Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Minor Matter of Great Concern: The Different Sustainability Logics of ‘Societal Benefits’ and ‘Socio-economic Profit’

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Sustainability Science and Research

Part of the book series: World Sustainability Series ((WSUSE))

  • 4777 Accesses

Abstract

Sustainability science research is characterized by its high transdisciplinary ambitions. However, despite claims to urgent social change, important sustainability principles—including social complexity issues such as learning and knowledge sharing among stakeholders—are not fully contextualized and understood within the general framework of sustainability science research. To explore possible synergies between sustainability science research and social analysis, this chapter uses a qualitative method to account for the theoretical and practical implementation of a transdisciplinary research process. Through one example of a change in Swedish natural resource management policy, the paper demonstrates how a top–down and bottom–up conflict in natural resource management was dealt with by the creation of an innovative environmental governance constellation. This was done by the mobilization of the theoretical concept of ‘boundary objects’ to develop and maintain coherence over time between stakeholders and social worlds sharing a common sustainability interest but with conflicting stakes. It is concluded that ‘boundary objects’—here, a new communication platform—can facilitate cooperation between stakeholders regarding the complexities of social–ecological systems governance and policy.

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 349.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
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

References

  • Anderson, T., & Libecap, G. (2014). Environmental markets. A property right approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Aspers, P., & Beckert, J. (2011). Value in markets. In P. Aspers & J. Beckert (Eds.), The worth of goods. Valuation & pricing in the economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlton, K. E. (2016). Food security, food systems and food sovereignty in the 21st century: A new paradigm required to meet sustainable development goals. Nutrition & Dietetics, 73, 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2013). Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Common Fisheries Policy. EC: Brussels. Accessed Oct 17, 2016 from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32013R1380

  • Evely, A. C., Fazey, I., Pinard, M., & Lambin, X. (2008). The influence of philosophical perspectives in integrative research: A conservation case study in the Cairngorms National Park. Ecology and Society, 13(2): article 52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fazey, I., Schäpke, N., Patterson, J., Hultman, J., van Mierlo, B., Säwe, F., et al. (2017). Principles for transformation research in a changing climate (submitted).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fourcade, M., Ollion, E., & Algan, Y. (2014). The superiority of economists. Maxpo discussion paper No. 14/3. Max Planck Sciences Center on Coping with Instability in Market Societies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Baggethun, E., de Groot, R., Lomas, P. L., & Montes, C. (2010). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics, 69, 1209–1218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, A. (2013). Towards an ontology of the present moment. On The Horizon, 21, 24–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holm, P., & Nolde Nielsen, K. (2007). Framing fish, making markets: The construction of individual transferable quotas (ITQs). The Sociological Review, 55(2), 173–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hultman, J., & Säwe, F. (2015). Absence and presence of social complexity in the marketization of sustainable tourism. Journal of Cleaner Production, 111, 336–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hultman, J., & Säwe, F. (2013). What is transdisciplinarity in a transdisciplinary project? (In Swedish: I vad består tvärvetenskapen i ett tvärvetenskapligt projekt?) Kulturella Perspektiv, 22(1), 39–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, D. J., Wiek, A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, M., Martens, P., Moll, P., et al. (2012). Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: Practice, principles, and challenges. Sustainability Science, 7, 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leigh Star, S. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science Technology Human Values, 35, 601–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leigh Star, S., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkely’s museum of vertebrate zoology 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, B. (2007). Articulation between neoliberal and state-oriented environmental regulation: Fisheries privatization and endangered species protection. Environment and Planning A, 39, 1926–1942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, B. (Ed.). (2008). Privatization: Property and the remaking of nature-society relations. London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J. (2006). Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way. Qualitative Research, 6(1), 9–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, T. R., Baird, T. D., Littlefield, C. M., Kofinas, G., Chapin, F., & Redman, C. L. (2008). Epistemological pluralism: Reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecology and Society, 13(2): article 46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, L., Jerneck, A., Thoren, H., Persson, J., & O’Byrne, D. (2015). Why resilience is unappealing to social science: Theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience. Scientific Advances, 1, e1400217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polk, M. (2014). Achieving the promise of transdisciplinarity: A critical exploration of the relationship between transdisciplinary research and societal problem solving. Sustainability Science, 9, 439–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan, A. E., Berbés-Blázques, M., Haider, L. J., & Peterson, G. D. (2016). Measuring and assessing resilience: Broadening understanding through multiple disciplinary perspectives. Journal of Applied Ecology, 53, 677–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, S. (2012). Uncomfortable knowledge: The social construction of ignorance in science and environmental policy discourses. Economy and Society, 41(1), 107–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber, M., Säwe, F., Hultman, J., & Linke, S. (2016). Addressing social sustainability commitments in the SSF guidelines: Institutional barriers in Sweden. In S. Jentoft (Ed.), Unpacking the voluntary guidelines for securing sustainable small-scale fisheries: From rhetoric to action. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M. (2015). Re-theorizing social network analysis and environmental governance: Insights from human geography. Progress in Human Geography, 39(4), 449–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahadu, H. (2016). Towards an umbrella science of sustainability. Sustainability Science. doi:10.1007/s11625-016-0375-3 (online).

  • Silverman, D. (2007). A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about qualitative research. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swedish Board of Agriculture and The Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management. (2016). The Swedish National strategy for professional fisheries. Swedish Board of Agriculture: Jönköping. Accessed Oct 17, 2016, from www.jordbruksverket.se

  • Säwe, F., & Hultman, J. (2012). Ask us!! We know!! Scanian professional fishers on coastal fisheries (In Swedish: Fråga oss!! Vi vet!! Skånska yrkesfiskare om det kustnära fisket). Dept of Service Studies, Lund University (Available from authors).

    Google Scholar 

  • Säwe, F., & Hultman, J. (2014). From moral to markets: The rhetoric of responsibility and resource management in EU fisheries policy. Society & Natural Resources, 27(5), 507–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Säwe, F., & Hultman, J. (2016). Two approaches to a sustainability problem: Systems modelling and social complexity in Swedish fisheries governance. Under revision: Environmental Policy and Governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittmayer, J. M., & Schäpke, N. (2014). Action, research and participation: Roles of researchers in sustainability transitions. Sustainability Science, 9, 483–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittmayer, J. M., Schäpke, N., van Steenbergen, F., & Omann, I. (2014). Making sense of sustainability transitions locally: How action research contributes to addressing societal challenges. Critical Policy Studies, 8(4), 465–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wuelser, G., & Pohl, C. (2016). How researchers frame scientific contributions to sustainable development: A typology based on grounded theory. Sustainability Science, 11, 789–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, R., & Ott, K. (2011). The quality of sustainability science. A philosophical perspective. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 7, 31–44.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Swedish Research Council Formas for the project ‘Doing sustainability through markets? Coastal communities and economies embedded in place’, Grant No. 2012-399.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Service Studies, Lund University, Helsingborg, Sweden

    Johan Hultman & Filippa Säwe

Authors
  1. Johan Hultman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Filippa Säwe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johan Hultman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Life Sciences, HAW Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Walter Leal Filho

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hultman, J., Säwe, F. (2018). A Minor Matter of Great Concern: The Different Sustainability Logics of ‘Societal Benefits’ and ‘Socio-economic Profit’. 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_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation