lecture system called the “Frontier of sustainability science” (FSS). This paper discusses the concepts and challenges of FSS and how it was organized to teach students to actively learn how to work with people of various disciplines to realize interdisciplinarity.     

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.     

Risk communication and sustainability science: lessons from the field

Sustainability science aims to help societies across the globe address the increased environmental and health crises and risks that range from poverty to climate change to health pandemics. With the increased magnitude and frequency of these large-scale risks to different societies, scientists and institutions have increasingly recognized the need for improved communication and collaboration among researchers, governments, businesses, and communities. This article argues that risk communication has fundamentally important contributions to make to sustainability science’s mission to create use-inspired, “actionable science” that can lead to solutions. Risk communication research can advance the mission of sustainability science to engage a wide range of stakeholders. This kind of engagement is especially important in the context of addressing sustainability problems that are characterized by high levels of uncertainty and complexity. We introduce three core tenets of risk communication research that are fundamental to advancing sustainability science. Risk communication specifically offers an increased understanding of how system feedbacks, human perceptions, and levels of uncertainty influence the study and design of solutions within social ecological systems.     

Assessing sustainability in nature-inspired design

In the field of sustainable product development, a new perspective for approaching sustainability has been advocated, challenging designers and engineers to aim beyond ‘reducing unsustainability’. Several design strategies – including Biomimicry and Cradle to Cradle – have been suggested for developing truly sustainable, or ‘beneficial’, products. But do these strategies help in developing such products, and how to assess their ‘sustainability’? Based on a review of the objectives in nature-inspired design, we argue that assessing environmental sustainability is not straightforward. Whereas both Biomimicry and Cradle to Cradle build on the perspective of ‘achieving sustainability’, current life-cycle assessment-based tools are geared towards reducing current impacts. As a consequence, existing tools are insufficiently equipped for the purpose of the assessment: they do not cover some of the main results that nature-inspired design is set out to accomplish. To be able to include these results, we propose two new constituents to current life-cycle-based product assessment: assessing against conditions of sustainability and assessing ‘achievement’, the extent to which these conditions of sustainability have been achieved. Furthermore, the product context needs to be included for assessing beneficial impacts. This article discusses how these constituents can contribute to an assessment tool that enables designers and engineers to assess the development of environmentally sustainable solutions.     

Ecological distribution conflicts as forces for sustainability: an overview and conceptual framework

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.