Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A review of data-intensive approaches for sustainability: methodology, epistemology, normativity, and ontology

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Sustainability Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the growth of data, data-intensive approaches for sustainability are becoming widespread and have been endorsed by various stakeholders. To understand their implications, in this paper, data-intensive approaches for sustainability will be explored by conducting an extensive review. The current data-intensive approaches are defined as an amalgamation of traditional data-collection methods, such as surveys and data from monitoring networks, with new data-collection methods that involve new information communication technology. Based on a comprehensive review of the current data-intensive approaches for sustainability, key challenges are identified: the lack of data availability, diverse indicators developed from a narrowly viewed base, diverse definitions and values, skewed global representation, and the lack of social and economic information collected, especially among the business indicators. To clarify the implications of these trends, four major research assumptions regarding data-intensive approaches are elaborated: the methodology, epistemology, normativity, and ontology. Caution is required when data-intensive approaches are masked as “objective”. Overcoming this issue requires interdisciplinary and community-based approaches that can offer ways to address the subjectivities of data-intensive approaches. The current challenges to interdisciplinarity and community-based approaches are also identified, and possible solutions are explored, so that researchers can employ them to make the best use of data-intensive approaches.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(figure by the author source—GISR)

Fig. 2, 3

(figure by the author source—GISR)

Fig. 4

(figure by author source—Center for Open Data Enterprise)

Fig. 5

(figure by the author source—Center for Open Data Enterprise)

Fig. 6, 7

(figure by the author source—Center for Open Data Enterprise)

Fig. 8

(figure by the author source—Center for Open Data Enterprise)

Fig. 9

(figure by the author source—Global Pulse 2018)

Fig. 10

(figure by the author source—Global Pulse 2018)

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. The planetary boundaries frame a safe operating space as a condition for sustainable development which is applicable to governments, business, and researchers (Rockström 2009).

References

  • Agrawal A (1995) Dismantling the divide between indigenous and scientific knowledge. Dev Change 26(3):413–439

    Google Scholar 

  • Anjum RL, Copeland S, Rocca E (2018) Medical scientists and philosophers worldwide appeal to EBM to expand the notion of ‘evidence’. BMJ Evid Based Med (bmjebm-2018)

  • Ansell CK, Bartenberger M (2016) Varieties of experimentalism. Ecol Econ 130:64–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Asokan VA, Yarime M, Esteban M (2017) Introducing flexibility to complex, resilient socio-ecological systems: a comparative analysis of economics, flexible manufacturing systems, evolutionary biology, and supply chain management. Sustainability 9(7):1091

    Google Scholar 

  • Asokan VA, Yarime M, Onuki M (2019) Bridging practices, institutions, and landscapes through a scale-based approach for research and practice: a case study of a business association in South India. Ecol Econ 160:240–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (2013) Big data: its power and perils. http://www.accaglobal.com/bigdata

  • Autodesk Inc (2016) Autodesk Inc. http://sustainability.autodesk.com/available-solutions/c-fact/. Retrieved 10 Jan 2016, from Corporate and city sustainability —C-FACT

  • Beck S (2011) Moving beyond the linear model of expertise? IPCC and the test of adaptation. Reg Environ Change 11(2):297–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger JO, Berry DA (1988) Statistical analysis and the illusion of objectivity. Am Sci 76(2):159–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjørn A, Hauschild MZ (2015) Introducing carrying capacity-based normalisation in LCA: framework and development of references at midpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20(7):1005–1018

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjørn A, Bey N, Georg S, Røpke I, Hauschild MZ (2017) Is Earth recognized as a finite system incorporate responsibility reporting? J Clean Prod 163:106–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blunt C (2015) Hierarchies of evidence in evidence-based medicine. PhD thesis, The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)

  • Böhringer C, Jochemc PE (2016) Measuring the immeasurable—a survey of sustainability indices. ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp06073.pdf. Retrieved Feb 2016 from ZEW—discussion paper no. 06-073

  • Bond AJ, Morrison-Saunders A (2011) Re-evaluating sustainability assessment: aligning the vision and the practice. Environ Impact Assess Rev 31(1):1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond AJ, Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J (2012) Sustainability assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Project Appraisal 30(1):53–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulanger PM (2014) Elements for a comprehensive assessment of public indicators. In: Report procured by the European Commission-Joint Research Centre, Econometrics and Applied Statistics (DDG 01)

  • Brown B, Chui M, Manyika J (2011) Are you ready for the era of ‘big data’. McKinsey Q 4(1):24–35

    Google Scholar 

  • BTplc (2016) Climate stabilisation intensity targets. https://www.btplc.com/Betterfuture/NetGood/OurNetGoodgoal/OurCSIMethodology/CSI_Methodology.pdf. Retrieved Jan 2016 from BTplc

  • Bulkeley H, Castán Broto V (2013) Government by experiment? Global cities and the governing of climate change. Trans Inst Br Geogr 38(3):361–375

    Google Scholar 

  • Busch L (2014) Big data, big questions| a dozen ways to get lost in translation: inherent challenges in large scale data sets. Int J Commun 8:18

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjørn A, Diamond M, Owsianiak M, Verzat B, Hauschild, MZ (2015) Strengthening the link between life cycle assessment and indicators for absolute sustainability to support development within planetary boundaries

  • Callebaut W (2012) Scientific perspectivism: a philosopher of science’s response to the challenge of big data biology. Stud Hist Philos Sci Part C Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 43(1):69–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DT (1979) Assessing the impact of planned social change. Eval Program Plan 2(1):67–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Caniglia G, Schäpke N, Lang DJ, Abson DJ, Luederitz C, Wiek A, Laubichler MD, Gralla F, von Wehrden H (2017) Experiments and evidence in sustainability science: a typology. J Clean Prod 169:39–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbon Disclosure Project (2016) Reporting to CDP. https://www.cdp.net/en-US/Respond/Pages/companies.aspx. Retrieved Jan 2016 from Carbon Disclosure Project

  • Cartwright N, Hardie J (2012) Evidence-based policy: a practical guide to doing it better. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Cash DW, Clark W, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Jaeger J (2004) Salience, credibility, legitimacy and boundaries: linking research, assessment and decision making. Global Environmental Assessment Project, Harvard University (http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/gea)

  • Center for Open Data Enterprise (2016) The open data impact map. http://opendataenterprise.org/index.html

  • Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Research Institute (2017) Harnessing the data revolution to achieve the sustainable development goals: enabling frogs to leap. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceres (2016) Global initiative for sustainability ratings (GISR). http://ratesustainability.org/hub/index.php/search/

  • Ceres and Sustainalytics (2012) The road to 2020: corporate progress on the Ceres roadmap for sustainability. Ceres and Sustainalytics, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark WC (2007) Sustainability science: a room of its own. PNAS 104(6):1737–1738. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0611291104

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clark WC, Van Kerkhoff L, Lebel L, Gallopin GC (2016) Crafting usable knowledge for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113(17):4570–4578

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Climate Disclosure Standards Board (2016) CDSB framework for reporting environmental information & natural capital. http://www.cdsb.net/what-we-do/reporting-frameworks/environmental-information-natural-capital. Retrieved 10 Jan 2016 from Climate Disclosure Standards Board

  • Colander D (2005) The making of an economist redux. J Econ Perspect 19(1):175–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole MJ, Bailey RM, New MG (2014) Tracking sustainable development with a national barometer for South Africa using a downscaled “safe and just space” framework. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111(42):E4399–E4408

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cooksey R, McDonald G (2011) Surviving and thriving in postgraduate research. VIC, Tilde University Press, Prahran

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornell S, Downing A (2004) Environment, absolute? The quality infrastructure of the planetary boundaries. Discussion paper. Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Braunschweig

    Google Scholar 

  • Cort T (2015) Vanishing materiality in sustainability reporting. Environmental leader. https://www.environmentalleader.com/2015/09/vanishing-materiality-in-sustainability-reporting/

  • Craver C, Tabery J (2017) Mechanisms in Science. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Springer, New York. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/science-mechanisms/

  • Crawford K (2013) The hidden biases in big data. Harv Bus Rev 1

  • Crawford K, Schultz J (2014) Big data and due process: toward a framework to redress predictive privacy harms. BCL Rev 55:93

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalin C, Wada Y, Kastner T, Puma MJ (2017) Groundwater depletion embedded in international food trade. Nature 543(7647):700

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dao H, Peduzzi P, Chatenoux B, Bono AD, Schwarzer S, Friot D (2015) Environmental limits and Swiss footprints based on planetary boundaries. Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN)

  • Davenport TH (2009) How to design smart business experiments. Strateg Direct 25(8)

  • Davenport TH (2015) It’s way too late not to know where your data is. Wall Street J. http://www.tomdavenport.com/wp-content/uploads/Its-Way-Too-Late-Not-to-Know-Where-Your-Data-Is.pdf

  • Davenport TH (2016) Rise of the strategy machines. MIT Sloan Manag Rev. Magazine: Fall 2016 issue. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/rise-of-the-strategy-machines/?utm_content=buffer20039&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

  • Davidian M, Louis TA (2012) Why statistics? Science 336(6077):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1218685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton A (2010) Understanding the mechanisms of economic development. J Econ Perspect 24(3):3–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Derman E (2011) Models behaving badly: why confusing illusion with reality can lead to disaster, on wall street and in life. Simon and Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • DJSI annual review 2015 (2015) http://www.sustainability-indices.com/. Retrieved 7 Jan 2016 from ROBECOSAM

  • Dunning C, Jared K (2016) ‘What SDGs can we track now?’ Center for Global Development. https://www.cgdev.org/blog/what-sdgs-can-we-track-now. Accessed 16 Sep 2018

  • Eccles RG, Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2014) The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Manag Sci 60(11):2835–2857

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards PN, Mayernik MS, Batcheller AL, Bowker GC, Borgman CL (2011) Science friction: data, metadata, and collaboration. Soc Stud Sci 41(5):667–690

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster J (1989) Nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairfield J, Shtein H (2014) Big data, big problems: emerging issues in the ethics of data science and journalism. J Mass Media Ethics 29(1):38–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitz-Gibbon CT (1990) Performance indicators, vol 2. Multilingual Matters, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  • Forscher BK (1963) Chaos in the brickyard. Science 142(3590):339

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fourcade M, Ollion E, Algan Y (2015) The superiority of economists. J Econ Perspect 29(1):89–114. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.1.89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FTSE4Good Index Series (2016) http://www.ftse.com/products/indices/FTSE4Good. Retrieved 8 Jan 2016 from FTSE Russell

  • Galli A, Wiedmann TO, Ercin E, Knoblauch D, Ewing BR, Giljum S (2011) Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint: defining the footprint family and its application in tracking human pressure on the planet. Open-EU

  • Gallopin GC (1996) Environmental and sustainability indicators and the concept of situational indicators. A systems approach. Environ Model Assess 1(3):101–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasparatos A (2010) Embedded value systems in sustainability assessment tools and their implications. J Environ Manag 91(8):1613–1622

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasparatos A, Scolobig A (2012) Choosing the most appropriate sustainability assessment tool. Ecol Econ 80:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Giampietro M, Aspinall RJ, Ramos-Martin J, Bukkens SGF (2014) Resource accounting for sustainability assessment: the nexus between energy, food, water and land use. Taylor & Francis (Routledge explorations in sustainability and governance)

  • Gilman K, Schulschenk J (2013) Sustainability accounting standards board by Ernst & Young

  • Gitelman L (2013) Raw data is an oxymoron. MIT Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Pulse (2018) Global pulse. https://www.unglobalpulse.org/jakarta

  • Global Reporting Initiative (2015) G4-GRI sustainability reporting guidelines. https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/GRIG4-Part1-Reporting-Principles-and-Standard-Disclosures.pdf. Retrieved Jan 2016 from Global Reporting Initiative

  • Goldenberg MJ (2005) Evidence-based ethics? On evidence-based practice and the” empirical turn” from normative bioethics. BMC Med Ethics 6(1):11

    Google Scholar 

  • Grantham TA (2004) Conceptualizing the (dis) unity of science. Philos Sci 71(2):133–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray R, Bebbington J (2005) Corporate sustainability, accountability and the pursuit of the impossible dream. In: Handbook of sustainable development, pp 376–394

  • Greenhalgh T (1997) How to read a paper: getting your bearings (deciding what the paper is about). BMJ 315(7102):243–246

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N (2014) Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 348:g3725

    Google Scholar 

  • Grenier L (1998) Working with indigenous knowledge: a guide for researchers. IDRC, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimmer J (2015) We are all social scientists now: how big data, machine learning, and causal inference work together. PS Polit Sci Polit 48(1):80–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudmundsson H (2003) The policy use of environmental indicators-learning from evaluation research. J Transdiscip Environ Stud 2(2):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzman K (2015) A good socially responsible investment (SRI) fund is hard to find. Yale School of Management. https://som.yale.edu/blog/2015/09/good-socially-responsible-investment-sri-fund-hard-find. Accessed 14 Sep 2015

  • Hazas M, Morley J, Bates O, Friday A (2016) Are there limits to growth in data traffic?: on time use, data generation and speed. In: Proceedings of the second workshop on computing within limits. ACM, New York, p. 14

  • Head BW (2010) Reconsidering evidence-based policy: key issues and challenges

  • Heath T, Bizer C (2011) Linked data: evolving the web into a global data space. Synth Lect Semant Web Theory Technol 1(1):1–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedström P, Ylikoski P (2010) Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annu Rev Sociol 36

  • Hoffman AJ (2015) How culture shapes the climate change debate. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton R (2015) Offline: what is medicine’s 5 sigma. Lancet 385(9976):1380

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (2011) Evidence-based conservation: Post Note 379. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Houses of Parliament, London

    Google Scholar 

  • IAEG-SDG (2015) IAEG-SDG open consultation on green indicators. Bangkok. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/iaeg-sdgs/open-consultation-2

  • Imhoff ML, Bounoua L, Ricketts T, Loucks C, Harriss R, Lawrence WT (2004) Global patterns in human consumption of net primary production. Nature 429(6994):870

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Independent Expert Advisory Group on a Data Revolution for Sustainable Development (2014) A world that counts-mobilising the data revolution for sustainable development. United Nations, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Integrated Reporting Council (‘The IIRC’) (2013) The International <IR> Framework. http://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf. Retrieved 10 Jan 2016

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2018) Summary for policymakers. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, Roberts D, Skea J, Shukla PR, Pirani A, Moufouma-Okia W, Péan C, Pidcock R, Connors S, Matthews JBR, Chen Y, Zhou X, Gomis MI, Lonnoy E, Maycock T, Tignor M, Waterfield T (eds) Global warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva

  • James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2013) An introduction to statistical learning, vol 112. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jantsch E (1970) Inter- and transdisciplinary university: a systems approach to education and innovation. High Educ 1:7–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Jerneck A, Olsson L, Ness B, Anderberg S, Baier M, Clark E, Hickler T, Hornborg A, Kronsell A, Lövbrand E, Persson J (2011) Structuring sustainability science. Sustain Sci 6(1):69–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Joint Research Centre-European Commission (JRC-EC) (2008) Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide. OECD Publishing, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Kareiva PM, McNally BW, McCormick S, Miller T, Ruckelshaus M (2015) Improving global environmental management with standard corporate reporting. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112(24):7375–7382

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Evans J, Karvonen, A (2011) Living laboratories for sustainability: exploring the politics and epistemology of urban transition. In: Cities and low carbon transitions, pp 126–141

  • Kates RW (2011) What kind of a science is sustainability science? Proc Natl Acad Sci 108(49):19449–19450. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116097108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeso A (2014) Big data and environmental sustainability: a conversation starter. Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. In: Working paper series (14-04)

  • Keeves JP (1997) Educational research methodology and measurement. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim SJ, Kara S (2014) Predicting the total environmental impact of product technologies. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 63(1):25–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Komiyama H, Takeuchi K (2006) Sustainability science: building a new discipline

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazar N (2012) The big picture: big data hits the big time. Chance 25(3):47–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Leisinger KM, Bakker MP (2013) The key challenges to 2030/2050: mapping out long-term pathways to sustainability and highlighting solutions that should be scaled up. United Nation Sustainable Development Sustainability Network

