Open Access

Wiederverwendung (WV) von Erzeugnissen ist als Ansatz hinsichtlich der Ressourcenschonung zu verstehen. Durch Verwertungsmaßnahmen mit dieser Zielsetzung - Vorbereitung zur Wiederverwendung (VWV) - kann man bewirken, dass einst als Abfall eingestufte Erzeugnisse ihre ursprüngliche Funktion wieder erfüllen, so dass im Prinzip weniger Ressourcen für die Bereitstellung von neuen Produkten beansprucht werden müs-sen. Zumindest theoretisch wäre es dann möglich, nachhaltige Entwicklung mit Wirtschaftswachstum zu vereinbaren. Aus diesem Potenzial ergibt sich die hohe Stellung sowohl von WV als auch von VWV in der so-genannten Abfallhierarchie. Nichtsdestotrotz zeigt die Realität, dass die Umsetzungsmöglichkeiten von WV bzw. VWV bescheiden sind. Auf die Ursachen und Folgen dieses Phänomens geht dieser Aufsatz ein. Schlüsselwörter: Wiederverwendung, Abfallhierarchie, Effizienz, Suffizienz, Konsum-entenverhalten, Ressourcenschutz, Nachhaltigkeit, Kreislaufwirtschaft

The world currently faces important issues concerning climate change and environmental sustainability, with the wellbeing of billions of people around the world at risk over the next decades. Existing institutions no longer appear to be sufficiently capable to deal with the complexity and uncertainty associated with the wicked problem of sustainability. Achieving the required sustainability transformation will thus require purposeful reform of existing institutional frameworks. However, existing research on the governance of sustainability of sustainability transformations has strongly focused on innovation and the more ‘creative’ aspects of these processes, blinding our view to the fact that they go hand with the failure, decline or dismantling of institutions that are no longer considered functional or desirable. This doctoral dissertation thus seeks to better understand how institutional failure and decline can contribute productively to sustainability transformations and how such dynamics in institutional arrangements can serve to restructure existing institutional systems. A systematic review of the conceptual literature served to provide a concise synthesis of the research on ‘failure’ and ‘decline’ in the institutional literature, providing important first insights into their potentially productive functions. This was followed up by an archetype analysis of the productive functions of failure and decline, drawing on a wide range of literatures. This research identified five archetypical pathways: (1) crises triggering institutional adaptations toward sustainability, (2) systematic learning from failure and breakdown, (3) the purposeful destabilisation of unsustainable institutions, (4) making a virtue of inevitable decline, and (5) active and reflective decision making in the face of decline instead of leaving it to chance. Empirical case studies looking at the German energy transition and efforts to phase out coal in the Powering Past Coal Alliance served to provide more insights on (a) how to effectively harness ‘windows of opportunity’ for change, and (b) the governance mechanisms used by governments to actively remove institutions. Results indicate that the lock-in of existing technologies, regulations and practices can throw up important obstacles for sustainability transformations. The intentional or unintentional destabilisation of the status quo may thus be required to enable healthy renewal within a system. This process required active and reflective management to avoid the irreversible loss of desirable institutional elements. Instruments such as ‘sunset clauses’ and ‘experimental legislation’ may serve as important tools to learn through ‘trial and error’, whilst limiting the possible damage done by failure. Focusing on the subject of scale, this analysis finds that the level at which failure occurs is likely to determine the degree of change that can be achieved. Failures at the policy-level are most likely to merely lead to changes to the tools and instruments used by policy makers. This research thus suggests that failures on the polity- and political level may be required to achieve transformative changes to existing power structures, belief-systems and paradigms. Finally, this research briefly touches on the role of actor and agency in the governance of sustainabilitytransformations through failure and decline. It finds that actors may play an important role in causing a system or one of its elements to fail and in shaping the way events are come to be perceived. Drawing on the findings of this research, this dissertation suggests a number of lessons policy makers and others seeking to revisit existing institutional arrangements may want to take into account. Actors should be prepared to harness the potential associated with failure and decline, preserve those institutional elements considered important, and take care to manage the tension between the need for ‘quick fixes’ to currently pressing problems and solution that maintain and protect the longterm sustainability of a system.

Over 25 years after the UNCED conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, agriculture in the European Union (EU) has below the line not come much closer to being sustainable. By now, efforts to promote sustainability in agriculture have predominantly been based on “mainstream science”. This has resulted in strategies directed mainly at agricultural production, measures targeted at individual farms, and a major focus on technology-centered solutions. Yet, there have been many claims emphasizing that such approaches are insufficient to deal with wicked, sustainability-related problems. Rather, it has been argued, we need to question the governance of sustainability issues, i.e. who makes which decisions in which way. A central aspect of sustainability governance is collaboration, which has been lauded for its benefits but also criticized for its challenges. The potential benefits of collaboration have apparently been recognized also in the context of EU agriculture. Yet, there has been a lack of holistic consideration of how collaboration can be systematically integrated and promoted in the governance of EU agriculture. Sustainable agriculture cannot only be encouraged through changes in the overall governance system but also through the support of existing and emerging small-scale collaborative initiatives for sustainable agriculture. Indeed, there has been substantial research on the conditions that influence success of similar collaborative initiatives. However, the knowledge resulting from this research remains rather scattered and does not allow for the identification of overall patterns. Additionally, little of this research specifically focuses on sustainable agriculture. What is more, the promotion of collaboration for sustainable agriculture is further complicated by the lack of clarity of the meaning of sustainable agriculture, which is an inherently ambiguous and contested concept. This cumulative dissertation aims to address these gaps by contributing to a better understanding of how collaboration can be facilitated and designed as a means to govern for and advance sustainable agriculture. For this purpose, the dissertation addresses three sub-aims: 1) Advancing the understanding of the concept of sustainable agriculture; 2) scrutinizing the current governance system regarding its potential to facilitate or hamper collaboration; 3) assessing conceptually and empirically how actor collaboration can be facilitated as a means to govern for sustainable agriculture, both from a top-down and a bottom-up perspective. In doing so, this dissertation focuses on EU agriculture and applies a mix of methods, ranging from qualitative to quantitative dominant. The findings of this dissertation highlight that collaboration has been underappreciated and even hampered as an approach to governing for sustainable agriculture. In contrast, this dissertation argues that collaboration offers one promising way to promoting and realizing agriculture and emphasizes the need to integrate different approaches to collaboration and to sustainable agriculture. Thus, the findings of this dissertation encourage and justify more research, discussion, and action around collaboration in the context of sustainable agriculture. Additionally, the dissertation provides first tangible insights both on principles for systemic change to promote governance for sustainable agriculture and on factors that are crucial for the successful management of small-scale collaborative initiatives. Most importantly, this dissertation advocates an ‘integrative attitude’ among and between scientists and practitioners which could enable more collegial, collaborative and hopefully more constructive research, discussion and action for sustainable agriculture.

Agrobiodiversität besitzt vielfältigen ökologischen, ökonomischen und sozio-kulturellen Wert. Sie ist eine grundlegende Voraussetzung für zukünftige Nutzungen und steht gleichzeitig in einem besonderen Verhältnis zu menschlichem Handeln. Zwar basiert Agrobiodiversität auf Natur, sie ist jedoch wesentlich durch landwirtschaftliche Tätigkeiten gestaltet worden und kann ohne weitere Nutzung durch den Menschen nicht erhalten und erneuert werden. Die vorliegende Dissertation analysiert die Gestaltung gesellschaftlicher Naturverhältnisse in der ländlichen Entwicklung am Beispiel der nachhaltigen Nutzung von Agrobiodiversität. Schutz und Nutzung von Agrobiodiversität wird hierfür in einem ersten Schritt als sozial-ökologisches Phänomen konzipiert. Daran schließen sich Analysen auf agrarpolitischer und landwirtschaftlich praktischer Ebene an. Anhand einer Analyse der der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik der EU (GAP) und im speziellen der Politik zur ländlichen Entwicklung wird deutlich, dass eine programmatische Orientierung an Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung besteht und das Paradigma einer multifunktionalen Landwirtschaft integrierende Ansätze bietet. Diese Ansätze werden jedoch weiterhin vor dem Hintergrund einer unhinterfragten Logik realisiert, die davon ausgeht, dass naturerhaltendes Wirtschaften nicht wettbewerbsfähig sein kann. Die GAP löst somit die hierarchische Trennung zwischen Schutz und Nutzung von Agrobiodiversität nicht auf. Trotz der Wirkmächtigkeit der GAP kann mittels der Fallstudie ´Arche-Region Flusslandschaft Elbe´ an einem konkreten Beispiel aus der landwirtschaftlichen Praxis dargestellt werden, wie nachhaltige Agrobiodiversitätsnutzung umgesetzt wird. Aus den Ergebnissen der Fallstudie werden abschließend Schlussfolgerungen für eine Weiterentwicklung der Politik zur ländlichen Entwicklung und EU-Agrarpolitik im Allgemeinen abgeleitet.

The future of forests is closely linked to climate change and energy transition because the preconditions for forest management are changed through climate and energy policies (Beland Lindahl and Westholm 2012). Forest management has multiple objectives, and different stakeholders have competing interests in forests. A strong dichotomy between environmental and economic interests has characterized forest policy and most conflicts about forests in the past (Winkel and Sotirow 2011). Climate change and energy transition modify this established conflict line because new conflicts related to climate mitigation, climate adaptation, and renewable energies have blurred the clear opposition between environmental and economic interest (Mautz 2010). In the context of the new challenges of climate change and energy transition, the need for effective, efficient and legitimate forest governance is gaining a new importance. Based on 86 qualitative interviews about forest conflicts and forest governance in five qualitative case studies, theoretical approaches focusing on multi-level and multi-scale governance are merged with the field of environmental and natural resource conflict research in this thesis. Forest conflicts and their governance are a multi-level and multi-scale issue. However, not so much is known about how collective and individual state and non-state actors act in complex governance systems and how they perceive governance systems. In order to contribute to the understanding of these knowledge gaps, this thesis tests the applicability of three theoretical perspectives on multiple scales and levels of decision-making (multi-level governance, polycentricity, politics of scale) to fruitfully study forest conflicts. Furthermore, the thesis provides empirical insights about forest conflicts in the face of energy transition and climate change. Based on the theoretical and empirical findings, this thesis provides practical recommendations to policy makers and practitioners on how to improve governance in forestry and the management of other natural resources. For example, this thesis shows the importance of considering different actor constellations in participatory processes at different governance levels, and that not every actor will react the same way to a certain method of decision-making. Furthermore, this thesis illustrates how trust building measures, such as enhanced communication between stakeholders, transparency in decision-making and forest education can reduce the risk of destructive conflict escalation. This thesis also demonstrates that energy transition and the discussion about climate change are sources of new conflicts, can change old conflicts, and add new, additional levels to forest governance. Thus, climate change and energy transition cause further fragmentation of forest governance and make forest governance more multi-level, create additional venue-shopping opportunities, and bring new actors into forest governance, causing new power constellations in the policy field. Forest governance is in a reconfiguration process which can be conceptualized as shift towards multi-level governance. Level choice and the relation of state and non-state actors in decision-making are important aspects of governance, thus the theoretical approach has yielded valuable insights in forest conflicts and the importance of scale construction in conflict discourses can be illustrated. Different levels are associated with different functions, strengths, and weaknesses of stakeholders; the perceptions of appropriate scale choice are often based on frames. The empirical findings have shown that level choice is often a normative and/or cultural decision, often no objective ´best´ decision-making level exists. Some actors consider different competing, overlapping, and nested decision-making levels to be an opportunity for interest realization; others feel helpless and overwhelmed in complex, multi-level systems. Different re-scaling strategies (up-scaling, down-scaling, fit re-scaling) are applied by actors to realize their interests. Non-state actors have an important function in linking processes from different levels. However, multi-level governance and related concepts have their limits for the explanation of forest conflict processes because some important factors cannot be captured with this approach. For example, social-psychological factors and conflict frames are important for the understanding of conflict development and governance and at a local level individual action and the relations between individuals crucially set the preconditions for the governance of conflicts.