Cargando…
Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways
Sustainability assessment (SA) is an increasingly popular term referring to a broad range of approaches to align decision-making with the principles of sustainability. Nevertheless, in public and private sectors sustainability results are still disappointing, and this paper reflects on this problem...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Japan
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6106112/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30174754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0417-x |
_version_ | 1783349717172748288 |
---|---|
author | Dijk, M. de Kraker, J. van Zeijl-Rozema, A. van Lente, H. Beumer, C. Beemsterboer, S. Valkering, P. |
author_facet | Dijk, M. de Kraker, J. van Zeijl-Rozema, A. van Lente, H. Beumer, C. Beemsterboer, S. Valkering, P. |
author_sort | Dijk, M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Sustainability assessment (SA) is an increasingly popular term referring to a broad range of approaches to align decision-making with the principles of sustainability. Nevertheless, in public and private sectors sustainability results are still disappointing, and this paper reflects on this problem and proposes a way forward. We argue that, because sustainability issues are generally wicked problems (i.e. a ‘complex of interconnected factors in a pluralistic context’), effective assessments need to be reflexive about the definition of the issue and about the criteria for sustainable solutions. Based on a distinction of policy problems, we characterize SA as a form of problem structuring, and we distinguish three typical ways of problem structuring, corresponding to three different ways of integrating reflexivity in the assessment. We illustrate these routes in three examples. We discuss the way reflexivity is integrated in each example by discussing the mix of methods, SA process and epistemological balance. Rather than merely calling for more stakeholder participation, our aim is to call for more reflexivity integrated into the SA approach, and we conclude by proposing a process map for reflexive sustainability assessment to support this. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6106112 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer Japan |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61061122018-08-30 Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways Dijk, M. de Kraker, J. van Zeijl-Rozema, A. van Lente, H. Beumer, C. Beemsterboer, S. Valkering, P. Sustain Sci Original Article Sustainability assessment (SA) is an increasingly popular term referring to a broad range of approaches to align decision-making with the principles of sustainability. Nevertheless, in public and private sectors sustainability results are still disappointing, and this paper reflects on this problem and proposes a way forward. We argue that, because sustainability issues are generally wicked problems (i.e. a ‘complex of interconnected factors in a pluralistic context’), effective assessments need to be reflexive about the definition of the issue and about the criteria for sustainable solutions. Based on a distinction of policy problems, we characterize SA as a form of problem structuring, and we distinguish three typical ways of problem structuring, corresponding to three different ways of integrating reflexivity in the assessment. We illustrate these routes in three examples. We discuss the way reflexivity is integrated in each example by discussing the mix of methods, SA process and epistemological balance. Rather than merely calling for more stakeholder participation, our aim is to call for more reflexivity integrated into the SA approach, and we conclude by proposing a process map for reflexive sustainability assessment to support this. Springer Japan 2017-01-10 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC6106112/ /pubmed/30174754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0417-x Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Dijk, M. de Kraker, J. van Zeijl-Rozema, A. van Lente, H. Beumer, C. Beemsterboer, S. Valkering, P. Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways |
title | Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways |
title_full | Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways |
title_fullStr | Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways |
title_full_unstemmed | Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways |
title_short | Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways |
title_sort | sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6106112/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30174754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0417-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dijkm sustainabilityassessmentasproblemstructuringthreetypicalways AT dekrakerj sustainabilityassessmentasproblemstructuringthreetypicalways AT vanzeijlrozemaa sustainabilityassessmentasproblemstructuringthreetypicalways AT vanlenteh sustainabilityassessmentasproblemstructuringthreetypicalways AT beumerc sustainabilityassessmentasproblemstructuringthreetypicalways AT beemsterboers sustainabilityassessmentasproblemstructuringthreetypicalways AT valkeringp sustainabilityassessmentasproblemstructuringthreetypicalways |