  • Lucas RE Jr (1988) On the mechanics of economic development. J Monet Econ 22(1):3–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig J, Kling JR, Mullainathan S (2011) Mechanism experiments and policy evaluations. J Econ Perspect 25(3):17–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Lydenberg SD, Rogers J, Wood D (2010) From transparency to performance: industry-based sustainability reporting on key issues. Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Madnick S, Siegel M (2002) Seizing the opportunity: exploiting. Web aggregators. MIS Q Exec 1(1):35–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Marland G, Kowalczyk T, Cherry TL (2015) Green fluff”? The role of corporate sustainability initiatives in effective climate policy: Comment on “Science-based carbon targets for the corporate world: the ultimate sustainability commitment, or a costly distraction? J Ind Ecol 19(6):934–936

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzocchi F (2015) Could Big Data be the end of theory in science?: a few remarks on the epistemology of data-driven science. EMBO Rep 16(10):1250–1255

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McAfee A, Brynjolfsson E, Davenport TH, Patil DJ, Barton D (2012) Big data: the management revolution. Harv Bus Rev 90(10):60–68

    Google Scholar 

  • MELODIES Project (2016) MELODIES project. http://www.melodiesproject.eu/. Retrieved 10 Jan 2016 from MELODIES project

  • Mihelcic JR, Crittenden JC, Small MJ, Shonnard DR, Hokanson DR, Zhang Q, Chen H, Sorby SA, James VU, Sutherland JW, Schnoor JL (2003) Sustainability science and engineering: the emergence of a new metadiscipline. Environ Sci Technol 37(23):5314–5324

    CAS  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(2):239–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne MJ, Gray R (2013) W (h) ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting. J Bus Ethics 118(1):13–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittelstadt BD, Floridi L (2016) The ethics of big data: current and foreseeable issues in biomedical contexts. Sci Eng Ethics 22(2):303–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Moir E, Moonen T, Clark G (2014) What are future cities? Origins, meanings and uses (PDF). Foresight future of cities project and future cities Catapult

  • Moran D, Kanemoto K (2017) Identifying species threat hotspots from global supply chains. Nat Ecol Evol 1(1):0023

    Google Scholar 

  • Narasimhan M, Arun A (2017) Shifting gears: randomised control trials and the future of development evaluation. South Asia@ LSE, London

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2004) Facilitating interdisciplinary research. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. Accessed 27 Feb 2015

  • Nelson MP, Vucetich JA (2012) Sustainability science: ethical foundations and emerging challenges. Nat Educ Knowl 3(10):12

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell P, Frynas JG (2007) Beyond CSR? Business, poverty and social justice: an introduction. Third World Q 28(4):669–681

    Google Scholar 

  • Nykvist B (2013) National environmental performance on planetary boundaries: a study for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1974) “Core set of indicators”

  • OECD (1993) OECD core set of indicators for environmental performance reviews: a synthesis report by the Group on the State of the Environment, vol 1(18)(83). OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2002) Indicators to measure decoupling of environmental pressure from economic growth. SG/SD(2002) 1/final

  • Olteanu A, Castillo C, Diaz F, Kiciman E (2016) Social data: biases, methodological pitfalls, and ethical boundaries. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2886526

  • O’Neil C (2017) Weapons of math destruction: how big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Broadway Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Orts E, Spigonardo J (2014) Sustainability in the age of big data. IGEL/Wharton, University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, p 16

    Google Scholar 

  • Paddison L (2013) The effectiveness of non-financial reporting—live chat round up. Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/effectiveness-non-financial-reporting-live-chat

  • Parkhurst J (2017) The politics of evidence: from evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Taylor & Francis, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Parris TM, Kates RW (2003) Characterizing and measuring sustainable development. Annu Rev Environ Resour 28(1):559–586

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauly D (1995) Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of fisheries. Trends Ecol Evol 10(10):430

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce W (2014) Scientific data and its limits: rethinking the use of evidence in local climate change policy. Evid Policy J Res Debate Pract 10(2):187–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson J, Johansson EL, Olsson L (2018a) Harnessing local knowledge for scientific knowledge production: challenges and pitfalls within evidence-based sustainability studies. Ecol Soc 23(4):38

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson J, Thorén H, Olsson L (2018b) The interdisciplinary decision problem: Popperian optimism and Kuhnian pessimism in forestry. Ecol Soc 23(3):40

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrov O, Gurin J, Manley L (2016) Open data for sustainable development (no. 24017). The World Bank, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintér L, Hardi P, Bartelmus P (2005) Indicators of sustainable development: proposals for a way forward. In: Expert group meeting on indicators of sustainable development, New York, pp 13–15

  • Poli R (1999) Framing ontology, vol 23, pp 19–26. http://www.formalontology.it/essays/Framing.pdf. Available online from the Ontology resource guide for philosophers

  • Porter T (1995) Trust in numbers: the pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princenton University Press, Princenton

    Google Scholar 

  • Puschmann C, Burgess J (2014) Big data, big questions metaphors of big data. Int J Commun 8:20

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratti C, Helbing D (2016) The hidden danger of big data. Project syndicate. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/data-optimization-danger-by-carlo-ratti-and-dirk-helbing-2016-08#comments

  • Raupach MR, Davis SJ, Peters GP, Andrew RM, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Friedlingstein P, Jotzo F, Van Vuuren DP, Le Quere C (2014) Sharing a quota on cumulative carbon emissions. Nat Clim Change 4(10):873

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Redman TC (2013) Data’s credibility problem. Harv Bus Rev 91(12):84–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1972) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin III FS, Lambin E, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B (2009) Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol Soc 14(2):32. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/(online)

  • Rockström J, Sachs JD, Öhman MC, Schmidt-Traub G (2013) Sustainable development and planetary boundaries. In: Background research paper submitted to the high level panel on the post-2015 development agenda. Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Paris

  • Ruggie JG (2017) Multinationals as global institution: power, authority and relative autonomy. Regul Govern. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutter J (2012) Evidence and evaluation in policy making. Institute for Government, London, pp 1–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Samson A (2014) The behavioral economics guide 2014. Behavioral Science Solutions Ltd., Dostupnona

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandel MJ (2010) Justice: what’s the right thing to do?. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz D (2016) The pressure to publish pushes down quality. Nature 533(7602):147

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scotland J (2012) Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research: relating ontology and epistemology to the methodology and methods of the scientific, interpretive, and critical research paradigms. English Lang Teach 5(9):9–16. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n9p9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searcy C (2016) Measuring enterprise sustainability. Bus Strateg Environ 25(2):120–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Shah S, Horne A, Capellá J (2012) Good data won’t guarantee good decisions. Harv Bus Rev 90(4):23–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd K, Hubbard D, Fenton N, Claxton K, Luedeling E, Leeuw J (2015) Development goals should enable decision-making. Nature 523(7559):152

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Silberzahn R, Uhlmann EL (2015) Many hands make tight work. Nature 526(7572):189. https://doi.org/10.1038/526189a

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Slater A, Zwat G (2015) Informing decisions, driving change: the role of data in sustainable future. GRI and Oxfam Novib, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Smaldino PE, McElreath R (2016) The natural selection of bad science. R Soc Open Sci 3(9):160384

    Google Scholar 

  • Small ML, Sampson RTJ (2014) Executive summary of bringing social science back. In: The ‘big data’ revolution and urban theory. https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/executive-summary-bringing-social-science-back-in-%E2%80%98big-data%E2%80%99-revolution-and-urban-theory

  • Spangenberg JH (2011) Sustainability science: a review, an analysis and some empirical lessons. Environ Conserv 38(3):275–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Starr MA (2014) Qualitative and mixed-methods research in economics: surprising growth, promising future. J Econ Surv 28(2):238–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Strathern M (1997) ‘Improving ratings’: audit in the British University system. Eur Rev 5(3):305–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundar N (2000) The construction and destruction of indigenous knowledge in India’s Joint Forest Management Programme. Indigenous environmental knowledge and its transformations. Harwood Academic Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 79–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Sustainability Context Group (2012) Statement to GRI on the need to enhance treatment of the sustainability context principle in G4, 24 Sep 2012

  • TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity ecological and economic foundations. In: Kumar P (ed) Earthscan, London. http://www.teebweb.org/our-publications/teeb-study-reports/ecological-and-economic-foundations/

  • Thomke S, Manzi J (2014) The discipline of business experimentation. Harv Bus Rev 92(12):17

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorén H, Persson J (2013) The philosophy of interdisciplinarity: sustainability science and problem-feeding. J Gen Philos Sci 44(2):337–355

