Abstract
The Global Goals for Sustainable Development (SDGs) were produced in 2015 to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure prosperity for all. Eight of the 17 SDGs address social dimensions of sustainable development, although there are interrelationships between these and environmental, economic and process dimensions. Despite this emphasis on social aspects of sustainable development, sustainability science often neglects social science perspectives. In this paper this neglect will be confronted, and the value of both theoretical and empirical critical social sciences to sustainability science will be explored. With reference to an action research project, it will be argued that the framework of ideology–action–structure complexes is a useful one that can help illuminate the social conditions in which strides to achieving sustainability goals are taken. Some core characteristics of a future sustainability social science will be outlined.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this context ‘social’ refers to the people aspects of ensuring healthy and flourishing futures, addressing economic and environmental catastrophe and maximising human and social capital, community assets and social networks in pursuit of social equity.
- 2.
Core capitalist countries are those wealthy, dominant nations that exploit ‘peripheral’ countries for labour and raw materials. They own most of the world’s capital and technology and have great control over world trade and economic agreements (Wallerstein 2004).
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
See Mies and Bennholdt-Thomsen (1999) who argue that a subsistence perspective on science, technology and knowledge is one that leads to a revaluation of older survival wisdoms and traditions.
References
Burton, M. (2013). A renewal of ethics. The Psychologist, 26(11), 802–807.
Burton, M., & Kagan, C. (2009). Towards a really social psychology: Liberation psychology beyond Latin America. In M. Montero & C. Sonn (Eds.), Psychology of liberation: Theory and applications (pp. 51–72). New York: Springer.
Campos, I. S., Alves, F. M., Dinis, J., Truninger, M., Vizinho, A., & Penha-Lopes, G. (2016). Climate adaptation, transitions, and socially innovative action-research approaches. Ecology and Society, 21(1), 13.
Esquivel, V. (2016). Power and the sustainable development goals: A feminist analysis. Gender and Development, 24(1), 9–23.
Groundwork. (2013). Sustainable living in Stockport (unpublished). Manchester: Groundwork.
Harvey, D. (2010). The Enigma of capital: And the crises of capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harvey, B., Burns, D., & Oswald, K. (2012). Linking community, radio, and action research on climate change: Reflections on a systemic approach. In D. Burns (Ed.), Action research For development and social change. Brighton: Institute for Development Studies. doi:10.1111/j.1759-5436.2012.00326.x, IDS Bulletin, 4(3).
Jerneck, A., Olsson, L., Ness, B., Anderberg, S., Baier, M., Clark, E., et al. (2011). Structuring sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 6(1), 69–82.
Kagan, C., & Burton, M. (2000). Prefigurative action research: An alternative basis for critical psychology. Annual Review of Critical Psychology, 2, 73–87.
Kagan, C., & Burton, M. (2014). Culture, identity and alternatives to the consumer culture. Educar em Revista, Curitiba, Brasil, n. 53 (pp. 75–89), jul./set. Editora UFPR. https://www.academia.edu/9219654/Culture_identity_and_alternatives_to_the_consumer_culture. Retrieved November 12, 2016.
Kagan, C., Burton, M., Duckett, P., Lawthom, R., & Siddiquee, A. (2011). Critical community psychology. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
Kagan, C., Burton, M., & Siddiquee, A. (2008). Action research. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative methods in psychology (pp. 32–53). London: Sage.
Kajikawa, Y. (2008). Research core and framework for sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 3, 215–239.
Kates, R. W. (2011). What kind of a science is sustainability science? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA (PNAS), 108(49), 19449–19450. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/49/19449.full. Retrieved October 11, 2016.
Lobina, E., & Hall, D. (2001). UK water privatisation: A briefing. London: Public Services International research Unit, University of Greenwich. http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/e_records/walkerton/part2info/partieswithstanding/pdf/CUPE18UKwater.pdf. Retrieved November 12, 2016.
Martens, P. (2006). Sustainability: Science or fiction? Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 2(1), 1–5.
Mies, M., & Bennholdt-Thomsen, V. (1999). The subsistence perspective: Beyond the globalized economy. London: Zed Books.
Monbiot, G. (2015). The flood was not only foretold, it was publicly subsidised. In The Guardian. 29th December. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/29/deluge-farmers-flood-grouse-moor-drain-land. Retrieved November 12, 2016.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Power, A. (2012). The Olympic investment in east London has barely scratched the surface of the area’s needs. British Politics and Policy at LSE. August 15, 2012 Blog Entry. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/48624/. Retrieved November 12, 2016.
Raworth, K. (2014). Will these sustainable development goals get us into the doughnut (aka a safe and just space for humanity)? http://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/will-these-sustainable-development-goals-get-us-into-the-doughnut-aka-a-safe-and-just-space-for-humanity-guest-post-from-kate-raworth/. Retrieved November 1, 2016.
Richardson, L., & Durose, C. (2016). Designing public policy for co-production: Theory, practice and change. Bristol: Policy Press/University of Chicago Press.
Rogers, M. (2012). Conceptualising theories and practices of bricolage research. The Qualitative Report, 17(7), 1–17. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/rogers.pdf. Retrieved November 13, 2016.
Stafford-Smith, M., Griggs, D., Gaffney, O., Ullah, F., Reyers, B., Kanie, N., et al. (2016). Integration: The key to implementing the sustainable development goals. Published online 8 July 2016. doi:10.1007/s11625-016-0383. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11625-016-0383-3. Retrieved October 11, 2016.
UN. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development UN resolution document. New York: United Nations. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E. Retrieved October 19, 2016.
UNDP. (2015). Sustainable development goals. New York: United Nations Development Programme. http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html. Retrieved October 11, 2016.
Wallerstein, I. (2004). World systems analysis: An introduction. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Woolrych, R., Sixsmith, J., & Kagan, C. (2007). The impact of regeneration on health and well-being of local residents: The case of East Manchester. Manchester: RIHSC. ISBN 19000139.14.6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kagan, C., Burton, M.H. (2018). Putting the ‘Social’ into Sustainability Science. In: Leal Filho, W. (eds) Handbook of Sustainability Science and Research. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63007-6_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63007-6_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63006-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63007-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)