| 1. |
- McCrory, Gavin, 1990, et al.
(author)
-
Governing sustainability transitions: contrasting experimental arenas through the lens of Agenda 2030
- 2018
-
Conference paper (other academic/artistic)abstract
- In 2015, the necessity of fundamental societal change was outlined in a universal, transnational agreement with the headline of “transforming our world”. The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals, ranging from ending poverty and establishing gender equality to halting climate change and sustainable cities and communities. Building on UN and scholarly debates, we put forward two key principles to guide the realization of Agenda 2030: transformation (to sustainability) and integration. Transformation refers to the understanding that fundamental change is necessary to achieve sustainability; Integration recognizes that such change is dependent upon different perspectives, such as sustainability dimensions and the SDGs themselves, and different actors. At the same time, laboratories in real world contexts have emerged from various discourses, and are portrayed as settings to host potentially transformative experimentation and innovation processes and integrate various perspectives and actors. Sustainability related labs contribute a significant share to all labs existing. Despite their proliferation across the local, regional and national levels, it remains unclear how different laboratory settings might relate to processes of integration and transformation. Labs have seldom been attached explicitly to Agenda 2030 in practice, and a systematic assessment of the suitability of labs to support agenda 2030 so far is lacking. Hence, the main aim of this work-in-progress paper is to situate existing lab approaches from real world contexts in relation to the ambitions of Agenda 2030. It is guided by the following main research question: What is the capacity of labs in real world contexts in contributing to agenda 2030 by processes of transformation and integration? The paper presents the progress of an ongoing study, which intends to employ a step-based systematic review approach. Firstly, we highlight and unpack the key principles to guide the realization of Agenda 2030: transformation (to sustainability) and integration, and propose an analytical framework related to these principles. Secondly, and currently ongoing, we investigate a breadth of lab approaches building on a systematic review to draw out their capacities to contribute to transformation and integration. Results of the first stage are presented, before the paper ends by outlining the ongoing data collection process, describes the sample and provides a brief outlook.
|
|
| 2. |
- Schäpke, Niko Alexander, 1977, et al.
(author)
-
Jointly experimenting for transformation?: Shaping real-world laboratories by comparing them
- 2018
-
In: GAIA. - 2625-5413 .- 0940-5550. ; 27, s. 85-96
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Real-world laboratories (RwLs, German Reallabore) belong to a family of increasingly popular experimental and transdisciplinary research approaches at the science-society interface. As these approaches in general, and RwLs in particular, often lack clear definitions of key characteristics and their operationalization, we make two contributions in this article. First, we identify five core characteristics of RwLs: contribution to transformation, experimental methods, transdisciplinary research mode, scalability and transferability of results, as well as scientific and societal learning and reflexivity. Second, we compare RwLs to similar research approaches according to the five characteristics. In this way, we provide an orientation on experimental and transdisciplin ary research for societal transformations, and reveal the contributions of this type of research in supporting societal change. Our findings enable learning across the different approaches and highlight their complementarities, with a particular focus on RwLs.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Wanner, Matthias, et al.
(author)
-
Towards a Cyclical Concept of Real-World Laboratories A Transdisciplinary Research Practice for Sustainability Transitions
- 2018
-
In: DISP. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0251-3625 .- 2166-8604. ; 54:2, s. 94-114
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The transformative research approach of Real-World Laboratories (RWL) has recently attracted attention in German sustainability science. Some definitions and understandings have been published, but guidelines and procedural quality criteria for establishing and running a RWL are still missing. To address this gap, this article has two aims. First, it aims to derive key components of RWLs from the current discourse on RWLs and similar, but more elaborated research approaches. Second, it aims to transfer these key components into a comprehensive research practice. This practice is illustrated by the RWL process in the project "Well-being Transformation Wuppertal" (WTW). Methodologically, the article builds on a review of RWL-related approaches for collaborative, intervention-oriented research. This includes transition management, transdisciplinary process models and action research. Based on this review, eight key components for RWLs are proposed. They position RWLs as a normatively framed approach that aims to contribute to local action for sustainable development and the empowerment of change agents. The approach uses transdisciplinary methods of knowledge integration and engages in cyclical real-world interventions within certain spatial and content-related boundaries. The components are transferred into a flow-chart, detailing process steps, aims, responsibilities and overall principles for putting RWLs into practice. Thus, a hitherto missing tool for designing and running RWLs is provided. Then, the RWL in the district of Mirke, Wuppertal, is used as an empirical example to illustrate the application of the flowchart and related key components. Consecutive discussions centre on the different roles of researchers and practitioners in the research process, as well as the relevance of an underlying theory of change for effective interventions. Finally, critical reflection, application and amendment of the proposed flowchart are encouraged.
|
|