    Google Scholar 

  • Trexler M, Schendler A (2015) Science-based carbon targets for the corporate world: the ultimate sustainability commitment, or a costly distraction? J Ind Ecol 19(6):931–933

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock G (2001) A comment on Daniel Klein’s ‘a plea to economists who favor liberty. East Econ J 27(2):203–207

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDP (2004) Human development report 2004. UNDP, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP (2002) Global environment outlook 3. UNEP, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2015) Sustainable development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300. Retrieved from United Nations

  • Varian HR (2014) Big data: new tricks for econometrics. J Econ Perspect 28(2):3–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachsmuth D, Cohen DA, Angelo H (2016) Expand the frontiers of urban sustainability. Nat News 536(7617):391

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ward JS, Barker A (2013) Undefined by data: a survey of big data definitions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1309.5821

  • WB (2004) World development report 2005: a better investment climate for everyone. WB, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller K, Kinder-Kurlanda KE (2015) Uncovering the challenges in collection, sharing and documentation: the hidden data of social media research. In: Standards and practices in large-scale social media research. International Conference on Web and Social Media, Oxford

  • Werner R (2015) The focus on bibliometrics makes papers less useful. Nature 517(7534):245–246

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann TO, Schandl H, Lenzen M, Moran D, Suh S, West J, Kanemoto K (2015) The material footprint of nations. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112(20):6271–6276

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams M, Zalasiewicz J, Waters CN, Edgeworth M, Bennett C, Barnosky AD, Ellis EC, Ellis MA, Cearreta A, Haff PK, Ivar do Sul JA (2016) The anthropocene: a conspicuous stratigraphical signal of anthropogenic changes in production and consumption across the biosphere. Earth’s Future 4(3):34–53

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2015) Open data for sustainable development. World Bank, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2018) Information and communications for development 2018: data-driven development. World Bank, Washington, DC. © World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30437. License: CC BY 3.0 IGO

  • World Council on City Data (2015) About. http://www.dataforcities.org/about. Retrieved from World Council on City Data

  • WRI (2003) World resources 2002–2004. Decisions for the Earth

  • Xu M, Cai H, Liang S (2015) Big data and industrial ecology. J Ind Ecol 19(2):205–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarime M (2017) Facilitating data-intensive approaches to innovation for sustainability: opportunities and challenges in building smart cities. Sustain Sci 12(6):881–885

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarime M (2018) Learning and open data in sustainability transitions: evolutionary implications of the theory of probabilistic functionalism. Environ Syst Decis 38(1):88–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Zawistowska S (2015) Big data and corporate sustainability—what is the role of big data in MCNS with corporate sustainability agenda and what is the practical use they can make of it? Masters thesis, Copenhagen Business School

  • Zhang Q, Jiang X, Tong D, Davis SJ, Zhao H, Geng G, Feng T, Zheng B, Lu Z, Streets DG, Ni R (2017) Transboundary health impacts of transported global air pollution and international trade. Nature 543(7647):705

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhongming Z, Linong L, Xiaona Y, Wangqiang Z, Wei L (2014) Gap analysis on linking open data for global disaster risk research

  • Ziemann M, Eren Y, El-Osta A (2016) Gene name errors are widespread in the scientific literature. Genome Biol 17(1):177

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Monbukagakusho (MEXT), the Government of Japan, for their financial assistance during the doctoral study. We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and editors for providing new insights and broadening the scope of the paper. We would like to especially thank Nikole Roland and Clare Sandford for providing editing and proofreading assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Program in Sustainability Science, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Japan

    Vivek Anand Asokan

  2. Division of Public Policy, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Masaru Yarime

  3. Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy, University College London, London, UK

    Masaru Yarime

  4. Graduate School of Public Policy, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Masaru Yarime

  5. Graduate Program in Sustainability Science (GPSS), Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Japan

    Motoharu Onuki

Authors
  1. Vivek Anand Asokan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Masaru Yarime
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Motoharu Onuki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vivek Anand Asokan.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Handled by Daniel J. Lang, Leuphana University of Lueneburg, Germany.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Asokan, V.A., Yarime, M. & Onuki, M. A review of data-intensive approaches for sustainability: methodology, epistemology, normativity, and ontology. Sustain Sci 15, 955–974 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00759-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00759-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation