Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Transformational Sustainability Research Methodology

  • Chapter
Sustainability Science

Abstract

Sustainability science can roughly be differentiated into two distinct research streams – a “descriptive-analytical” and a “transformational” one. While the former is primarily concerned with describing and analyzing sustainability problems, the latter aims at developing evidence-supported solution options to solve these problems. This chapter presents relevant methodological guidelines and requirements as well as five exemplary research frameworks for transformational sustainability research. The frameworks are for (1) complex problem-handling, (2) transition management and governance, (3) backcasting, (4) integrated planning research, and (5) the transformational sustainability research (TRANSFORM framework). The TRANSFORM framework aims at synthesizing key components of the other frameworks. The frameworks provide guidelines for transformational sustainability research; yet, willingness and capacity of academic, governmental, private, and nonprofit organizations to use them for knowledge-generating operations are still fairly low. To truly support sustainability transformations, much more of this solution-oriented sustainability research is needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The literature uses the terms “framework”, “method”, “approach”, and “tool” sometimes interchangeably, sometimes as distinctly different (not consistently). There is no need to differentiate between these terms here. We focus on frameworks as defined above, irrespective of the fact that some of the frameworks are labeled, for instance, as “methods” (e.g., complex problem-handling) or “approaches” (e.g., backcasting).

  2. 2.

    While the methods are structured sequentially in this process model, Loorbach (2010) emphasizes the flexible character of the model: “In reality, there is no fixed sequence of the steps in transition management. The cycle only visualizes the need to connect activities and presents some possible logical connections but does not suggest a sequential order of activities” (p. 172). This position supports the general concept employed in this chapter that there is no single right way of creating solution options for sustainability problems (there are multiple). Yet, most of the empirical transition research projects follow the outlined sequence.

  3. 3.

    The sources highlighted with an asterisk (*) are recommended as further readings.

References

The sources highlighted with an asterisk (*) are recommended as further readings.

  • Bernstein MJ, Wiek A, Brundiers K, Pearson K, Minowitz A, Kay B, Golub B (2013, in press) Mitigating urban sprawl effects – a collaborative tree and shade intervention in Phoenix, Arizona, USA. Local Environ. DOI:10.1080/13549839.2014.965672

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark WC, Dickson NM (2003) Sustainability science: the emerging research program. PNAS 100:8059–8061

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Collins SL, Carpenter SR, Swinton SM, Orenstein DE, Childers DL et al (2011) An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social-ecological research. Front Ecol Environ 9:351–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vries B (2013) Sustainability science. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • DeTombe DJ (2008) Climate change: a complex societal process – analyzing a problem according to the COMPRAM methodology. J Organ Transform Soc Change 5(3):235–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *DeTombe DJ (2001) COMPRAM, a method for handling complex societal problems. Eur J Oper Res 128:266–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser MW, Richman JM, Galinsky MJ, Day SH (2009) Intervention research: developing social programs. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald A (2007) Working towards sustainable development in the face of uncertainty and incomplete knowledge. J Environ Policy Plan 9:245–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg J (1998) Backcasting: a natural step in operationalising sustainable development. Greener Manag Int 23:30–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Jerneck A, Olsson L, Ness B, Anderberg S, Baier M et al (2011) Structuring sustainability science. Sustain Sci 6:69–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kajikawa Y (2008) Research core and framework of sustainability science. Sustain Sci 3:215–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall JM, Jaeger CC et al (2001) Sustainability science. Science 291:641–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kay B (2012) Developing and testing transition strategies for urban sustainability – case studies in transition research in Phoenix, Arizona. PhD thesis, School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ

    Google Scholar 

  • Krütli P et al (2010) Technical safety vs. public involvement? A case study on the unrealized project for the disposal of nuclear waste at Wellenberg (Switzerland). J Integr Environ Sci 7:229–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang DJ, Wiek A (2012) The role of universities in fostering urban and regional sustainability. In: Mieg HA, Töpfer K (eds) Institutional and social innovation for sustainable urban development. Earthscan, London, pp 393–411

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang DJ, Wiek A, Bergmann M, Stauffacher M, Martens P, Moll P, Swilling M, Thomas C (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science – practice, principles and challenges. Sustain Sci 7(Supplement 1):25–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Loorbach D (2010) Transition management for sustainable development: a prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework. Gov Int J Policy Adm Inst 23:161–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach D, Rotmans J (2010) The practice of transition management: examples and lessons from four distinct cases. Futures 42:237–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Miller TR, Wiek A, Sarewitz D, Robinson J, Olsson L, Kriebel D, Loorbach D (2014) The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research agenda. Sustain Sci 9:239–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Mochmann IC, DeTombe DJ (2010) The COMPRAM methodology and complex societal problems – an analysis of the case of children born of war. Organizacija 43(3):113–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325:419–422

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Quist J, Vergragt P (2006) Past and future of backcasting: the shift to stakeholder participation and a proposal for a methodological framework. Futures 38:1027–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravetz J (2000) Integrated assessment for sustainability appraisal in cities and regions. Environ Impact Assess Rev 20:31–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Robinson JB (2003) Future subjunctive: backcasting as social learning. Futures 35:839–856

    Google Scholar 

  • *Robinson TN, Sirard JR (2005) Preventing childhood obesity: a solution-oriented research paradigm. Am J Prev Med 28:194–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson J, Burch S, Talwar S, O’Shea M, Walsh M (2011) Envisioning sustainability: recent progress in the use of participatory backcasting approaches for sustainability research. Technol Forecast Soc Change 78:756–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans J, Kemp R, Van Asselt M (2001) More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy. Foresight 3(1):17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz D, Kriebel D, Clapp R, Crumbley C, Hoppin P, Jacobs M, Tickner J (2012) The sustainability solutions agenda. New Solut 22(2):139–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz RW, Tietje O (2002) Embedded case study methods: integrating quantitative and qualitative knowledge. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz RW, Lang D, Wiek A, Walter A, Stauffacher M (2006) Transdisciplinary case studies as a means of sustainability learning: historical framework and theory. Int J Sustain High Educ 7:226–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Spangenberg JH (2011) Sustainability science: a review, an analysis, and some empirical lessons. Environ Conserv 38:275–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swart RJ, Raskin P, Robinson J (2004) The problem of the future: sustainability science and scenario analysis. Glob Environ Chang 14(2):137–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talwar S, Wiek A, Robinson J (2011) User engagement in sustainability research. Sci Public Policy 38:379–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner BL, Kasperson RE, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW et al (2003) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. PNAS 100:8074–8079

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Voß J-P, Smith A, Grin J (2009) Designing long-term policy: rethinking transition management. Policy Sci 42:275–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter A, Helgenberger S, Wiek A, Scholz RW (2007) Measuring social effects of transdisciplinary research – design and application of an evaluation method. Eval Progr Plan 30:325–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A (2014) TRANSFORM – a framework for transformational sustainability research. Working paper. Sustainability Transition and Intervention Research Lab, School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A, Iwaniec D (2014) Quality criteria for visions and visioning in sustainability science. Sustain Sci 9:497-512

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A, Walter A (2009) A transdisciplinary approach for formalized integrated planning and decision-making in complex systems. Eur J Oper Res 197:360–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A, Kay B, Forrest N (in press) Worth the trouble?! An evaluative scheme for Urban Sustainability Transition Labs (USTL) and an application to the USTL in Phoenix, Arizona. In: Frantzeskaki N, Coenen L, Broto C, Loorbach D (eds) Urban sustainability transitions. Routledge series on sustainability transitions. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A, Withycombe L, Redman CL (2011) Key competencies in sustainability – a reference framework for academic program development. Sustain Sci 6:203–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A, Ness B, Brand FS, Schweizer-Ries P, Farioli F (2012) From complex systems analysis to transformational change: a comparative appraisal of sustainability science projects. Sustain Sci 7(Supplement 1):5–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A, Guston DH, van der Leeuw S, Selin C, Shapira P (2013) Nanotechnology in the city: sustainability challenges and anticipatory governance. J Urban Technol 20:45–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiek A, Harlow J, Melnick R, van der Leeuw S, Fukushi K, Takeuchi K, Farioli F, Yamba F, Blake A, Geiger C, Kutter R (2015) Sustainability science in action – a review of the state of the field through case studies on disaster recovery, bioenergy, and precautionary purchasing. Sustain Sci 10:17–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiong A, Talbot K, Wiek A, Kay B (2012) Integrated health care for communities – participatory visioning and strategy building for a New Mountain Park Health Center Clinic in Phoenix. Project report. Sustainability Transition and Intervention Research Lab, School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, 875502, Tempe, AZ, 85287-5502, USA

    Arnim Wiek

  2. Faculty of Sustainability, Institute for Ethics and Transdisciplinary Research, Leuphana University of Lüneburg, Scharnhorststr. 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany

    Daniel J. Lang

Authors
  1. Arnim Wiek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel J. Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnim Wiek .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Sustainability Governance (INSUGO), Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Germany

    Harald Heinrichs

  2. Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Pim Martens

  3. Faculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Germany

    Gerd Michelsen

  4. School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA

    Arnim Wiek

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wiek, A., Lang, D.J. (2016). Transformational Sustainability Research Methodology. In: Heinrichs, H., Martens, P., Michelsen, G., Wiek, A. (eds) Sustainability Science. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7242-6_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation