Refine
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (12)
- Working Paper (2)
Language
- English (14) (remove)
Keywords
- Governance (2)
- Nachhaltigkeit (2)
- Steuerungsprozesse (2)
- Sustainability (2)
- Agriculture (1)
- Anden (1)
- Collaborative Initiative (1)
- Developing politics (1)
- Economic growth (1)
- Elektrifizierung (1)
- Energie (1)
- Energiepolitik (1)
- Energiewende (1)
- Energy Policy (1)
- European Union (1)
- Europäische Union (1)
- Forschungsevaluation (1)
- Gewässerbelastung (1)
- Indigenous peoples (1)
- Institutional Change (1)
- Institutioneller Wandel (1)
- Klimaänderung (1)
- Kollaborative Initiative (1)
- Landwirtschaft (1)
- Ländlicher Raum (1)
- Research Evaluation (1)
- Sustainable development (1)
- Transformation (1)
- Wasserqualität (1)
- Wasserverschmutzung (1)
- Water Pollution (1)
- Water Quality (1)
- Windenergie (1)
- chance equality (1)
- climate change (1)
- energy transition (1)
- entrepreneurship (1)
- family Law (1)
- gender studies (1)
- social sustainability (1)
- wind energy (1)
Institute
- Institut für Nachhaltigkeitssteuerung (INSUGO) (14) (remove)
Collaborative governance is a promising approach to address the difficult challenges of sustainability through global public and private partnerships between diverse actors of state, market and civil society. The textile and clothing industry is an excellent example where a variety of such initiatives have evolved to address the wicked sustainability challenges. However, the question arises whether collaborative governance actually leads to transformation. In this dissertation, the author therefore questions whether and how collaborative governance in the textile sector provides space for, or pathways to, sustainability transformation. In three scientific articles and this framework paper, the author uses a mixed-methods research approach and follows scholars of sustainability science towards transformation research. First, he conducts a systematic literature review on inter-organizational and governance partnerships before diving into a critical case study on an interactive collaborative governance initiative, the German Partnership for Sustainable Textiles (Textiles Partnership). The multi-stakeholder initiative (MSIs) was initiated by the German government in 2015 and brings together more than 130 organizations and companies from seven stakeholder groups. It aims at improving working conditions and reducing environmental impacts in global textile and clothing supply chains. In two empirical articles, the author then explores learning spaces in the partnership and the ways in which governance actors navigate the complex governance landscape. For the former, he uses a quantitative and qualitative social network analysis based on annual reports and qualitative interviews with diverse actors from the partnership. Then, he uses qualitative content analysis of the interviews, policy documents and conducts a focus group discussion to validate assumptions about the broader empirical governance landscape and the social interactions within. Finally, in this framework paper, he uses theories of transformation to distinguish forms of change and personal, political and practical spheres of transformation, and reflects on the findings of the three articles in this cumulative dissertation.
Undertaking local actions, such as implementing public (sustainability) policy, plays a crucial role in achieving sustainable development (SD) at the municipal level. In this regard, indicator-based assessment supports effective implementation by measuring the SD process, based upon evidence-based outcomes that indicators produce. Over the last decade, using subjective indicators, which rely on an individual's self-perception to measure subjects, has gained its significance in sustainability assessment, in line with the increasing importance of signifying individual's and community's well-being (WB) in the context of SD. This study aims to discuss and clarify the scope and functions of subjective sustainable development indicators (SDIs) conceptually and theoretically while examining the usability of such indicators employed in the practice of assessing sustainability policy and action process in a Japanese municipality. Furthermore, the potential usability of using subjective SDIs in monitoring a municipal initiative of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is also explanatorily examined. The present paper consists of a framework paper and three individual studies. In the framework paper, Section 1 introduces the global transition of SD discourse and the role that local authorities and implementing public policy play in achieving SD while outlining how WB positions in the SD context. Section 2 provides a brief overview of the major scope of overall SDIs at the conceptual and theoretical levels. Section 3 defines WB in the study's own right while exploring the scope of indicators measuring WB. In addition, this study strives to further clarify the peculiar scope of SDIs, measuring WB by synthesising the findings. Section 4 overviews how SD at the municipal level in Japan is practiced while acknowledging the extent to which residents perceive WB and SDGs in policymaking. Section 5 provides a brief yet extensive summary of the three individual studies. Section 6 discusses the findings while presenting implications for further study and practices of subjective SDIs. Furthermore, the three individual studies provide a thorough and in-depth discussion of the study subject. Study 1 illustrates the SD trend at the municipal level in Japan and the growing recognition of using subjective SDIs in public (sustainability) policy assessment in exploring comparative SDI systems to municipality groups. The findings, in turn, raise the need for a further study on subjective SDIs. Study 2 extensively discusses the concept of WB as the overarching subject to be measured while examining varying approaches and scopes of SDIs. It identifies three differentiated WB (i.e., material and social objective WB as well as subjective WB) and distinctive approaches of subjective SDIs (i.e., expert-led and citizen-based approaches) alongside objective SDIs. The findings suggest that these SDIs identified are, conceptually, most capable of measuring associated WB; for instance, citizen-based subjective SDIs can most optimally measure subjective WB. Finally, Study 3 examines the usability of (citizen-based) subjective SDIs in a practice of assessing public policy, aiming at municipal SD, and the potential usability of using such indicators in monitoring a municipal SDG initiative. The findings highlight the determinants and obstacles of using subjective SDIs as well as signifying WB in measuring progress of a municipal SD practice.
