Search

Transformative research is a broad and loosely connected family of research disciplines and approaches, with the explicit normative ambition to fundamentally question the status quo, change the dominant structures, and support just sustainability transitions by working collaboratively with society. When engaging in such science-practice collaborations for transformative change in society, researchers experience ethical dilemmas. Amongst others, they must decide, what is worthwhile to be researched, whose reality is privileged, and whose knowledge is included. Yet, current institutionalised ethical standards, which largely follow the tradition of medical ethics, are insufficient to guide transformative researchers in navigating such dilemmas. In addressing this vacuum, the research community has started to develop peer guidance on what constitutes morally good behaviour. These formal and informal guidelines offer a repertoire to explain and justify positions and decisions. However, they are only helpful when they have become a part of researchers’ practical knowledge ‘in situ’. By focusing on situated research practices, the article addresses the need to develop an attitude of leaning into the uncertainty around what morally good behaviour constitutes. It also highlights the significance of combining this attitude with a critical reflexive practice both individually and collaboratively for answering questions around ‘how to’ as well as ‘what is the right thing to do’. Using a collaborative autoethnographic approach, the authors of this paper share their own ethical dilemmas in doing transformative research, discuss those, and relate them to a practical heuristic encompassing axiological, ontological, and epistemological considerations. The aim is to support building practical wisdom for the broader research community about how to navigate ethical questions arising in transformative research practice.

Uncertainty and change are increasingly commonplace as communities respond to impacts of social-ecological change including climate change, and dangerous levels of pollution. Given the extent of these crises, new approaches are needed to support responses. Here we identify challenges and discuss insights that the nexus of Senses of place (SoP) and mobilities research offers in navigating such uncertainty. We conducted a two-round Delphi, followed by a workshop, and collaborative writing process with a global network of researchers with expertise in either or both SoP and mobilities research. Participants identified five challenges at the place-mobility nexus that emerge when a social-ecological system is disrupted. We use the 2022 Odra River fish die-off to exemplify the identified challenges: 1) accounting for power dynamics, inequalities and motility; 2) doing justice to more-than human actors; 3) integrating multiple and sometimes nested spatial scales; 4) considering temporalities of place and mobilities, and 5) embracing multisensoriality. To address these challenges, we recommend drawing on diverse methods and knowledge co-creation processes that combine more-than-human perspectives, multisensoriality, and engage in the dynamic relations between places to understand people-place disruptions in the face of socio-spatial precarity. Addressing such knowledge gaps requires stronger collaboration of mobilities and place researchers.

Transformative research is a broad and loosely connected family of research disciplines and approaches, with the explicit normative ambition to fundamentally question the status quo, change the dominant structures, and support just sustainability transitions by working collaboratively with society. When engaging in such science-practice collaborations for transformative change in society, researchers experience ethical dilemmas. Amongst others, they must decide, what is worthwhile to be researched, whose reality is privileged, and whose knowledge is included. Yet, current institutionalised ethical standards, which largely follow the tradition of medical ethics, are insufficient to guide transformative researchers in navigating such dilemmas. In addressing this vacuum, the research community has started to develop peer guidance on what constitutes morally good behaviour. These formal and informal guidelines offer a repertoire to explain and justify positions and decisions. However, they are only helpful when they have become a part of researchers’ practical knowledge ‘in situ’. By focusing on situated research practices, the article addresses the need to develop an attitude of leaning into the uncertainty around what morally good behaviour constitutes. It also highlights the significance of combining this attitude with a critical reflexive practice both individually and collaboratively for answering questions around ‘how to’ as well as ‘what is the right thing to do’. Using a collaborative autoethnographic approach, the authors of this paper share their own ethical dilemmas in doing transformative research, discuss those, and relate them to a practical heuristic encompassing axiological, ontological, and epistemological considerations. The aim is to support building practical wisdom for the broader research community about how to navigate ethical questions arising in transformative research practice.

Ways of evaluating the societal impact of real-world labs as a transdisciplinary and transformative research format are under discussion. We present an evaluation approach rooted in structuration theory, with a focus on structure-agency dynamics at the science-society interface. We applied the theory with its four modalities (interpretation schemes, norms, allocative and authoritative resources) to the case of the Mirke neighbourhood in Wuppertal, Germany. Six projects promoted the capacity for co-productive city-making. The effects of the projects were jointly analysed in a co-evaluation process. Previously proposed subcategories of the modalities as an empirical operationalisation were tested and confirmed as being applicable. Five new subcategories were generated. The use of the modalities seems appropriate for co-evaluation processes. The tool is practical, focused on real-world effects, and suitable for transdisciplinary interpretation processes. We encourage further empirical testing of the tool, as well as development of the subcategories.

This article enriches the existing literature on the importance and role of the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in renewable energy sources research by providing a novel approach to instigating the future research agenda in this field. Employing a series of in-depth interviews, deliberative focus group workshops and a systematic horizon scanning process, which utilised the expert knowledge of 85 researchers from the field with diverse disciplinary backgrounds and expertise, the paper develops a set of 100 priority questions for future research within SSH scholarship on renewable energy sources. These questions were aggregated into four main directions: (i) deep transformations and connections to the broader economic system (i.e. radical ways of (re)arranging socio-technical, political and economic relations), (ii) cultural and geographical diversity (i.e. contextual cultural, historical, political and socio-economic factors influencing citizen support for energy transitions), (iii) complexifying energy governance (i.e. understanding energy systems from a systems dynamics perspective) and (iv) shifting from instrumental acceptance to value-based objectives (i.e. public support for energy transitions as a normative notion linked to trust-building and citizen engagement). While this agenda is not intended to be—and cannot be—exhaustive or exclusive, we argue that it advances the understanding of SSH research on renewable energy sources and may have important value in the prioritisation of SSH themes needed to enrich dialogues between policymakers, funding institutions and researchers. SSH scholarship should not be treated as instrumental to other research on renewable energy but as intrinsic and of the same hierarchical importance.

Sustainability transition research seeks to understand the patterns and dynamics of structural societal change as well as unearth strategies for governance. However, existing frameworks emphasize innovation and build-up over exnovation and break-down. This limits their potential in making sense of the turbulent and chaotic dynamics of current transition-in-the-making. Addressing this gap, our paper elaborates on the development and use of the X-curve framework. The X-curve provides a simplified depiction of transitions that explicitly captures the patterns of build-up, breakdown, and their interactions. Using three cases, we illustrate the X-curve’s main strength as a framework that can support groups of people to develop a shared understanding of the dynamics in transitions-in-the-making. This helps them reflect upon their roles, potential influence, and the needed capacities for desired transitions. We discuss some challenges in using the X-curve framework, such as participants’ grasp of ‘chaos’, and provide suggestions on how to address these challenges and strengthen the frameworks’ ability to support understanding and navigation of transition dynamics. We conclude by summarizing its main strength and invite the reader to use it, reflect on it, build on it, and judge its value for action research on sustainability transitions themselves.

The European Union has vowed to transition from a linear to a circular economy (CE). Many innovations, new business models, and policies have begun to emerge to support the push for further institutionalizing CE practices. A large portion of these attempts are based on transforming a flow currently labeled as a waste stream into a value proposition, i.e. a resource. However, this ironically increases the risk of creating a demand for these waste streams, which thereby may become commodified. In this article, we unpack the inherent dilemmas and implications created by this phenomenon, which we define as the Waste-Resource Paradox (WRP). Understanding the WRP is highly relevant, as its manifestation may lead to situations in which the further establishment of “circular” practices may reinforce linear economy by sustaining a waste (over)production in the system or causing undesired social or environmental repercussions. This can tighten a lock-in of the existing linear structures counteractive to CE that have not been explicitly identified or explored to date. We observed that the WRP may evolve and morph throughout time, across boundaries or respective to different societal sectors. Based on our findings, we highlight the profound implications of the WRP for the future of circularity and the potential consequences for a transition to CE.

We explore the tensions and dynamic connections between the place narratives of Faroese residents and those of Tourism Faroe Islands. Our findings demonstrate the need to shift from sense to senses of place in order to accommodate the multiple narratives of people–place relations, which are embedded in different standpoints on mobility and place change. Residents and brokers adopt different senses of place in order to respond to social and ecological pressures wrought by mobility, and the potential economic benefits of tourism growth and development. Concurrently, important relations exist among place meanings, one’s understanding of system variability and behavioural responses. Thus, senses of place emerge as a result of dynamic and complex relationships between different types of narratives on place that are constantly unfolding in response to social-ecological change.

The chapter focuses on people’s experiences of natural places and changes in their sense of place through the use of social media. It explores how social media are linked to senses of place and experiences of nature from a social–ecological–technological systems perspective. This is illustrated through four empirical cases representing specific people–place–tech systems, i.e. systems where different social, ecological and tech contexts interact. From a system perspective, those couplings are integrated parts of people’s experiences of nature that bridge virtual and physical worlds, thereby facilitating and communicating cognitive, affective and behavioural social-ecological interactions. These interactions foster novel individual and co-constructed meanings of place and thus plural senses of place; they can also mobilise people around shared meanings of place that are used to question dominant views. Thus, it is argued that social media can mediate and proliferate plural meanings of place, leading to new conceptualisations of senses of place.

Enhancing the urban quality of life (QoL) is an explicit policy goal of many countries, yet it is rarely studied using models that relate objective measures of the urban environment to the subjective evaluations of residents. It thus often remains unclear how planning interventions in the urban environment may influence residents' satisfaction with their living conditions. In particular, during periods of significant urban growth, such as those recently observed in Switzerland, which result in diverse, unwanted threats to the local QoL (e.g., loss of green spaces, traffic congestions, and fear of crime). This study uses data from a sample of 1,693 residents that participated in a postal survey about urban QoL. The responses were combined with objective attributes of residential conditions, using geographic information systems. Structural equation models were calibrated to examine the direct and indirect effects of important indicators of urban QoL, namely safety in public spaces and access to central urban facilities. The study sheds further light on the mediating effects between objective characteristics and subjective evaluations that influence the urban QoL. The results showed predominantly low correlations between objective characteristics and subjective evaluations of urban QoL, which confirmed the findings of the few previous studies on this topic. Surprisingly, this study also found a strong link between objective access and perceived accessibility. This relation was explained by the spatial scope of the study region and suggested that the scale discordance theory should be tested in future research. The findings implied that variations in objective measures do not reliably represent differences as evaluated by residents.

Sustainability science needs more systematic approaches for mobilizing knowledge in support of interventions that may bring about transformative change. In this Perspective, we contend that action-oriented knowledge for sustainability emerges when working in integrated ways with the many kinds of knowledge involved in the shared design, enactment and realization of change. The pluralistic and integrated approach we present rejects technocratic solutions to complex sustainability challenges and foregrounds individual and social learning. We argue that research institutions devoted to sustainability should focus more on creating the conditions for experimenting with multiple kinds of knowledge and ways of knowing to foster sustainability-oriented learning.

Exploratives Erproben nachhaltiger Lösungen findet stets ortsgebunden statt ‐ etwa in einem Stadtquartier. Überraschenderweise wird dieser räumliche Kontext bisher kaum thematisiert. Zeit, die Wechselwirkungen zwischen Nachhaltigkeitsexperimenten und räumlichem Kontext systematisch in einem Modell zu beschreiben. Conducting local sustainability experiments establishes an explorative approach for gaining action-oriented knowledge about sustainabilityrelated transformation processes. The experiments are situated in specific local contexts, such as within a real-world laboratory, thereby representing an intervention into the socio-spatial fabric that includes diverse interactions. However, it remains unclear as to how the socio-spatial context influences these experimental interventions and how it is simultaneously influenced by the intervention itself. Based on the relational understanding of space, we present an analytical model that describes the dimensions of the socio-spatial interactions of local sustainability experiments and provides guidance for their strategic design and evaluation.