No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Knowledge Generation and Sustainable Development
Abstract
This entry sketches the relation between knowledge generation (KG) and sustainable development (SD) as it appears within the realm of Higher Education for Sustainable Development (HESD). The suggestion is to distinguish three forms of appearances: The first relation can be called a passive relation. In this appearance, KG for SD is mainly undertaken by (academic) experts whose results and methods are conveyed to students in forms of canonical knowledge within HESD. The students’ role in KG processes is hence the role of passive recipients of this canonical knowledge. Opposed to this appearance is the active relation. Here, students (and other social actors) are directly included in the process of KG in order to craft applicable solutions to concrete challenges for SD. Moreover, KG is not restricted to the acquisition of explicit knowledge. It also includes the development of tacit forms of knowledge that are deemed important for the prospective professional activities of students. Nevertheless, both the passive and active relation share an external orientation of KG processes, meaning that their matter of interest is neither the participants themselves nor the way they produce new knowledge. The third appearance, in contrast, primarily construes KG as a subjective process in which new information concerning SD is translated into new knowledge representations. It can be called reflexive appearance, because it aims to obtain awareness of the subjective process of KG, thereby laying the grounds for constructive KG processes for SD in the passive and active sense.
... At Leuphana University, courses in sustainability science are offered that experiment with two, new pedagogical approaches which incorporate mindfulness practice: reflexive knowledge generation (Frank 2018;Frank and Fischer 2018) and self-inquiry-based/self-experiencebased learning . In the reflexive knowledge generation format, students systematically observe the way they deal with new information about controversial sustainability issues, for example, meat consumption. ...
In this chapter, we critically assess the connection between mindfulness, education, and ESD. The aim is to explore the potential of mindfulness as an educational innovation in the context of the SDGs, in particular SDG 4. After providing some background to the philosophy and practice of mindfulness (section “Mindfulness”), we systematically analyze and present its linkages with education in general (section “Mindfulness and Education”) and, subsequently, with education for sustainability in particular (section “Mindfulness in Education for Sustainable Development”). In this context, two highly relevant fields of application in ESD are discussed in greater depth: climate change and resilience (section “Field of Application: Education for Sustainable Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation, and Resilience”) and consumption (section “Field of Application: Education for Sustainable Consumption”). We conclude with some critical perspectives and possible ways forward (section “Critical Reflections and Ways Forward”).
Despite the rapid expansion of sustainability science in recent decades, sustainability crises have continued to grow. Sustainability researchers argue that this is partly the result of neglecting people’s inner worlds and call for a stronger consideration of inner states and processes in sustainability scholarship. We argue that the advancement of personal sustainability science, i.e., the systematic inquiry of inner worlds in relation to sustainability, is currently impeded by at least two unresolved issues. First, attitudes, emotions, values, and the like have frequently been the object of sustainability-related research. It thus remains unclear to what exactly researchers should more closely look at when inquiring into people’s inner worlds. Second, the epistemological and methodological foundations for conducting research on inner worlds remain underdeveloped. We illustrate that current research activities usually remain at a phenomenologically shallow level. In response to these issues, we provide conceptual, methodological, and normative cornerstones for a first-person inquiry within personal sustainability science, allowing for an in-depth understanding and potentially even a transformation of people’s inner worlds with regard to sustainability. Overall, we suggest redirecting personal sustainability science more strongly toward the inquiry into people’s subjective (i.e., first-person) experiences of inner states and processes unfolding in relation to sustainability.
Research on moral judgment has been dominated by rationalist models, in which moral judgment is thought to be caused by moral reasoning. The author gives 4 reasons for considering the hypothesis that moral reasoning does not cause moral judgment; rather, moral reasoning is usually a post hoc construction, generated after a judgment has been reached. The social intuitionist model is presented as an alternative to rationalist models. The model is a social model in that it deemphasizes the private reasoning done by individuals and emphasizes instead the importance of social and cultural influences. The model is an intuitionist model in that it states that moral judgment is generally the result of quick, automatic evaluations (intuitions). The model is more consistent than rationalist models with recent findings in social, cultural, evolutionary, and biological psychology, as well as in anthropology and primatology.
