Field Of Sustainable Research Research Articles

Root Assessment Method (RAM): A novel multi-criteria decision making method and its applications in sustainability challenges

The major objective of this paper is to introduce a novel multi-criteria decision making method (MCDM) called Root Assessment Method (RAM) which is easy to understand, straightforward to use and comparable with other well-known MCDM methods. RAM is motivated by the shortcomings of existing MCDM methods to obtain a reliable result in a decision problem and also the fact that decision maker (DM) should understand the whole decision making process to be able to avoid possible computational pitfalls. To do so, we define an aggregating function to rank the alternatives based on a radical expression which its radicand and index are the sums of benefit and cost criteria of each alternative, respectively. Accordingly, RAM allows a different compensation degree between beneficial and non-beneficial criteria which is rare in existing MCDM methods. As the advantages of RAM, the ranking result is not influenced by additional parameter, beneficial and non-beneficial criteria can be simultaneously considered without any transformation and pairwise comparisons are not used. On the other hand, it is observed that RAM can provide the advantage of preventing rank reversal in two case studies, whereas TOPSIS and VIKOR are subject to this problem in the same cases. As another contribution, a new heuristic procedure is suggested to compare the ranking results obtained by RAM with other methods. Ten numerical examples demonstrate that RAM results are consistent with its presumed function and are easily interpretable for a DM who may not be well acquainted with theoretical aspects of MCDM methods. Examples are positioned in the field of sustainability research as the area with wide application of MCDM methods. The results provided by RAM are encouraging and we hope this method contributes to enrich decision theory.

Goodbye Expert-Based Policy Advice? Challenges in Advising Governmental Institutions in Times of Transformation

The global transformation towards sustainability has not only increased the demand for anticipatory and reflexive knowledge to support decision making, but also raises three challenges common to all forms of scientific policy advice: to appropriately consider societal norms and values (challenge of normativity), to integrate different forms of knowledge (challenge of integration) and to organize the participation of stakeholders (challenge of participation). While new forms of scientific policy advice in the field of sustainability research (SR) have emerged in response, the role of established actors such as the Office of Technology Assessment at the German Bundestag (TAB) is increasingly scrutinized. One of the fundamental characteristics of TAB’s model of scientific policy advice is a rigid boundary arrangement between politics and science that places a high value on the objectivity and authority of scientific knowledge. Based on a content analysis of digitalization-related TAB reports spanning three decades, we describe how a rather technocratic institution such as TAB has dealt with the challenges of normativity, integration, and participation, and we compare its approach with that of SR institutions. TAB has partly adapted its working mode to the new challenges, e.g., by trying out new methods to foster a stronger dialogue with stakeholders. However, TAB’s response to the challenges distinctly differs from the forms of transformative research conducted in the SR community. We argue that this is not only a necessary precondition to maintain its reputation as a trustworthy actor towards the Parliament but gives TAB and similar expert-based institutions a special role in the governance of societal transformation.

Measuring interdisciplinarity in the context of sustainability research projects toward capacity building in higher education

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to develop an analytical framework toward facilitating the quantitative measurement of interdisciplinary understanding regarding sustainable energy systems with an application in the area of capacity-building projects in higher education.Design/methodology/approachThe analytical framework is developed using the portfolio representation measurement approach in combination with a survey questionnaire. The subsequent assessment is carried out using the statistical measure of mean signed deviation to capture variation from an established baseline across the project group and visualized via radar diagrams.FindingsThe results provide a quantitative assessment framework for evaluating the degree of interdisciplinary understanding in the project groups. The application of the framework to the DESIRE project indicates the most significant degree of variation across economic and regulatory dimensions of sustainability. Discrepancies in general and educational contexts are observed.Research limitations/implicationsThe exploitable value of the results is sensitive to the derivation of composite indicators of the dimensions defined as well as the survey design. The case study was carried out on an ex-post basis, potentially biasing the results reported and limiting their interpretability and theoretical value.Practical implicationsThe analytical framework can be used as a basis for assessing and engaging in discussions on interdisciplinarity understanding at the outset of capacity-building projects.Originality/valueThe contribution of this paper is practical in scope and entails the development of a quantitative framework for measuring interdisciplinarity in the specific context of capacity-building projects in the field of sustainability research in higher education institutions.

Towards a relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice, andeducation

Relational thinking has recently gained increasing prominence across academic disciplines in an attempt to understand complex phenomena in terms of constitutive processes and relations. Interdisciplinary fields of study, such as science and technology studies (STS), the environmental humanities, and the posthumanities, for example, have started to reformulate academic understanding of nature-cultures based on relational thinking. Although the sustainability crisis serves as a contemporary backdrop and in fact calls for such innovative forms of interdisciplinary scholarship, the field of sustainability research has not yet tapped into the rich possibilities offered by relational thinking. Against this background, the purpose of this paper is to identify relational approaches to ontology, epistemology, and ethics which are relevant to sustainability research. More specifically, we analyze how relational approaches have been understood and conceptualized across a broad range of disciplines and contexts relevant to sustainability to identify and harness connections and contributions for future sustainability-related work. Our results highlight common themes and patterns across relational approaches, helping to identify and characterize a relational paradigm within sustainability research. On this basis, we conclude with a call to action for sustainability researchers to co-develop a research agenda for advancing this relational paradigm within sustainability research, practice, and education.

Strategies towards sustainable households using stakeholder workshops and scenarios

Meeting the needs of present generations while ensuring that future generations can fulfil their needs properly requires sustainable development. Assuming that in the next 50 years the global population will double and global wealth will increase fivefold, while it will be necessary to halve the environmental burden, social needs will have to be fulfilled twenty times more environmentally efficiently by 2050. It requires great changes in consumption and production in the developed part of the world. This is the starting point of the EU-funded research project Strategies towards the Sustainable Household – focusing on what households can contribute to such Factor 20 strategies. This paper describes the participatory approach of the SusHouse project, focusing on the key elements of stakeholder workshops and scenario construction, and presents first results for the household functions (areas) (Clothing Care, and Shopping, Cooking and Eating) studied in the Netherlands and the UK. It is concluded that it is possible to construct scenarios for future sustainable fulfilment of household functions based on the creative ideas and visions of stakeholders from different societal groups attending workshops. The paper ends with a discussion of the relevance of the applied methodology in the field of sustainability research.