Suchergebnisse

In managing environmental problems, several countries have chosen the management by objectives (MBO) approach. This paper investigates how focus group participants from the Swedish environmental administration used metaphors to describe the mode of organization needed to attain environmental objectives. Such analysis can shed light on how an MBO system is perceived by actors and how it works in practice. Although the Swedish government intended to stimulate broad-based cooperation among many actors, participants often saw themselves as located at a certain "level," i.e., "higher" or "lower," in the MBO system-that is, their conceptions corresponded to a traditional, hierarchical interpretation of MBO. Prepositions such as "in" and "out" contributed to feelings of inclusion and exclusion on the part of MBO actors. However, horizontal metaphors merged with vertical ones, indicating ongoing competition for the right to interpret how the system of environmental objectives should best be managed. The paper concludes that any organization applying MBO could benefit from discussing alternate ways of talking and thinking about its constituent "levels." ; funding agencies|Swedish Environmental Protection Agency| I-37-03 |

Societal transformations are needed across the globe in light of pressing environmental issues. This need to transform is increasingly acknowledged in policy, planning, academic debate, and media, whether it is to achieve decarbonization, resilience, national development plans, or sustainability objectives. This volume provides the first comprehensive comparison of how sustainability transformations are understood across societies. It contains historical analogies and concrete examples from around the world to show how societal transformations could achieve the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals through governance, innovations, lifestyle changes, education and new narratives. It examines how societal actors in different geographical, political and cultural contexts understand the agents and drivers of societal change towards sustainability, using data from the academic literature, international news media, lay people's focus groups across five continents, and international politics. This is a valuable resource for academics and policymakers working in environmental governance and sustainability.

While sense-making is a frequently used concept in everyday discourse and in several social science research areas, discussions about how the concept translates into methodology are currently scarce. This paper introduces a framework for analyzing how actors in different cultural contexts make sense of global concepts. By this we refer to expressions that are used and expected to find a common ground worldwide, yet are equivocal in their multiple meanings and connotations. The paper discusses methodological considerations of such a sense-making analysis. The paper cites examples from a mixed-methods, cross-country, sense-making analysis of societal transformations toward sustainability-a concept promoted by the United Nations 2030 Agenda. We identify three steps in a comprehensive sense-making analysis: 1) mapping relevant societal arenas for sense-making; 2) vertical analyses; and 3) horizontal analyses. We outline how different datasets can be approached vertically, focusing on the use of framing, metaphors, categorizations, and stories. This forms the basis for the horizontal analysis of societal narratives and recurrent themes across the different data sources. By presenting comprehensive vertical and horizontal analyses, researchers and state and non-state actors can gain insight into the broader varieties of sense-making that can enrich scientific analysis, enhance transparency and effectiveness in international relations, and support transnational governance and civil society collaborations. ; Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council Formas through the project "Decarbonisation leadership: Disentangling Swedish transformation pathways and their exemplary roles" [2016-00589]; Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research-Mistra through the research programme "Mistra Geopolitics" [2016/11 #5]

While increasing hopes are being attached to deliberate societal transformative change to achieve the targets of the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement, questions remain about whether and whereby such profound systemic change can be governed. This paper analyses how transformative changes are intended to be encouraged and achieved, where and when. The paper explores critical drivers and how they relate to leverage points at different places in the societal systems. The paper builds on a comprehensive sense-making analysis of scholarly literature, policy documents, including countries contributions to the Paris Agreement and national reviews of progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals, international news media and lay focus group discussions on five continents. There are great variations in how drivers were made sense of in the data. The many ongoing interacting transformations across societies involve different social, cultural, and political contexts, while the implementation of the 2030 Agenda also contains goal conflicts and unavoidable trade-offs. The paper highlights four categories of drivers as particularly important to consider in view of international transformation efforts: technological innovations, political economy redistribution, new narratives, and transformative learning. Four features are important for bringing clarity on how deliberate transformations can be encouraged: (1) the function of drivers in enabling and restricting transformations of societal systems characterised by detailed or dynamic complexity, (2) cultural and geographical contexts of transformations, (3) where in the systems the drivers are intended to intervene, and (4) the role of critical junctions in time, where transformative trajectories can branch out. ; Funding Agencies|Linkoping University

While increasing hopes are being attached to deliberate societal transformative change to achieve the targets of the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement, questions remain about whether and whereby such profound systemic change can be governed. This paper analyses how transformative changes are intended to be encouraged and achieved, where and when. The paper explores critical drivers and how they relate to leverage points at different places in the societal systems. The paper builds on a comprehensive sense-making analysis of scholarly literature, policy documents, including countries' contributions to the Paris Agreement and national reviews of progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals, international news media and lay focus group discussions on five continents. There are great variations in how drivers were made sense of in the data. The many ongoing interacting transformations across societies involve different social, cultural, and political contexts, while the implementation of the 2030 Agenda also contains goal conflicts and unavoidable trade-offs. The paper highlights four categories of drivers as particularly important to consider in view of international transformation efforts: technological innovations, political economy redistribution, new narratives, and transformative learning. Four features are important for bringing clarity on how deliberate transformations can be encouraged: (1) the function of drivers in enabling and restricting transformations of societal systems characterised by detailed or dynamic complexity, (2) cultural and geographical contexts of transformations, (3) where in the systems the drivers are intended to intervene, and (4) the role of critical junctions in time, where transformative trajectories can branch out. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-021-00957-4.

Calls for societal transformations in response to climate change and unsustainable trajectories are surging in scientific journals, political proposals and news media. The multifaceted usages of the concept of transformation creates challenges for scientific assessments, such as those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, as well as for the implementation of the Paris Agreement process, the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development, the EUs long-term climate strategy, the European Green Deal, and other political decisions. In this paper, we suggest an analytical framework to differentiate between how sustainability transformations are made sense of in terms of system level, pace and scope. We distinguish between four general modes of transformations: quantum leap, convergent, emergent, and gradual approaches. We also discuss how they can be used to make sense of interventions to foster major sustainability transformations. We expand on three examples of interventions that were pertinent in our cross-country studies: technological innovations, transformative learning and the formulation of new narratives of sustainable societies. ; Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council FormasSwedish Research CouncilSwedish Research Council Formas [2016-00589]; Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research -Mistra, under the Mistra Geopolitics programme (2016/11) [5]

"This chapter deals with public understanding of uncertainty in climate science and policy taking a closer look at how laypeople perceive and make sense of the non-knowledge about the topic. Based on original research with Swedish focus groups, among others, the authors conclude that the uncertainty about causes and consequences might not be the most pressing issues. Rather they see that the questions regarding the individual responsibility to mitigate climate change and the effectiveness of responses to climate change can be even more confusing. An implication for global change management would be to address more systematically the blindspots related to effectiveness of policies and measures tackling climate change." (author's abstract)

Climate change is a fundamental challenge for which agriculture is sensitive and vulnerable. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has identified relevant information as key to enabling appropriate climate adaptation and mitigation action. Information specifically directed to farmers can be found, for example, in specialized farming magazines. While recent studies examine how national news media frame climate change, less —if any —studies have addressed climate framings and coverage in specialized media. Media framings are storylines that provide meaning by communicating how and why an issue should be seen as a problem, how it should be handled, and who is responsible for it. This paper analyses the framings and coverage of climate change in two Swedish specialized farming magazines from 2000 to 2009. It examines the extent of the climate change coverage, the content of the media items, and the dominant framings underlying their climate change coverage. The study identifies: increased coverage of climate change starting in 2007; frequent coverage of agriculture 's contribution to climate change, climate change impacts on agriculture, and consequences of climate politics for agriculture; and four prominent frames: conflict, scientific certainty, economic burden, and action. The paper concludes that climate change communicators addressing farmers and agricultural extension officers should pay attention to how these frames may be interpreted by different target audiences. Research is needed on how specialized media reports on climate-related issues and how science-based climate information is understood by different groups of farmers and which other factors influence farmers' engagement in climate mitigation and adaptation. ; Ett konkurrenskraftigt jordbruk-kommunikation kring klimatförändringar och nya möjligheter (SLF) ; Baltic Challenges and Chances for local and regional development generated by Climate Change (BalticClimate)

The focus group is a research methodology in which a small group of participants gathers to discuss a specified issue under the guidance of a moderator. The discussions are tape-recorded, transcribed and analysed. Notably, the interaction between focus group participants has seldom been evaluated, analysed or discussed in empirical research. We argue that considering the focus group in light of current research into interaction in problem-based learning (PBL) tutorial groups would facilitate the deliberate exploitation of group processes in designing focus groups, staging data collection and analysing and interpreting data. When the analytical focus shifts from mere content analysis to an analysis of what the participants themselves are trying to learn, one can explore not only what the participants are talking about, but also how they are trying to understand and conceptualise the issue under discussion.

Based on a meta-study, the paper describes the existing options, areal extents, and Swedish farmers' conditions for energy crop production promoted by the governments to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The drivers of and barriers to cultivating various energy crops are described in terms of a variety of motivational factors. The approach used peer-reviewed and gray literature using three Internet sources. Questions addressed include the energy crops available to Swedish farmers and how well established they are in terms of areal extent. What drivers of and barriers to growing energy crops do farmers perceive? How do various motivational factors for these drivers and barriers correspond to the adoption of certain energy crops? The results indicate that 13 energy-related crops are available, of which straw (a residue), oil crops, and wheat are the most extensively produced in terms of cultivated area. Results confirm earlier research findings that converting from annual to perennial crops and from traditional crops or production systems to new ones are important barriers. Economic motivations for changing production systems are strong, but factors such as values (e.g., esthetic), knowledge (e.g., habits and knowledge of production methods), and legal conditions (e.g., cultivation licenses) are crucial for the change to energy crops. Finally, there are knowledge gaps in the literature as to why farmers decide to keep or change a production system. Since the Swedish government and the EU intend to encourage farmers to expand their energy crop production, this knowledge of such motivational factors should be enhanced. ; Ett konkurrenskraftigt jordbruk – kommunikation kring klimatförändring och nya möjligheter (K3), Stiftelsen Lantbruksforskning

Inclusion of indigenous knowledge and voices is paramount if societal transformations relative to climate change are to be fully and appropriately considered. However, much of the research in this area still uses Western-based research methodologies rather than methodologies driven by the local Indigenous communities. Therefore, it is highly likely that large numbers of affected communities remain excluded from global discussions and decisions around climate change solutions and policy. This article presents talanoa, a qualitative culturally centred research methodology used in many Pacific Island countries. As non-Indigenous researchers, we present our exploration of Indigenous research methods and talanoa experiences in a framework that confirms the importance of relationships when conducting research with Indigenous communities. We also propose that talanoa is a crucial component for qualitative research as it can help facilitate knowledge exchange and understanding among Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities.