Beyond divides: prospects for synergy between resilience and pathways approaches to sustainability
Beyond divides: prospects for synergy between resilience and pathways approaches to sustainability
复制标题
超越鸿沟：复原力与可持续发展途径之间协同作用的前景
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Karpouzoglou
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. West;J. Haider;Hanna Sinare;T. Karpouzoglou
在快速的社会，生态和技术变革的背景下，私人，公共和公民利益对跨学科可持续发展研究的全球需求不断增加。这一需求的推动力来自于人们日益认识到，向可持续发展过渡需要新的知识生产模式，其中包括社会和自然科学以及人文科学。STEPS中心的“路径方法”和斯德哥尔摩韧性中心（SRC）的“韧性方法”是理解和应对可持续性挑战的两个不同的跨学科框架。然而，SRC和STEPS所追求的各种跨学科性都有不同的起源和含义。因此，通过选择“弹性”或“路径”的方法，或任何不同的方法来实现可持续性，研究人员必须与一系列深刻影响问题定义，知识生成和行动处方的基础本体论和认识论承诺抗衡。一个（不）可持续的世界是什么样子的？我们如何“了解”和研究（联合国）可持续发展？可持续性研究人员应如何定位自己与民间社会、政策、商业和学术界的关系？在本文中，我们探讨了弹性和途径如何解决这些问题，确定重叠和摩擦点，目的是产生新的研究问题，并阐明潜在的协同作用领域。
In the context of rapid social, ecological and technological change, there is rising global demand from private, public and civic interests for trans-disciplinary sustainability research. This demand is fuelled by an increasing recognition that transitions toward sustainability require new modes of knowledge production that incorporate social and natural sciences and the humanities. The STEPS Centre’s ‘pathways approach’ and the Stockholm Resilience Centre’s (SRC) ‘resilience approach’ are two distinct trans-disciplinary frameworks for understanding and responding to sustainability challenges. However, the varieties of trans-disciplinarity pursued by the SRC and STEPS each have distinct origins and implications. Therefore, by selecting either the ‘resilience’ or ‘pathways’ approach, or indeed any distinct approach to sustainability, the researcher must contend with a range of foundational ontological and epistemological commitments that profoundly affect the definition of problems, generation of knowledge and prescriptions for action. What does an (un)sustainable world look like? How might we ‘know’ and research (un)sustainability? How should sustainability researchers position themselves in relation to civil society, policy, business and academic communities? In this paper we explore how resilience and pathways address these questions, identifying points of overlap and friction with the aim of generating new research questions and illuminating areas of potential synergy.
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Daw, Tim;Brown, Katrina;Pomeroy, Robert
通讯作者：
Pomeroy, Robert