From sustainable development to social-ecological justice: Addressing taboos and naturalizations in order to shift perspective

2021 ◽  
pp. 251484862110294
Author(s):  
Katrin Grossmann ◽  
James JT Connolly ◽  
Małgorzata Dereniowska ◽  
Giulio Mattioli ◽  
Luca Nitschke ◽  
...  

While sustainability was introduced as a game-changing idea, it has often been criticized for its vagueness and its over-accommodating bent toward powerful, vested interests, economic growth, and profit seeking—or, on the contrary, for not being able to enter mainstream politics. As a result, in the current political climate, sustainability policies seem to be everywhere, but so does the social and ecological critique of these policies. In this article, we articulate the seeds of an emerging cross-sectoral shift away from sustainability and toward social-ecological justice. Coming from a multidisciplinary background, we explore commonalities in the shortcomings of sustainability agendas and identify discursive barriers to change across three critical fields: transport, energy, and urban greening. Within each of these fields, we observe an upswing of scholarly work addressing the pitfalls and trade-offs of sustainability, but we also show how taboos and naturalizations embedded in these fields hinder adequately questioning the economy’s role in sustainability thinking and action. To develop our argument that there is an emerging cross-sectoral push away from sustainability agendas and toward social-ecological justice goals, we briefly examine the current state of the wider sustainability discourse together with its critique from a social and ecological justice angle. We then review relevant academic work across the applied fields of transport, energy, and urban greening, focusing on the normative and analytical aspects dealt with, and how they address and conceptualize tensions between the different dimensions of sustainability. In the concluding section, we highlight how a focus on sectoral and local tensions between ecological, economic, and social policy goals uncovers the ways in which injustices or environmental degradation are continually reproduced, despite the sustainability framework. We conclude with suggestions for thinking and acting under the umbrella of social-ecological justice.

2004 ◽  
Vol 49 (7) ◽  
pp. 61-66
Author(s):  
J.M. Trondalen

This article takes the perspective that when political relationships are strained, there seem to be few examples of wise international water resources governance. The Middle East is a striking example. Much effort has been put into policy development and the design of international principles, but very little into the translation of those into concrete and lasting governance. One of the theses of the article is that politics - whether domestic or international- in most cases overrides these principles and standards. Moreover ready-made regional co-operation models of water managements are not directly applicable to every geographical, political, economic and social setting. Certain factors are often under-estimated in international water negotiations, such as:• the complexity of any hydro-political negotiations, and need to develop commonly accepted standards;• the difficulty of translating policy - either politically or legally - into an operational and realistic negotiations strategy;• the format of the procedures and meetings;• recognition that third parties should have a long-term perspective on any conflict they get involved in.With reservations, the lessons learned indicate that the following factors have an impact on grid locked situations, such as: new substantive information; new trade-offs between the parties; and changed political climate or relationship with external power-brokers.


2020 ◽  
pp. 097674792094518
Author(s):  
Vani Kant Borooah

After reviewing health outcomes and policy in India, this paper concludes that there are at least six sets of issues to be addressed about improving the quantity and quality of health services, and ipso facto improving health outcomes, in India. First, the amount of resources earmarked for health needs to increase. Second, health resources need to be used in a fair and just manner and, in particular, complaints relating to egregious health outcomes need to be addressed. Predominant in this set of issues is oversight and regulation of private-sector health provision. The third set of issues relates to the allocation of health resources and, in particular, to the imbalance in the allocation of health resources between towns and villages. A fourth issue is the accessibility of rural areas since it is the most remote areas that have the lowest density of health workers. Another issue is the more efficient use of health workers in order to make them more productive. Finally, Indian health policy is stronger on rhetoric and aspiration than it is on action and implementation. The successful implementation of the policy requires the explicit recognition that objectives are often competing (primary versus tertiary care) and the acknowledgement that, with budgetary constraints, one cannot have more of one without having less of the other. The first role of policy is to then choose the optimal mix of objectives with respect to these trade-offs. Secondly, policies come up against vested interests which agitate (often with the support of opposition politicians) and litigate against proposed changes. Lastly, policies in India are made against a background of poor governance with the predatory presence of corruption looming over every policy initiative. In implementing, rather than simply articulating, a policy it is important to address these governance issues.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 7472 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsing-Sheng Tai

While the notion of social-ecological system resilience is widely accepted and applied, the issue of “resilience for whom” is clearly ignored. This phenomenon has also occurred in Taiwan. This article explores the roots of, and a possible solution to, this issue through a case study in the context of Taiwan’s indigenous peoples. The Danungdafu area, the focal social-ecological system, was studied. Qualitative research methods and an action-oriented research approach were employed. For a long period, the central government shaped the political, economic, social, institutional, and ecological contexts; dominated resilience discourses and determined the problem-framing and problem-solving agenda; defined the scale and levels at which social-ecological system governance issues were addressed; and determined the knowledge system used to define and solve problems. After 2011, a new participatory governance regime emerged. Multiple stakeholders, including indigenous communities, began to contribute to resilience discourses and influenced governance and trade-offs among differing governance goals. However, under the established structures dominated by Han people, indigenous views, rights, and well-being continue to be ignored. Affirmative action is required to recognize and safeguard indigenous rights. A practical institutional pathway is available to facilitate the transformation from “resilience for mainstream society” to “resilience for indigenous people” in indigenous territories.