It is becoming clear that increasingly complex global challenges cannot simply be solved by new technology or governments alone. We also need to develop new social practices and encourage a broader cultural shift towards sustainability. Against this background, this paper explores the role of mindfulness in adapting to increasing risk and climate change. Based on a literature review, it assesses current research on ‘mindful climate adaptation’, and explores how individual mindfulness is linked to climate adaptation. While in practice mindfulness-based approaches to climate adaptation have gained widespread recognition (e.g., by the United Nations), the results show that related research is scarce and fragmented. There is almost no research into the role of mindfulness in climate adaptation. At the same time, new scientific domains are opening up in cognate fields that illuminate the mindfulness–adaptation nexus from certain perspectives. These fields include: (1) disaster management; (2) individual well-being; (3) organisational management; (4) environmental behaviour; (5) social justice; and (6) knowledge production. As new concepts and approaches emerge, they require critical construct validation and empirical testing. The importance of further investigation is supported by a complementary empirical study, which shows that individual mindfulness disposition coincides with increased motivation to take (or support) climate adaptation actions. The paper concludes that mindfulness has the potential to facilitate adaptation at all scales (through cognitive, managerial, structural, ontological, and epistemological change processes) and should, therefore, become a core element in climate and associated sustainability research. Finally, it sketches the conceptual trajectories of the mindfulness–adaptation nexus and presents a pioneering, comprehensive framework for ‘mindful climate adaptation’.
Why do people eat animals despite their morally-affective relation to other sentient beings? In this paper, I argue that an adaptation of one‘s eating behaviour to personal animal-ethical standards is accompanied by a series of emotional, social and identitary challenges. For many agents, such challenges cannot be overcome. Instead, they draw upon rationalizations in order to soothe the cognitive dissonance prompted by their ambivalent relation to animals.
The UN’s Sustainable development Goals (SDGs) are the most significant global effort so far to advance global sustainable development. Bertelsmann Stiftung and the sustainable development solutions network released an SDG index to assess countries’ average performance on SDGs. Ranking high on the SDG index strongly correlates with high per person demand on nature (or “Footprints”), and low ranking with low Footprints, making evident that the SDGs as expressed today vastly underperform on sustainability. Such underperformance is anti-poor because lowest-income people exposed to resource insecurity will lack the financial means to shield themselves from the consequences. Given the significance of the SDGs for guiding development, rigorous accounting is essential for making them consistent with the goals of sustainable development: thriving within the means of planet Earth.
This study focuses on the nature of teachers’ arguments for and rebuttals to 10 denial theories about anthropogenic climate change that are most commonly encountered in the media and public debates. Through a semi-structured survey, the study collected data from 24 participants who are K-12 teachers in Maryland and Delaware. The deductive coding and frequency analysis of data shows that although all participants of our study agree with the importance of teaching anthropogenic climate change, some teachers agree with the denial theories of climate change. The arguments for the denial theories show less epistemic quality than the rebuttals against denial theories. Moreover, teachers went beyond the textbooks and searched for other varied sources of information. However, we noticed that teachers might still doubt the anthropogenic causes of climate change. The study further uses intertextual discourse analysis to explore the reasons why use of sources might still leave teachers confused.
This paper explores the current role of mindfulness in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. Based on a qualitative literature review that is complemented by an experimental learning lab, we sketch the patterns and core conceptual trajectories of the mindfulness–sustainability relationship. In addition, we assess this relationship within the field of climate change adaptation and risk reduction. The results highlight that notions such as ‘sustainability from within’, ‘ecological mindfulness’, ‘organizational mindfulness’, and ‘contemplative practices’ have been neglected in sustainability science and teaching. Whilst little sustainability research addresses mindfulness, there is scientific support for its positive influence on: (1) subjective well-being; (2) the activation of (intrinsic/ non-materialistic) core values; (3) consumption and sustainable behavior; (4) the human–nature connection; (5) equity issues; (6) social activism; and (7) deliberate, flexible, and adaptive responses to climate change. Most research relates to post-disaster risk reduction, although it is limited to the analysis of mindfulness-related interventions on psychological resilience. Broader analyses and foci are missing. In contrast, mindfulness is gaining widespread recognition in practice (e.g., by the United Nations, governmental and non-governmental organizations). It is concluded that mindfulness can contribute to understanding and facilitating sustainability, not only at the individual level, but sustainability at all scales, and should, thus, become a core concept in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. More research that acknowledges positive emotional connections, spirituality, and mindfulness in particular is called for, acknowledging that (1) the micro and macro are mirrored and interrelated, and (2) non-material causation is part of sustainability. This paper provides the first comprehensive framework for contemplative scientific inquiry, practice, and education in sustainability.
Successful careers in sustainability are determined by positive real-world change towards
sustainability. This success depends heavily on professional skills in effective and compassionate
communication, collaborative teamwork, or impactful stakeholder engagement, among others. These
professional skills extend beyond content knowledge and methodical expertise. Current sustainability
programs do not sufficiently facilitate students’ acquisition of such skills. This article presents a
brief summary of professional skills, synthesized from the literature, and why they are relevant for
sustainability professionals. Second, it presents how these skills have been taught in an undergraduate
course in sustainability at Arizona State University, USA. Third, it critically discusses the effectiveness
and challenges of that exemplary course. Finally, the article concludes with outlining the lessons
learned that should be incorporated into future course offerings.
Despite the widespread recognition of climate change as the single biggest global threat, the willingness of people to change their behavior to mitigate its effects is limited. Past research, often focusing on specific categories of behavior, has highlighted a very significant gap between people’s intentions to behave more sustainably and their actual behavior. This paper presents a new approach to this issue, by using more open-ended questions to map a much broader range of cognitions and emotions about good environmental behavior. Two key findings emerged. Firstly, participants were aware of the contradiction between their level of concern about the environment and their willingness to act in more sustainable ways. The qualitative analysis further revealed that this discrepancy often hinged on a lack of knowledge about how to act more sustainably; the analysis also revealed a desire for more information about genuinely green behavior. Secondly, pro-environmental behavior was often conceptualized by participants in essentially “social” terms; anticipated emotions relating to sustainable/non-sustainable behavior were as closely tied to the behavior of one’s peers as to one’s own behavior. This finding suggests that we must highlight the social dimension in any interventions to increase sustainable behaviors amongst the public.
The term ‘contemplative’ is now frequently used in the fast growing field of meditation research. Yet, there is no consensus regarding the definition of contemplative science. Meditation studies commonly imply that contemplative practices such as mindfulness or compassion are the subject of contemplative science. Such approach, arguably, contributes to terminological confusions in the field, is not conducive to the development of an overarching theory in contemplative science, and overshadows its unique methodological features. This paper outlines an alternative approach to defining contemplative science which aims to focus the research on the core capacities, processes and states of the mind modified by contemplative practices. It is proposed that contemplative science is an interdisciplinary study of the metacognitive self-regulatory capacity (MSRC) of the mind and associated modes of existential awareness (MEA) modulated by motivational/intentional and contextual factors of contemplative practices. The MSRC is a natural propensity of the mind which enables introspective awareness of mental processes and behavior, and is a necessary pre-requisite for effective self-regulation supporting well-being. Depending on the motivational/intentional and contextual factors of meditation practice, changes in the metacognitive self-regulatory processes enable shifts in MEA which determine our sense of self and reality. It is hypothesized that changes in conceptual processing are essential mediators between the MSRC, motivational/intentional factors, context of meditation practice, and the modulations in MEA. Meditation training fosters and fine-tunes the MSRC of the mind and supports development of motivational/intentional factors with the ultimate aim of facilitating increasingly advanced MEA. Implications of the proposed framework for definitions of mindfulness and for future systematic research across contemplative traditions and practices are discussed. It is suggested that the proposed definition of contemplative science may reduce terminological challenges in the field and make it more inclusive of varied contemplative practices. Importantly, this approach may encourage development of a more comprehensive contemplative science theory recognizing the essential importance of first- and second-person methods to its inquiry, thus uniquely contributing to our understanding of the mind.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to report on the creation of innovative methods for engaging in conversations about everyday risk.
Design/methodology/approach
A range of methods from conventional survey research to open-ended, semi-structured conversations and focus groups were used in the series of studies that serve as the subject of this meta-study. The meta-study uses participant observation, key informant interviews and project reports to narrate and evaluate the evolution of Frontline as an action planning, monitoring, advocacy and research tool.
Findings
The Views from the Frontline (VFL) methods began as the bottom-up mirror of a top-down monitoring approach used by the United Nations (Hyogo Framework for Action Monitor). Limitations of such bottom up monitoring led to creation of guidelines for formalising local knowledge resulting from actions – Action at the Frontline (AFL) and, later, Frontline, a flexible tool for eliciting experiences of everyday risk. The earlier VFL monitoring approach had shared outsiders’ assumptions about the nature of the “problem” and limited the degree to which local residents could express their own experiences and priorities.
Originality/value
Extensive use of this suite of methods has shown that civil society organisations are fully capable of conducting credible research when properly supported and motivated. Use of these methods has so far provided strong support for policy advocacy at the global scale, has had moderate success in liaison with national policy makers and slow but promising results as a learning/action tool at the local scale. Frontline has as yet untapped potential as a resource for academic research.
This article attempts a broad characterization of environmental education (EE) and education for sustainable development (ESD), and includes a short overview of the history of the field, key debates, the main approaches to ESD and EE, and a look toward the future. However, such a brief account should not be considered to be fully comprehensive, and can only be considered to provide a broad overview of the field from the authors' perspectives.
This paper distills core lessons about how researchers (scientists, engineers, planners, etc.) interested in promoting sustainable development can increase the likelihood of producing usable knowledge. We draw the lessons from both practical experience in diverse contexts around the world, and from scholarly advances in understanding the relationships between science and society. Many of these lessons will be familiar to those with experience in crafting knowledge to support action for sustainable development. But few are included in the formal training of researchers. As a result, when scientists and engineers first venture out of the lab or library with the goal of linking their knowledge to action, the outcome has often been ineffectiveness and disillusionment. We therefore articulate here a core set of lessons that we believe should become part of the basic training for researchers interested in crafting usable knowledge for sustainable development. These lessons entail at least four things researchers should know, and four things they should do. The “knowing” lessons involve understanding the coproduction relationships through which knowledge making and decision making shape one another in social-environmental systems. We highlight the lessons that emerge from examining those coproduction relationships through the ‘ICAP’ lens, viewing them from the perspectives of Innovation systems, Complex systems, Adaptive systems, and Political systems. The “doing” lessons involve improving the capacity of the research community to put its understanding of such systems into practice. We highlight steps though which researchers can help build capacities for stakeholder collaboration, social learning, knowledge governance, and researcher training.
