Steering for Sustainable Development: a Typology of Problems and Strategies with respect to Ambivalence, Uncertainty and Distributed Power

Voß, Jan-Peter; Newig, Jens; Kastens, Britta; Monstadt, Jochen; Nölting, Benjamin

doi:10.1080/15239080701622881

Cited by 168 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The multi-actor system developed by the ParticipatoryDesign Facilitator-Scientists must consider asymmetries in power and relationships (e.g. knowledge, availability, hierarchy) between stakeholders to foster expression and consideration of the interests of all stakeholders involved in the design process (Voß et al 2007). Grimble and Wellard (1997) and Barnaud and Van Paassen (2013) propose strategies and methods to address these power asymmetry issues.…”

Section: A Participatory Methodology For Designing the Agroecologicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing agroecological transitions; A review

Duru

Thérond

Fares

2015

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

355

230

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns about the negative impacts of productivist agriculture have led to the emergence of two forms of ecological modernisation of agriculture. The first, efficiency-substitution agriculture, aims to improve input use efficiency and to minimise environmental impacts of modern farming systems. It is currently the dominant modernisation pathway. The second, biodiversity-based agriculture, aims to develop ecosystem services provided by biological diversity. It currently exists only as a niche. Here we review challenges of implementing biodiversity-based agriculture: managing, at the local level, a consistent transition within and among farming systems, supply chains and natural resource management. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of existing conceptual frameworks developed to analyse farming, socialecological and socio-technical systems. Then we present an integrative framework tailored for structuring analysis of agriculture from the perspective of developing a territorial biodiversity-based agriculture. In addition, we propose a participatory methodology to design this agroecological transition at the local level. This design methodology was developed to support a multi-stakeholder arena in analysing the current situation, identifying future exogenous changes and designing (1) targeted territorial biodiversity-based agriculture, (2) the pathway of the transition and (3) the required adaptive governance structures and management strategies. We conclude by analysing key challenges of designing such a complex transition, developing multi-actor and multidomain approaches based on a combination of scientific and experiential knowledge and on building suitable boundary objects (computer-based and conceptual models, indicators, etc.) to assess innovative systems designed by stakeholders.

show abstract

Section: A Participatory Methodology For Designing the Agroecologicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing agroecological transitions; A review

Duru

Thérond

Fares

2015

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

355

230

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the first place, one may think here of the way that many environmental issues are not just political challenges, but also scientific questions (Voß et al 2007). They are 'wicked' or 'unstructured' problems about which there is no consensus about how they can be managed, while there is also no consensus about the actual nature of the problem (Rittel and Webber 1973;Hisschemöller and Hoppe 2001;Cuppen 2012).…”

Section: The Constraints Of Institutional Domainsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable development and institutional boundaries

Pesch

2014

Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Rules-related challenges address the necessary changes in formal or informal frameworks of organisational, substantive and procedural rules that structure actors' interactions (Van Rijswick and Havekes 2012). Rules determine which authorities have which competences.…”

Section: Flood Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recurrent Governance Challenges in the Implementation and Alignment of Flood Risk Management Strategies: a Review

Dieperink

Hegger

Bakker

et al. 2016

Water Resour Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Europe increasing flood risks challenge societies to diversify their Flood Risk Management Strategies (FRMSs). Such a diversification implies that actors not only focus on flood defence, but also and simultaneously on flood risk prevention, mitigation, preparation and recovery. There is much literature on the implementation of specific strategies and measures as well as on flood risk governance more generally. What is lacking, though, is a clear overview of the complex set of governance challenges which may result from a diversification and alignment of FRM strategies. This paper aims to address this knowledge gap. It elaborates on potential processes and mechanisms for coordinating the activities and capacities of actors that are involved on different levels and in different sectors of flood risk governance, both concerning the implementation of individual strategies and the coordination of the overall set of strategies. It identifies eight overall coordination mechanisms that have proven to be useful in this respect.

show abstract

Steering for Sustainable Development: a Typology of Problems and Strategies with respect to Ambivalence, Uncertainty and Distributed Power

Cited by 168 publications

References 31 publications

Designing agroecological transitions; A review

Designing agroecological transitions; A review

Sustainable development and institutional boundaries

Recurrent Governance Challenges in the Implementation and Alignment of Flood Risk Management Strategies: a Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About