The significance of meaning. Why IPBES needs the social sciences and humanities

Jetzkowitz, Jens; Koppen, C.S.A. van; Lidskog, Rolf; Ott, Konrad; Voget-Kleschin, Lieske; Wong, Catherine Mei Ling

doi:10.1080/13511610.2017.1348933

Cited by 27 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The struggle is between economics, ecology, and a few intermediary positions, as well as the social sciences as a whole. Recent developments suggest an increasing awareness that something has been overlooked with regard to the social sciences and humanities (Vadrot et al 2018a,b) such as the significance of meanings, Ecology and Society 23(4): 44 https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol23/iss4/art44/ aspirations, and desires with regard to values of biodiversity (Jetzkowitz et al 2018).…”

Section: Discussion and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem services between integration and economics imperialism

Thorén¹,

Stålhammar²

2018

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Here, we explore the interdisciplinary merits of the ecosystem services concept by recruiting the notion of economics imperialism. We identify four different ways in which interdisciplinary concepts can fail as interdisciplinary concepts, three of which are associated with imperialism. First, interdisciplinary concepts can fail to be integrative, typically by being overtly flexible or vague. The remaining three ways, which typically mark imperialist infringements, are: failure to achieve ontological unification, failure to maintain or accommodate a plurality of accounts when it is suitable, and the obfuscation of social or ethical values. We analyze some of the critiques that have been raised with respect to the ecosystem services concept as a case of economics imperialism. We conclude by discussing the scope and limits of the concept more broadly and what those mean for an interdisciplinary ecosystem services science going forward.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem services between integration and economics imperialism

Thorén¹,

Stålhammar²

2018

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To monitor these ecosystem services, the community of practice proposed eight state indicators ( Table 2). Indicators were not defined for the remainder of the ecosystem services, which had frequencies below the cut-off value (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19) (Table S3). Table 1.…”

Section: Marine Ecosystem Services Impacted By the Regional Drivers Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within this context, a major constraint to increasing the impact of ecosystem service research is the limited knowledge and understanding of scientific discourse on the ESA by policymakers and the general public [16], particularly, on how ESA concepts can inspire dialogue and cooperation across social groups [17][18][19]. This may be attributed to the different meanings and interpretations that ES concepts elicit amongst people with a plurality of perspectives, knowledge and values [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Learning for Facilitating Dialogue and Understanding of the Ecosystem Services Approach: Lessons from a Cross-Border Experience in the Alboran Marine Basin

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social learning (SL) appears to have considerable potential to enhance the impact of the ecosystem services approach (ESA) discourse on policy and society. However, empirical research to better understand the processes that support SL, the effects it generates, and the conditions that enable such learning is limited. This study assesses the ability of SL to enhance dialogue and understanding of the ESA to support transformative social change in governance practice in the Alboran Marine Basin. To do so, we conducted a specifically designed SL process oriented towards the ESA as a governance approach in this marine region. The SL process was developed through three interlinked workshops involving scientists, decision-makers and local users from Spain and Morocco, the two countries that share the governance of this social-ecological system. The results revealed that the SL process progressively facilitated (i) a more inclusive and constructive ecosystem services dialogue, (ii) a better understanding of the social-ecological system in which the actors were embedded, (iii) an enhanced recognition of science-policy-society complementarities to address sustainability issues, and (iv) a gradual social transformation towards more sustainable and equitable governance. Via the SL process, a variety of factors were identified as contributing to the creation of four relevant conditions that facilitated its successful operationalisation. These conditions included (i) the generation of trust and shared understanding, (ii) the facilitation of knowledge exchanges between actor groups across frontiers, (iii) the promotion of more democratic participation, and (iv) the co-production of practical outcomes. These contextual insights provided empirical evidence of the prominent role SL can play to enhance dialogue and understanding of the ESA for supporting its adoption as governance practice. On this basis, it is argued that operationalising SL in those processes focused on making the ESA relevant to policy and society is pivotal to its implementation in governance practice.

show abstract

“…Our objective is to initiate a mutually enriching conversation between philosophers of science and sustainability scientists, thus responding to recent calls from the latter for more inclusive engagement with the humanities and social sciences (e.g. Hulme 2011;Jetzkowitz et al 2018;Laplane et al 2019;Díaz-Reviriego 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Philosophy of science for sustainability science

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability science seeks to extend scientific investigation into domains characterized by a distinct problem-solving agenda, physical and social complexity, and complex moral and ethical landscapes. In this endeavor, it arguably pushes scientific investigation beyond its usual comfort zones, raising fundamental issues about how best to structure such investigation. Philosophers of science have long scrutinized the structure of science and scientific practices, and the conditions under which they operate effectively. We propose a critical engagement between sustainability scientists and philosophers of science with respect to how to engage in scientific activity in these complex domains. We identify specific issues philosophers of science raise concerning current sustainability science and the contributions philosophers can make to resolving them. In conclusion, we reflect on the steps philosophers of science could take to advance sustainability science.

show abstract

The significance of meaning. Why IPBES needs the social sciences and humanities

Cited by 27 publications

References 57 publications

Ecosystem services between integration and economics imperialism

Ecosystem services between integration and economics imperialism

Social Learning for Facilitating Dialogue and Understanding of the Ecosystem Services Approach: Lessons from a Cross-Border Experience in the Alboran Marine Basin

Philosophy of science for sustainability science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About