(This paper is part of a PNAS Special Feature on "Knowledge Systems for Sustainable Development", available here: http://onlinedigeditions.com/publication?i=305487 ).
The Routledge International Handbook of Higher Education for Sustainable Development gives a systematic and comprehensive overview of existing and upcoming research approaches for higher education for sustainable development. It provides a unique resource for researchers engaged in the field of higher education for sustainable development by connecting theoretical aspects of the range of relevant methodologies, showing the interdisciplinary aspects of the research field and illustrating the breadth of research directions.
With a team of international authors from leading universities in research and teaching in higher education for sustainable development this Handbook brings together a broad range of research approaches and shows how these approaches are reflected in the research practice in higher education for sustainable development. Key topics include:
- Research Paradigms and Methodologies
- Ongoing and Future Directions of Research
- Meta-Analysis and Reviews
- Policy and Politics
- Challenges for Implementation
- Action Research and Transdisciplinary Perspective
- Gender, Diversity and Post-Colonial Perspectives
- Operationalising Competencies
- Outcome-Oriented Research
- Curriculum Change
- Organisational Change and Organisational Learning
- Community and Partnerships
- University Appraisal Systems and Indicators
- Evaluation Approaches
- Engaging Academic Teachers
- Good Practice Learning and Teaching
- Transformative Leadership and Change Strategies
This Handbook is an invaluable research and teaching tool for all those working in higher education for sustainable development.
Mutual learning is a fundamental element in transdisciplinary (Td) sustainability research. It allows for integrating knowledge and experiences gained in different contexts, including the building of consensus about necessary transformations to reach sustainability solutions. To successfully achieve mutual learning, appropriate conditions are required. These range from providing boundary objects that serve knowledge integration, the development of a common language and knowledge, and shared experiences to transparency concerning the objectives and motives of all those involved. Mutual learning is particularly challenging from an intercultural perspective in both local and global processes. Interaction among the participants is based on experiential, educational, and cultural dimensions that induce different types of knowledge and cognition, thought styles, socializations, constraints and preferences in socio-political structures and day-to-day practices. In this article, formats of case-based Mutual Learning Sessions (cbMLS) that organize mutual learning based on a single case or a set of cases are presented. The different formats have been developed and studied in the context of a global Td process on phosphorus management (i.e., the Global TraPs project). After presenting the formats of cbMLS, the paper presents the first results from an empirical, integrated qualitative study based on interviews and observations, and discusses potentials and limitations of cbMLS, in particular their application in an international context. We further highlight challenges and learning experiences that have to be met in Td mutual learning processes.
The present research aimed to investigate the decision-making process for sustainable holidays, as a type of ethical consumption related to environmental welfare. Using semi-structured in-depth interviews with 20 German holidaymakers of different ages, it was found that individuals use cognitive processes such as neutralisation and mental accounting to justify their unethical/unsustainable choices and to manage negative emotions. The findings also indicated a lack of spillovers between sustainable behaviours at home and holiday-related behaviours. This could be explained by the identification of "ethical" and "unethical" mental accounts, which the interviewees have disclosed. When the compensation between the two types of mental accounts takes place, neutralisation is not used. It was also found that positive and negative emotions could motivate the choice of sustainable holidays. These findings have implications in relation to marketing communications aimed at creating awareness and encouraging the purchase of sustainable holidays.
Confirmation bias, as the term is typically used in the psychological literature, connotes the seeking or interpreting of evidence in ways that are partial to existing beliefs, expectations, or a hypothesis in hand. The author reviews evidence of such a bias in a variety of guises and gives examples of its operation in several practical contexts. Possible explanations are considered, and the question of its utility or disutility is discussed.
In this contribution a key policy 'tool' used in the Dutch Environmental Edu-cation and Learning for Sustainability Policy framework is introduced as a means to develop a sense of place and associated ecological mindfulness. The key elements of this tool, called the vital coalition, are described while an example of its use in practice, is analysed using a form of reflexive monitoring and evaluation. The example focuses on a multi-stakeholder learning process around the transformation of a somewhat sterile pre-school playground into an intergenerational green place suitable for play, discovery and engagement. Our analysis of the policy-framework and the case leads us to pointing out the importance of critical interven-tions at so-called tipping points within the transformation process and a discussion of the potential of hybrid learning in vital coalitions in strengthening ecological mindfulness. This paper does not focus on establishing an evidence base for the causality between this type of learning and a change in behavior or mindfulness among participants as a result contributing to a vital coalition but rather focusses on the conditions, processes and interventions that allow for such learning to take place in the first place. Keywords Ecological mindfulness Á Vital coalitions Á Hybrid learning Á Place-based education Á Reflexivity In recent years place-based education—which we consider a form of science education as a cultural, cross-age, cross-class, and cross-disciplinary phenomenon—has been receiving increased attention from educators and policy-makers as a means to help people, young and old, re-connect with the physical, material and socio-ecological world they inhabit. There M. Mueller and D. Greenwood, Editors for Special Issue on Ecological Mindfulness and Cross-Hybrid Learning.
Whilst objectivist epistemologies have been dominant in productivist agriculture, the local, cultural and environmental contexts of sustainable agriculture are more fully informed by constructivist epistemologies. Within constructivism, tacit knowledge – an intuitive knowledge that cannot be formalised – is explored empirically. Six types of tacit knowledge were identified as a result of working closely with a sustainable food network: the Brighton and Hove Food Partnership. Customs cohere around integrating food with other sustainable activity; developing a complex unregulated organisation requires savoir-faire. The unique character of Brighton has developed an operational folklore, and network identity is important, particularly in relation to conventional agriculture and to the city as a whole. A confidence in people's roles has helped define network development and using different discourses, communicating the network in diverse contexts, is important for understanding the network. All these tacit knowledge elements have a strong influence over the network but have to be assimilated knowledge rather than learned.
Thepapersinthisspecialissueprovideavariety ofperspectivesonSSIandsustainabilitylinkedto science education. Indeed, if one were looking for some indication of convergence in thisgrowing area of research interest one would not find a clear indication of it here. However, thepapers are interesting for this very reason of the ir diversity, since they represent a number ofstrands of thinking relating sustainability and SSIs, and school science. While the papers allrelatecentrallytoSSIasanapproachto teachin gandlearning,theyfocustoavaryingdegreeonsustainability, and on science. In this commentary, I will first attempt an overview of the issuesthey raise and attempt to situate them with respect to some common strands of thinking, beforeresponding to the key implications I see in the pa pers for the school science curriculum. I willjustifydoingthisonthreegrounds.First,allthepapersinsomemeasurehavethingstosayaboutpedagogy, structure and epistemology of school science, and they say this in interestinglydifferent ways. Second, whatever the historical approach in environmental education/ESDresearch, often involving an antagonistic stance to the traditional science curriculum and itscompanion epistemology (an issue raised by Robottom and echoed to some degree in a numberof the other papers), these papers as a set demons trate clearly the important role that the schoolscience curriculum could, and sometimes does, pla y in student learning about sustainability. Infact, on my reading, the ‘pointy end’ of the issues raised in the papers relates to this issue of thenatureandstatusofscienceknowledgeinthecurri culumanditsappropriaterole.Third,Ihavealongstandinginterestinreforminscienceeducation,andtheissuesraisedinthesepapersprovidesomepowerfulcommentariesonthewaysthatscienceeducationmightbe,andshouldbeframedif it is to engage students in a science that is relevant and powerful for them as future citizens.The papers have much to say on a number of important curriculum dimensions:1. the structures of teaching and learning about SSI related to the science curriculum area2. the pedagogies evident in the models of SSI teaching and learning3. the broader purposes that frame the interventions4. the epistemological stances evident in the interventions described, particularlyconcerning the status and setting of scientific knowledge
Purpose
Academic sustainability programs aim to develop key competencies in sustainability, including problem‐solving skills and the ability to collaborate successfully with experts and stakeholders. These key competencies may be most fully developed in new teaching and learning situations. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the kind of, and extent to which, these key competencies can be acquired in real‐world learning opportunities.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper summarizes key competencies in sustainability, identifies criteria for real‐world learning opportunities in sustainability programs, and draws on dominant real‐world learning models including project‐ and problem‐based learning, service learning, and internships in communities, businesses, and governments. These components are integrated into a framework to design real‐world learning opportunities.
Findings
A “functional and progressive” model of real‐world learning opportunities seems most conducive to introduce students (as well as faculty and community partners) to collaborative research between academic researchers and practitioners. The stepwise process combined with additional principles allows building competencies such as problem solving, linking knowledge to action, and collaborative work, while applying concepts and methods from the field of sustainability.
Practical implications
The paper offers examples of real‐world learning opportunities at the School of Sustainability at Arizona State University, discusses general challenges of implementation and organizational learning, and draws attention to critical success factors such as collaborative design, coordination, and integration in general introductory courses for undergraduate students.
Originality/value
The paper contributes to sustainability education by clarifying how real‐world learning opportunities contribute to the acquisition of key competencies in sustainability. It proposes a functional and progressive model to be integrated into the (undergraduate) curriculum and suggests strategies for its implementation.
A motivational system approach to avoidance behavior is presented. According to this approach, a motivational state increases the probability of relevant response patterns and establishes the appropriate or “ideal” consummatory stimuli as positive reinforcers. In the case of feeding motivation, for example, hungry rats are likely to explore and gnaw, and to learn to persist in activities correlated with the reception of consummatory stimuli produced by ingestion of palatable substances. In the case of defense motivation, fearful rats are likely to flee or freeze, and to learn to persist in activities correlated with consummatory stimuli produced by flight from a dangerous place. Defense system activation is distinct from alarm reactions. The latter prepare the animal for probable noxious events, involve relatively intense negative affect and extinguish rapidly in situations where the noxious event no longer occurs. In contrast, defense system activation potentiates innate and modified defense reactions, thus preparing the animal for possible, but not necessarily probable, noxious events; it involves little or no negative affect and extinguishes very slowly when the noxious event no longer occurs. With these assumptions and the resulting model we attempt to resolve several long-standing problems in avoidance learning, including the low correlation between negative affect and avoidance performance, differential rates of extinction for avoidance performance and conditioned emotional responses, and evidence that some avoidance responses are much more easily learned than others. In addition, the model has implications for the study of parallels between appetitive and aversive motivation, sign tracking in aversive conditioning, and orientation of flight responses. Historical antecedents and alternative approaches are discussed.
The thesis of this book is that whether or not someone knows a proposition at a given time is in part determined by his or her practical interests, i.e., by how much is at stake for that person at that time. Thus, whether a true belief is knowledge is not merely a matter of supporting beliefs or reliability; in the case of knowledge, practical rationality and theoretical rationality are intertwined. This thesis, called Interest-Relative Invariantism about knowledge, is defended against alternative accounts of the phenomena that motivate it, such as the claim that knowledge attributions are linguistically context-sensitive and the claim that the truth of a knowledge claim is somehow relative to the person making the claim. The strategies available for resolving skepticism to the strategies available for resolving other philosophical paradoxes are compared. For example, contextualist solutions to the sorites paradox and the liar paradox, as well as interest-relative accounts of the sorites paradox are considered. It is shown that the argument for the interest-relative character of epistemic notions is not the result of an application of a general strategy for resolving philosophical quandaries, but arises from the distinctive nature of epistemic properties.
What kind of science do we need today and tomorrow? In a game that knows no boundaries, a game that contaminates science, democracy and the market economy, how can we distinguish true needs from simple of fashion? How can we distinguish between necessity and fancy? whims How can we differentiate conviction from opinion? What is the meaning of this all? Where is the civilizing project? Where is the universal outlook of the minds that might be capable of counteracting the global reach of the market? Where is the common ground that links each of us to the other? We need the kind of science that can live up to this need for univer sality, the kind of science that can answer these questions. We need a new kind of knowledge, a new awareness that can bring about the creative destruction of certainties. Old ideas, dogmas, and out-dated paradigms must be destroyed in order to build new knowledge of a type that is more socially robust, more scientifically reliable, stable and above all better able to express our needs, values and dreams. What is more, this new kind of knowledge, which will be challenged in turn by ideas yet to come, will prove its true worth by demonstrating its capacity to dialogue with these ideas and grow with them.
This book documents and disseminates experiences from a wide range of universities, across the five continents, which showcase how the principles of sustainable development may be incorporated as part of university programmes, and present transformatory projects and programmes, showing how sustainability can be implemented across disciplines. Sustainability in a higher education context is a fast growing field. Thousands of universities across the world have signed declarations or have committed themselves to integrate the principles of sustainable development in their activities: teaching, research and extension, and many more will follow.
It is clear that in making the concept of sustainable development concrete, one has to take into account a number of practical elements and obstacles. There is little doubt that integrated approaches are required to support sustainable development. Therefore, a new research paradigm is needed that is better able to reflect the complexity and the multidimensional character of sustainable development. The new paradigm, referred to as sustainability science, must be able to encompass different magnitudes of scales (of time, space, and function), multiple balances (dynamics), multiple actors (interests) and multiple failures (systemic faults). I also think that sustainability science has to play a major role in the integration of different styles of knowledge creation in order to bridge the gulf between science, practice, and politics—which is central to successfully moving the new paradigm forward.
This paper presents a review of the role of education for sustainable development and points out the benefits higher education institutions may gain, from implementing a holistic sustainability thinking as part of their work and institutional practice. It also outlines some of the needs seen in order to maximize the potential benefits of sustainable development to higher education institutions, with a special emphasis to the role of education for sustainable development in the process.
The debate about sustainability can be traced back into the eighteenth century. It was revived following the publication of the Brundtland Report “Our Common Future” (1987) and the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro (1992). Since then, interest has been focused on developing new concepts between the seemingly opposing paradigms of strong and weak sustainable development as well as on their application in practice. Moreover, sustainable development entails normative implications that affect inter- and intragenerational justice.
After his earlier book Discourse and Context, also published by Cambridge University Press, Teun A. van Dijk in this study presents the second part of his new multidisciplinary theory of context. The main thesis of this theory is that the influence of society on discourse is not direct, as is postulated for instance in sociolinguistics, but cognitively mediated by subjective mental models of the communicative situation: context models. These dynamic models control discourse production and comprehension and define the pragmatic appropriateness of text and talk. Whereas in Discourse and Context the psychological and linguistic aspects of context were analyzed, this book focuses on the social psychological, sociological, anthropological and political aspects of context. Tony Blair's 2003 speech defending his motion to go to war against Saddam Hussein and the following debate in parliament is used as an example illustrating the new theory. © Teun A. van Dijk 2009 and Cambridge University Press, 2009. All rights reserved.
Sustainability science can roughly be differentiated into two distinct research streams – a “descriptive-analytical” and a “transformational” one. While the former is primarily concerned with describing and analyzing sustainability problems, the latter aims at developing evidence-supported solution options to solve these problems. This chapter presents relevant methodological guidelines and requirements as well as five exemplary research frameworks for transformational sustainability research. The frameworks are for (1) complex problem-handling, (2) transition management and governance, (3) backcasting, (4) integrated planning research, and (5) the transformational sustainability research (TRANSFORM framework). The TRANSFORM framework aims at synthesizing key components of the other frameworks. The frameworks provide guidelines for transformational sustainability research; yet, willingness and capacity of academic, governmental, private, and nonprofit organizations to use them for knowledge-generating operations are still fairly low. To truly support sustainability transformations, much more of this solution-oriented sustainability research is needed.
The concept of Mode 2 has often been seen as especially applicable to fields addressing grand challenges, such as climate change. Being a relatively new field-interdisciplinary in its approach, and focused on addressing such issues-sustainability science would appear to be a case in point. The aim of this paper is twofold: 1) to explore the perceived relation between Mode 2 and sustainability science, and 2) to advance the discussion of Mode 2 from a philosophical perspective. To address these questions we focus on three characteristic features of Mode 2: the notion of a distinct, but evolving framework; boundary crossing; and a problem solving capacity "on the move". We report the results of a survey carried out amongst leading sustainability scientists. The survey gives insight into the scientists' perception of Mode 2, their perception of their own field of sustainability science and the relation between the two. The free text answers reveal a tension within the field of sustainability science: with developments both towards Mode 1 and Mode 2 science. We conclude that the implementation of inter- and trans-disciplinarity is challenged by institutional and conceptual factors alike.
The diverse set of college and university sustainability leadership programs, which represent a growing trend in higher education, share a common goal: building skills and knowledge for aspiring environmental and sustainability professionals. However, there is little empirical research available to shape program design and implementation. To address this gap, this study builds on sustainability leadership and core competency research as well as previous analysis from the perspective of sustainability leadership program directors with the first evaluation of these programs from the perspective of alumni. The results reveal high expectations for knowledge development and skill building, which are largely being met by programs. Alumni display strong affinity for their programs and report high levels of basic sustainability knowledge and skills upon completion of the program. However, there are significant gaps between program outcomes and perceived needs in the workplace in practice and theory. Despite the realization of program directors that communication skills are the most important outcome of their programs, sustainability leadership programs tend to overemphasize self-reflection/assessment when compared to needs in the workplace. Conversely, these programs tend to underemphasize negotiation, public speaking, facilitation, and coalition-building skills from the perspective of alumni. These gaps likely result from mismatches between faculty competencies and preferences compared to the multiple audiences that these programs serve. Moreover, the literature on core competencies does not provide distinctions between competencies at this scale nor from the perspective of practitioners. Future research on the effectiveness of sustainability leadership programs from the perspective of employers and change-related outcomes would help fill these gaps and improve program design and implementation in addition to better informing the theoretical literature.
This is the first book to provide a comprehensive overview of the theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of personal epistemology from a psychological and educational perspective. Both theory building and empirical research have grown dramatically in the past decade but, until now, this work has not been pulled together in a single volume. That is the mission of this volume whose state-of-the-art theory and research are likely to define the field for the next 20 years. Key features of this important new book include: *Pioneering Contributors--The book provides current perspectives of each of the major theoreticians and researchers who pioneered this growing field, as well as contributions from new researchers. *Diverse Perspectives--The contributors represent a variety of perspectives, including education, educational psychology, developmental psychology, higher education, and science and mathematics education. *Editorial Integration--Opening and closing chapters by the editors set out key issues confronting the field.
