Suchergebnisse

Within the context of both national and EU policy, sustainable development (SD) emerges in the Nordic countries as a horizontal perspective to be systematically integrated into regional development programming. Research on this type of integration has, however, been somewhat scarce. This paper deals with the question of how the relation between environmental and economic sustainability – as part of the overall SD framework – is played out in the context of regional development programming at both the national and regional levels. Three issues are raised in the analysis, pointing to challenges of achieving environmental policy-integration. First, working with cross-sectoral interconnectedness or ending up in sectoral traps, where partnership learning processes are hampered by both a lack of responsibility for, and ownership of, the overall SD-perspective and interactions dominated by sectoral struggles where the different roles, mandates and perspectives of various keyactors are strong. Second, achieving 'win-win' or getting stuck in environment-economy conflicts, where the policy-rhetoric picturing the existence of possible 'win-win'- opportunities in which environmental and economic sustainability benefit each other show some empirical support at the same time as troublesome conflicts and tough regional development priorities raise questions of where principled priority lies in practical decisionmaking. Third, rhetorical declarations, pockets of good practice or systematic policyintegration, where the paper highlights a focus on environmental sustainability in rhetorical declarations and through flagship win-win examples though the study does not provide evidence of any overall transformation of regional development practices taking place. Indeed, policy-integration in terms of rhetorical declarations is more common than evidence of systematic integration. Despite indications of changing patterns of interaction and learning in respect of partnerships between actors from different sectors, the conflict ...

This commentary focuses on analyzing the potential of citizen science to address legitimacy issues in the knowledge base used to guide transformative governance in the context of the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals (henceforth SDGs). The commentary develops two interrelated arguments for better understanding the limits of what we term "traditional" Environmental Monitoring and Assessment (EMA) as well as the potential of citizen science (CS) for strengthening the legitimacy of EMA in the local implementation of SDGs. We start by arguing that there is an urgent need for a profound renewal of traditional EMA to better implement the SDGs. Then, we present CS as a democratic innovation that provides a path to EMA renewal that incorporates, develops, and extends the role of CS in data production and use by EMA. The commentary substantiates such arguments based on current approaches to CS and traditional EMA. From this starting point, we theorize the potential of CS as a democratic innovation that can repurpose EMA as a tool for the implementation of the SDGs. With a focus on the implementation of SDG15 (Life on Land) in local contexts, the commentary presents CS as a democratic innovation for legitimate transformative governance that can affect socio-ecological transitions. We see this approach as especially appropriate to analyze the implementation of SDGs in rural settings where a specific resource nexus can create conflict-laden contexts with much potential for a renewed EMA to support transformative governance towards Agenda 2030. ; Evidence-based navigation of SDG synergies and conflicts: Renewing Environmental Monitoring and Assessment for a more effective role in Agenda 2030

This commentary focuses on analyzing the potential of citizen science to address legitimacy issues in the knowledge base used to guide transformative governance in the context of the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals (henceforth SDGs). The commentary develops two interrelated arguments for better understanding the limits of what we term "traditional" Environmental Monitoring and Assessment (EMA) as well as the potential of citizen science (CS) for strengthening the legitimacy of EMA in the local implementation of SDGs. We start by arguing that there is an urgent need for a profound renewal of traditional EMA to better implement the SDGs. Then, we present CS as a democratic innovation that provides a path to EMA renewal that incorporates, develops, and extends the role of CS in data production and use by EMA. The commentary substantiates such arguments based on current approaches to CS and traditional EMA. From this starting point, we theorize the potential of CS as a democratic innovation that can repurpose EMA as a tool for the implementation of the SDGs. With a focus on the implementation of SDG15 (Life on Land) in local contexts, the commentary presents CS as a democratic innovation for legitimate transformative governance that can affect socio-ecological transitions. We see this approach as especially appropriate to analyze the implementation of SDGs in rural settings where a specific resource nexus can create conflict-laden contexts with much potential for a renewed EMA to support transformative governance towards Agenda 2030.

This commentary focuses on analyzing the potential of citizen science to address legitimacy issues in the knowledge base used to guide transformative governance in the context of the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals (henceforth SDGs). The commentary develops two interrelated arguments for better understanding the limits of what we term "traditional" Environmental Monitoring and Assessment (EMA) as well as the potential of citizen science (CS) for strengthening the legitimacy of EMA in the local implementation of SDGs. We start by arguing that there is an urgent need for a profound renewal of traditional EMA to better implement the SDGs. Then, we present CS as a democratic innovation that provides a path to EMA renewal that incorporates, develops, and extends the role of CS in data production and use by EMA. The commentary substantiates such arguments based on current approaches to CS and traditional EMA. From this starting point, we theorize the potential of CS as a democratic innovation that can repurpose EMA as a tool for the implementation of the SDGs. With a focus on the implementation of SDG15 (Life on Land) in local contexts, the commentary presents CS as a democratic innovation for legitimate transformative governance that can affect socio-ecological transitions. We see this approach as especially appropriate to analyze the implementation of SDGs in rural settings where a specific resource nexus can create conflict-laden contexts with much potential for a renewed EMA to support transformative governance towards Agenda 2030. ; Swedish Research Council Formas 2018-02341 ; Versión publicada - versión final del editor