Bridge over troubled water: managing compatibility and conflict among thought collectives in sustainability science

Abstract

Sustainability transformations call forth new forms and systems of knowledge across society. However, few tools and processes exist for promoting dialogue among different interests and normative stances in knowledge co-creation. In this article, we build on the notion of thought collectives to argue that understanding and moderating normative tensions are necessary if sustainability science is to provide successful solutions. Drawing on an analysis of the normative tensions between rival high-tech and low-tech thought collectives in the mobility and food production sectors, we discuss three strategic approaches: applying common evaluative frameworks, building contextual convergence and embracing complexity. We argue that these strategies indicate a need to distinguish different kinds of reflexivity in managing tensions among thought collectives. As a practical conclusion, we establish sets of reflexive questions to help sustainability scientists deploy the knowledge management strategies discussed.

Transformations towards Sustainable Food Systems : Pathways, Governance, and Actors in a Swedish and European Union Context

“…The challenges described by the EGD documents and Swedish stakeholders mostly align with each other as well as with earlier studies. This might be a significant enabler, as common problem formulations and goals have been suggested as important for transformative processes (UN 2015;Moser 2016;Kuenkel 2019;Sachs et al 2019;Mauser et al 2013;Vaughn, Shay Schumm, and Sinagub 1996;Turnhout et al 2020;Soininen et al 2022;Stefanovic, Freytag-Leyer, and Kahl 2020). However, the environmental impacts and consumption patterns of meat, emphasised in scientific literature (e.g.…”

“…The need for a common goal to align strategies and efforts was explicitly stated, and the 2030 Agenda was described as an enabling tool in this context. In food systems specifically, sustainable food production and consumption and food security are goals that are generally agreed upon, although there is diversity in the strategies suggested for achieving them (Soininen et al 2022). A need for a paradigm shift in how food is valued was identified in the empirical materials, alongside a diversity of proposed pathways to achieve this shift.…”

“…Although pathways towards sustainable food systems have been described as diverse and contested, there is some agreement on what the goals and outcomes could be Soininen et al 2022). Food and nutritional security, environmental security, and social and cultural well-being are often described as desired outcomes of sustainable food systems (Stefanovic, Freytag-Leyer, and Kahl 2020;Tuomisto 2019b;Ericksen 2008).…”

“…Furthermore, resilience, reduced waste, equity and justice, increased agrobiodiversity and ecosystem function, local food sovereignty, global food democracy, and climate change mitigation are other aspects that have been associated with sustainable food systems (Stefanovic, Freytag-Leyer, and Kahl 2020;. Policy makers and academic scholars (UN 2015;Moser 2016;Kuenkel 2019;Sachs et al 2019;Mauser et al 2013;Vaughn, Shay Schumm, and Sinagub 1996;Turnhout et al 2020;Soininen et al 2022;Stefanovic, Freytag-Leyer, and Kahl 2020) have pointed to the importance of consensus between actors, which can be defined as "reaching legitimate and effective 'congruency' around a course of action" (Patterson et al 2017, p. 12), concerning the goals and outcomes of transformations. It has been emphasised that the pathways to achieving these goals will need to be the subject of democratic and inclusive processes in which a diversity of stakeholders take part.…”

“…It has been emphasised that the pathways to achieving these goals will need to be the subject of democratic and inclusive processes in which a diversity of stakeholders take part. These processes need to recognise the context-specific nature of food production and consumption and the knowledge of local and indigenous communities, and manage issues of power and inequalities (UN 2015;Moser 2016;Kuenkel 2019;Sachs et al 2019;Mauser et al 2013;Vaughn, Shay Schumm, and Sinagub 1996;Turnhout et al 2020;Soininen et al 2022;Stefanovic, Freytag-Leyer, and Kahl 2020;Tuomisto 2019a).…”