Climate change is not 'a problem' waiting for 'a solution'. It is an environmental, cultural and political phenomenon which is re-shaping the way we think about ourselves, our societies and humanity's place on Earth. Drawing upon twenty-five years of professional work as an international climate change scientist and public commentator, Mike Hulme provides a unique insider's account of the emergence of this phenomenon and the diverse ways in which it is understood. He uses different standpoints from science, economics, faith, psychology, communication, sociology, politics and development to explain why we disagree about climate change. In this way he shows that climate change, far from being simply an 'issue' or a 'threat', can act as a catalyst to revise our perception of our place in the world. Why We Disagree About Climate Change is an important contribution to the ongoing debate over climate change and its likely impact on our lives.
Over the last decade, sustainability science has emerged as an interdisciplinary and innovative field attempting to conduct problem-driven research that links knowledge to action. As the institutional dimensions of sustainability science continue to gain momentum, this article provides an analysis of emerging research agendas in sustainability science and an opportunity for reflection on future pathways for the field. Based on in-depth interviews with leading researchers in the field and a content analysis of the relevant literature, this article examines how sustainability scientists bound the social, political and normative dimensions of sustainability as they construct research agendas and look to link knowledge to social action. Many scientists position sustainability science as serving universal values related to sustainability and providing knowledge that is crucial to societal decision-making. The implications of these findings are discussed with an eye towards creating a space for a more democratic and reflexive research agenda for sustainability.
Cognitive Illusions investigates a wide range of fascinating psychological effects in the way we think, judge and remember in our every day lives. At the beginning of each chapter, leading researchers in the field introduce the background to phenomena such as; illusions of control, overconfidence and hindsight bias. This is followed by an explanation of the experimental context in which they can be investigated and a theoretical discussion which draws conclusions about the wider implications of these fallacy and bias effects. Written with researchers and instructors in mind, this tightly edited reader-friendly text provides both an overview of research in the area and many lively pedagogic features such as chapter summaries, further reading lists and suggestions for class-room experiments.
Social cognition refers to the mental representations and processes that underlie social judgments and behavior—for example, the application of stereotypes to members of social groups. Theories of social cognition have generally assumed that mental representations are abstract and stable and that they are activated and applied by relatively automatic, context-independent processes. Recent evidence is inconsistent with these expectations, however. Social-cognitive processes have been shown to be adaptive to the perceiver's current social goals, communicative contexts, and bodily states. Although these findings can often be given ad hoc explanations within current conceptual frameworks, they invite a fuller integration with the broad intellectual movement emphasizing situated cognition. Such an approach has already been influential in many areas within psychology and beyond, and theories in the field of social cognition would benefit by taking advantage of its insights.
This paper presents arguments for the inherent ‘transgressiveness’ of expertise. First, it must address issues that can never be reduced to the purely scientific and purely technical, and hence must link up with diverse practices, institutions and actors. Second, it addresses audiences that are never solely composed of fellow-experts, whose expectations and modes of understanding reflect the heterogeneous experience of mixed audiences. Recent demands for greater accountability have created a vast site for social experimentation, especially on the supra-national level, which are briefly reviewed. However, the democratisation of expertise also creates tensions, especially on the institutional level. Moving from reliable knowledge towards socially robust knowledge may be one step forward in negotiating and bringing about a regime of pluralistic expertise. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.
This article gives an overview of the origin of the concept of sustainable development by going far back in history to trace its roots. It shows how the idea of sustainability evolved through the centuries as a counter to notions of progress. The historical context in the latter half of the 20th century is outlined, in which a paradigm shift in thinking about development caused sustainable development to occupy the centre stage in development discourses.
Much research in recent years has addressed the contribution of indigenous knowledge (IK) to development initiatives in developing countries. An IK system that continuously evolves and adapts in response to environmental and socio-economic change is often considered to be at the core of sustainable natural resource management practices and rural livelihoods. In the context of indigenous wetland management in western Ethiopia, this paper examines the relationship between IK and wetland sustainability, focusing on the mechanisms through which IK evolves and how local adaptive capacity is built up. A series of participatory research activities undertaken in four wetland communities revealed spatial variations in the degree of innovation and communication taking place. The paper argues that these mechanisms are key factors influencing adaptive capacity, suggesting a key link between wetland sustainability and the occurrence of innovation and communication among communities.
Sustainable development, although a widely used phrase and idea, has many different meanings and therefore provokes many different responses. In broad terms, the concept of sustainable development is an attempt to combine growing concerns about a range of environmental issues with socio-economic issues. To aid understanding of these different policies this paper presents a classification and mapping of different trends of thought on sustainable development, their political and policy frameworks and their attitudes towards change and means of change. Sustainable development has the potential to address fundamental challenges for humanity, now and into the future. However, to do this, it needs more clarity of meaning, concentrating on sustainable livelihoods and well-being rather than well-having, and long term environmental sustainability, which requires a strong basis in principles that link the social and environmental to human equity. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.