Environmental governance beyond borders: Governing telecoupled systems towards sustainability
(2023)
This doctoral dissertation analyses the environmental governance of long-distance social-ecological interactions in telecoupled systems in two issue domains: global commodity chains and infrastructure projects as part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Although both domains involve different governance actors, institutions and processes, they both concern the question of how the involved actors develop governance structures and institutional responses to telecoupling. This dissertation aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of how to govern environmental problems that are associated with global flows. Since many multilateral environmental governance initiatives have not yet produced the desired solutions to global problems, particular attention is directed at unilateral state-led governance approaches. This dissertation addresses the questions of (1) how to achieve a spatial fit between the scale of telecoupled systems and the scale of governance institutions, (2) how governance actors exercise agency in governing telecoupled systems, and (3) how state actors can govern the domestic and foreign environmental effects of telecoupled flows. The results show that creating a spatial fit in the governance of global commodity flows is challenging because boundary and resolution mismatches can emerge. Boundary mismatches denote situations where social-ecological problems transcend established jurisdictional boundaries, whereas resolution mismatches refer to governance institutions that have too coarse a spatial resolution to allow them to address the specific aspects of social-ecological problems effectively. No single governance institution is likely to avoid all mismatches, which highlights the need to align multiple governance approaches to effectively govern telecoupled systems.
This thesis aims to contribute to a better understanding of the actual implementation of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science. Following three aims, this work likes to (1) contribute to the measurability of transdisciplinary research processes as well as their societal and academic outputs and impacts, to (2) demarcate transdisciplinary research from other modes of research in sustainability science and to (3) identify and examine the determinants that shape the contribution of transdisciplinary research to societal action for sustainable development and to scientific knowledge production. To serve these aims a mixed methods approach is applied that combines strong quantitative elements with in-depth qualitative analyses that integrate the perspectives of practitioners. This thesis provides a broad set of indicators to describe and assess transdisciplinary research that translate theoretical concepts form transdisciplinarity theory into observable variables. The indicators offer a holistic perspective on transdisciplinary research by representing research mode characteristics, societal as well as scientific outcomes of research projects and their specific context. To theoretically demarcate transdisciplinary research from other forms of research, a narrative literature review first elaborates the differences between "normal science", political use of scientific knowledge and transdisciplinarity in their underlying logics of problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization. Subsequently, these concepts were compared with perspectives and expectations of practitioners in the forest sector on integrative research settings. Moreover, a cluster analysis of data from 59 research projects identified five research modes that empirically demarcate ideal-typical transdisciplinary research from other research modes within sustainability science: (1) purely academic research, (2) practice consultation, (3) selective practitioner involvement, (4) ideal-typical transdisciplinary research and (5) practice-oriented research. Based on this finding, transdisciplinary research can be characterized as an intensive, but balanced involvement of practitioners. It incorporates not only the needs and goals of the practitioners but also their norms and values. Ideal-typical transdisciplinary research goes beyond mere consultatory research approaches and must be distinguished from what is conceptualized as applied research. Regression analysis of 81 research projects and statistical group comparisons of the five research mode clusters show that societal and academic outputs and impacts vary with specific project characteristics and combinations of project characteristics defined as research modes. The findings indicate that more interactive research modes reach more societal impacts. In particular, the involvement of practitioners in early project phases and the targeted dissemination of the research results positively affect societal impacts. This finding also aligns with practitioner expectations on integrative research and research utilization, provided by qualitative analysis. Moreover, the quantitative results show that scientific outputs and impacts decrease with the intensity of interactions, indicating a trade-off between societal and scientific outcomes and impacts. Overall, the empirical results of this thesis support the claimed effectiveness of transdisciplinary research in providing societally relevant, applicable knowledge and encourage further funding of transdisciplinary research by funding agencies.