Search

Abstract Transdisciplinary research has been introduced as an approach to integrate different bodies of knowledge to learn and to develop solutions towards socio-ecological transformations. In these concepts, broad stakeholder involvement is intended to promote knowledge integration, consensus formation and activation of local actors to initiate and advance learning and change processes. In doing so, however, transdisciplinary processes enter societal battlegrounds and meet conflicting interest and knowledge claims. Thus, building on the discussion on transdisciplinarity in the context of sustainability-related research, the paper seeks to understand when and why which types of conflicts emerge in sustainability-related transdisciplinary research, how they affect knowledge integration, and how they can be resolved. It develops a categorization of conflicts including differing values, conflicting interests, dissimilar claims of legitimacy, and diverse knowledge claims. They are applied empirically in the analysis of a project on regional adaptation to climate change in Northwestern Germany. It studies processes and outcomes with regard to the societal impact of the project and discusses experiences of conflicts and relevant solutions. The paper finds that societally relevant transdisciplinary research processes need to be prepared for conflict resolution and overcoming resistance and blockages in cases when consensus formation and mutual agreement is not attainable. Highlights • Analyses types of conflicts in sustainability-related transdisciplinary research • Finds that conflicts are rarely addressed in this literature • Identifies conflicts from differing values, interests, claims of legitimacy, and knowledge claims • Studies conflicts in an adaptation case in Northwestern Germany • Finds conflicts between values and legitimacy claims in the case study [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growing globalisation and climate change are challenging the sustainability of our societies. It is now clear that climate change and its devastating impacts cannot be resolved by new technology or governance alone. They require a broader, cultural shift. As a result, the role of human beings' ‘inner dimensions’ and related transformations is attracting increased attention from researchers. Recent advances in neuroscience suggest for instance that mindfulness can open new pathways towards sustainability. However, the role of mindfulness in climate adaptation has been largely ignored. This paper is the first exploratory empirical investigation into linking individuals' intrinsic mindfulness (as opposed to outside mindfulness interventions) to pro- and reactive climate adaptation. Based on a survey of citizens at risk from severe climate events, we explore if, and how individual mindfulness is correlated with climate adaptation at different scales. The results show that individual mindfulness coincides with higher motivation to take climate adaptation actions or to support them, especially actions that are ‘other-focused’ or support pro-environmental behaviour. Mindfulness may also corroborate the acknowledgement of climate change and associated risk perception, and it may steer people away from fatalistic attitudes. We conclude with a call for more research into the relationship between human beings' inner dimensions and climate adaptation in the wider public domain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The maintenance of climatic conditions that support biotic integrity and human life is a critical aspect of sustainable development. Serious instability in global economic and environmental spheres calls for an intensive search for new paradigms guiding human understanding, motivation and action. This two-part paper examines how central Buddhist world views and themes can contribute to effectively addressing climate change and other sustainability problems confronting consumer economies. Environmental, economic, ethical and cosmological dimensions of Buddhism are presented as a logical and practical basis for reducing the climate change pressures deriving from prevailing global modes of production and consumption. This first paper presents an analytical framework and philosophical base for understanding the causes and refining the goals behind human and societal endeavor. This frames the relevant adaptive responses outlined in the concluding paper. The paper begins by developing an innovative systems framework for analyzing major environmental problems such as climate change. Building on this framework, we then examine Buddhist insights into the fundamental nature of the behavior and driving forces that generate climate change. The model not only provides an improved basis for human–environmental analysis in general, but is applied to demonstrate and specify how the Buddhist world view could be operationalized to tackle anthropogenic climate change — the task is undertaken in second paper. Buddhist notions of interconnectedness, dependent origination, and mindful consumption and production can help explain and reshape human motives and actions for climate and other forms of environmental sustainability. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The evidence of impending and serious climate and other consequences of an expanding world economy based on fossil carbon energy continues to accumulate. This two-part paper examines the potential contribution of the world view and insights of Buddhism to this search. It presents both a conceptual and practical case that Buddhism can help shape and move towards an alternative and effective paradigmatic basis for sustainable economies — one capable of bringing about and maintaining genuine, high welfare levels across the world''s societies. The first paper outlined a comprehensive analytical framework to identify the fundamental nature of anthropogenic climate change. Based on the integration of two of the most influential environmental analysis tools of recent decades (the DPSIR model and IPAT equation), the framework was then broadened to facilitate ideas from the Buddhist world view by injecting two key missing aspects — the interrelated role of (1) beliefs and values (on goals and behavior) and (2) the nature of well-being or human happiness. Finally, the principal linkages between this climate change analysis framework and Buddhism were explored. In this concluding paper, the systems framework is used to demonstrate how Buddhist and related world views can feed into appropriate and effective responses to the impending challenges of climate change. This is undertaken by systematically presenting a specific, if indicative, list of relevant strategies informed by the understanding of interconnectedness and other basic principles about the nature of reality and human well-being as proposed in Buddhism. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper develops an Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare for Spain from 1970 to 2012 and seeks to update valuation approaches to a number of items. Two approaches have proven particularly controversial over recent decades; the costs of energy depletion and of climate change. The valuation implications in measuring present welfare have proven problematic, as both include future sustainability consequences arising from resource depletion and environmental impacts. This study includes a ‘ transition cost ’ approach to energy depletion, a modified approach to costs of climate change and water pollution, and removes the cost of ozone depletion. The results illustrate that while GDP per capita increased significantly, the ISEW per capita shows a widening gap. Household labour contributes strongly, but income distribution, energy depletion and costs of climate change limit improvement. Sensitivity analysis shows that accumulating climate change costs and escalating energy depletion costs have significant effects. Nevertheless, the new valuation approaches do not alter conclusions that welfare has shown little improvement. The ISEW provides a useful alternative to current indicators such as GDP subject to awareness of limitations. It is a measure of welfare that uses sustainability accounting methods when estimating costs, but is not an indicator of whether welfare is actually sustainable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Farmers in Europe act within guidelines set by agricultural programs, market demands and biophysical constraints. At the same time, they are social actors embedded in their respective family structures and individual lifestyles and preferences. We here present the socio-ecological land-use model SECLAND that provides an improved representation of the versatility in farmer's characteristics and subsequently its impact on land-use decision making. The model combines (1) an agent-based module (ABM) with farmers as agents whose intrinsic behavioural characteristics are represented via farming styles with (2) a probabilistic GIS-based forest regrowth module. We apply the model for the LTSER Eisenwurzen region in northern Austria to explore land-use patterns until the year 2050 under three different scenarios. Our results show the relevance of explicitly considering differences between the responses of individual farmers to changing framework conditions. In order to devise sustainable development paths for future agriculture, it is important to focus on farmers' well-being and recognize it as being equally important as economic success. • This paper provides the description of the bimodular SECLAND land-use model. • We depict the effect of intrinsic factors on farms decision-making. • We investigate the impact of socio-economic and climatic framework changes on land-use patterns. • We analyse intensity shifts, crop and forest type changes as well as forest transition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change research is currently a topic of great interest for economic researchers. In particular, environmental input–output analysis increasingly plays an important role in measuring the economic and environmental effects of sustainable development policies in Europe. Other approaches also exist, such as econometric modelling, in which impacts are quantified on statistical grounds and with certain desirable properties (efficient estimates, confidence intervals, hypothesis testing, etc.) that are not found in the input–output approach. Consequently, this paper merges the two approaches to address the calculation of unbiased and consistent carbon dioxide emission multipliers for Denmark and their respective confidence intervals. The use of the supply and use system instead of the symmetric input–output table also presents the opportunity to avoid the common problems associated with the construction of technical coefficients (technology assumptions, negatives, etc.). Moreover, a new policy-relevant application of these multipliers is introduced: the quantification of the performance of the carbon dioxide emission reductions carried out by industries via external trading. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The purpose of this paper is to contribute towards moving the predominant situation of weak sustainable development (WSD) in the direction of strong sustainable development (SSD). More people – academics, politicians, bureaucrats and laymen alike – need to recognize SSD as an alternative to WSD. A joint discourse of WSD and SSD is suggested, called reflexive sustainable development. Here, advocates of WSD and SSD must argue for each specific case why their solution is better. This will expose, amongst other things, the ethical foundations which form part of resulting policy advice. Reflexive sustainable development is to be framed in discourse ethics, thereby remedying the power imbalance and allowing for substantial discussion. Reflexive sustainable development builds on a common theoretical base but will not lead to consensus in all matters. A family metaphor is introduced to inspire a discourse of both consensus and compromise. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Recent years have seen a sharp increase in the production of indices of vulnerability to climate change. Most of these indices of vulnerability to climate change have been primarily used for awareness-raising purposes rather than for guiding international policy. The Physical Vulnerability to Climate Change Index (PVCCI) proposed in this paper has been designed as an index of exogenous vulnerability, not influenced by the present policy of the countries concerned. As such it can be used as a criterion for guiding the international allocation of concessional resources (in particular those devoted to adaptation), as well as for the identification of the countries that are most vulnerable for structural or physical reasons. The index has been calculated for 191 countries. LDCs, SIDS, and African countries have a higher average score. However, there is a wide disparity in PVCCI scores within these three groups of countries, implying that a country-by-country allocation of resources should be used rather than an allocation by country group. The findings appear to be robust after comparison of various options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecological economics was formally established in 1989 with the ambitious vision of developing a new economic paradigm embedding the social and economic systems in the biophysical world. Ecological economics had its roots in the biophysical understanding of economics that pioneers of the field Georgescu-Roegen (1971), Odum (1971), Daly (1977), Jansson (1984), Martinez-Alier (1987) and others developed while studying the thermodynamic bedrocks shared by natural and social systems. Subsequently, however, ecological economics has explicitly but controversially adopted a 'big umbrella' approach to methodological pluralism, focusing more on topics such as valuing nature and its functions rather than attempting to understand and quantify the biophysical roots of economic activities. Biophysical economics was established in response to these concerns, focusing more on developing analyses and models of the transformations of nature to generate wealth and approached mostly from an energy and material flows perspective. The present paper argues that to achieve its original vision ecological economics must return to its biophysical roots. Collaboration between the two fields will help the next generation of thinkers to address the socio-ecological challenges of the 21st century requiring an energy transformation called for by aspirations such as the Green New Deal and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. • The biophysical foundation of socio-economic systems must be at the center of the research agenda of ecological economics. • The socio-ecological challenges of the 21st century are biophysical in nature and will require education, management and policy that is based more on these biophysical realities and principles. • Prioritizing these biophysical foundations is fundamental for the next energy transition. • If proper biophysical procedures (such as comprehensive energy analyses) are not undertaken no "sustainable" recommendations can be considered valid. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When the Human Development Index (HDI) was introduced in the 1990s, it was an important step toward a more sensible measure of progress, one defined less by GDP growth and more by social goals. But the limitations of HDI have become clear in the 21st century, given a growing crisis of climate change and ecological breakdown. HDI pays no attention to ecology, and retains an emphasis on high levels of income that – given strong correlations between income and ecological impact – violates sustainability principles. The countries that score highest on the HDI also contribute most, in per capita terms, to climate change and other forms of ecological breakdown. In this sense, HDI promotes a model of development that is empirically incompatible with ecological stability, and impossible to universalize. In this paper I propose an alternative index that corrects for these problems: the Sustainable Development Index (SDI). The SDI retains the base formula of the HDI but places a sufficiency threshold on per capita income, and divides by two key indicators of ecological impact: CO2 emissions and material footprint, both calculated in per capita consumption-based terms and rendered vis-à-vis planetary boundaries. The SDI is an indicator of strong sustainability that measures nations' ecological efficiency in delivering human development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]