Author(s):  
Hang Zhang ◽  
Hai Chen ◽  
Tianwei Geng ◽  
Di Liu ◽  
Qinqin Shi

Social-ecological production landscape resilience (SELPR) is a significant representation of the continuous supply capacity of landscape services. It is a quantitative assessment of the spatial-temporal evolution of SELPR under internal and external disturbances that provides a scientific basis for regional ecological environments and socio–economic development. Taking Mizhi County for the study of the Loess Plateau region, a three-dimensional (social system, ecosystem, and production system) SELPR evaluation framework was constructed. Data integration was performed using the watershed as the evaluation unit. This study quantitatively evaluated the spatial–temporal differentiation of the social–ecological production landscape (SELPs) subsystem’s resilience and the total SELPR in the study area and classified the areas from the three-system resilience combination level to achieve regional development trade-offs. The results were as follows: (1) In 2009–2018, the change in the social–ecological production landscapes pattern in Mizhi County showed a significant reduction in agricultural production landscapes, relatively stable social living landscapes, and an increase in ecological landscapes; (2) in 2009–2018, the SELPR increased by 12.38%. The spatial distribution of resilience was significantly different, showing a distribution pattern of high central and low surrounding areas; (3) the county’s watershed development zones were divided into five partitions: synergistic promotion areas, ecological restoration areas, social development areas, production optimization areas, and comprehensive remediation areas. The five types of zones have a certain agglomeration effect. In addition, the main obstacle factors affecting the SELPR of each zone are quite different. The key issues and development directions of different types of watersheds are also proposed in this paper.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. eaar2176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Torralba ◽  
Nora Fagerholm ◽  
Tibor Hartel ◽  
Gerardo Moreno ◽  
Tobias Plieninger

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 3654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huashun Dou ◽  
Xiaobing Li ◽  
Shengkun Li ◽  
Dongliang Dang

Spatial scale plays a crucial role in the assessment and management of ecosystem services (ES), yet explicit information for identifying and understanding the scale effect on ES supply remains limited. In an attempt to detect scale effect on ES supply from a comprehensive perspective, this study developed a framework for integrating scale effect in three aspects, including individual ES patterns, pairwise ES interactions, and ecosystem service bundles (ESB). The framework was tested in Xilinhot, a prairie landscape city of Inner Mongolia, at four different levels of spatial scale. The results indicated that, most ES showed a decreasing clustering at coarser scales in terms of spatial pattern. At the same time, coarser scales resulted in fewer trade-offs and stronger synergies between pairwise ES. The identification of ESB varied greatly with scale, and this change reflected in the composition of ES variables and spatial distribution of bundles. We attributed the scale effect of the above three aspects to differences in social-ecological factors and their driving mechanisms at different scales. This comprehensive framework could support local managers to coordinate the management of multiple ES at different scales.


Author(s):  
Demissie Damite Degato

The traditional approach to innovation assessment has mainly focused on the economic outcomes and failed to capture the ecological and social dimensions of sustainability. By giving high attention to the role of specific kind of innovation (technological innovation), there is little empirical work on whether combining different kinds of innovation leads to progress in social-ecological sustainability in developing countries. The sustainability orientation in the assessment of innovation performance becomes increasingly important for achieve successful transformation towards sustainability. The research question of this study is under what condition or combination of conditions the intervention for innovation reconciles the trade-offs between socioeconomic and ecological performance and thus improve progress towards sustainability in poor countries. Combing concepts and methods from literature on strategic corporate social responsibility (CSR), value chain upgrading, sustainability, and technological capability, this study identifies different mechanisms and conditions for building innovation capacity and then empirically evaluates the relationship between the degree of innovation capacity and the progress towards social-ecological sustainability by taking four cases from Ethiopia. The data for this study is collected using key informant interviews, focus group discussion, and biodiversity and innovation scorecard questionnaire. Mixed methods combing comprehensive fuzzy evaluation, biodiversity scorecard and qualitative comparative analysis are used for analysis. The study found that combing value chain innovation and green governance innovation either with technological upgrading or innovation platform learning are sufficient conditions for achieving social-ecological sustainability. We also found that innovation in green governance and in value chain are necessary conditions for sustainability. By developing and applying fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model for measuring innovation capacity and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis for identifying necessary and sufficient conditions for sustainability, this study made an important methodological contribution to existing literature.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e107811 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudi Voss ◽  
Martin F. Quaas ◽  
Jörn O. Schmidt ◽  
Olli Tahvonen ◽  
Martin Lindegren ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document