Abstract
AbstractAcceptance by, and cooperation with relevant stakeholders in developing new sustainability initiatives when they are generally perceived as positive, is one of the keys for successful implementation of such new sustainability initiatives later on. It is remarkable, however, that ample literature exists about involving stakeholders in research projects focusing on problems with diverging views (controversy) around facts and values (wicked problems), but there is very little literature addressing whether and how to involve relevant stakeholders in case of initiatives where diverging norms and values do not play a (substantial) role, like in sustainability assessment for a future seaweed industry. This perspectives paper addresses that gap, and explores how to design such sustainability assessment, illustrated by how stakeholder interaction influenced the assessment and its results for a future seaweed industry in Sweden, followed by a discussion whether and how a similar approach may benefit sustainability assessment of other non-wicked sustainability initiatives.
Funder
Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas
Royal Institute of Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Ecology,Environmental Chemistry,Geography, Planning and Development,General Medicine
Reference50 articles.
1. Ackefors, H. 1980. Swedish aquaculture–An industry for future livelihoods and employment. Delegation for Natural Resource Research, Report 28-N, ISSN 0348-3991, Sweden (in Swedish).
2. Ackefors, H., K. Grip, and N. Holmström-Dhejne. 1982. Aquaculture in Sweden—Proposed actions. Research Council Board, Report 82:14, Gothenburg, Sweden (in Swedish, English summary).
3. Arnstein, S.R. 1969. A Ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35: 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225.
4. Björnberg, K.E., M. Karlsson, M. Gilek, and S.O. Hansson. 2017. Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015. Journal of Cleaner Production 167: 229–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.066.
5. Bremer, S., and S. Meisch. 2017. Co-production in climatechange research: Reviewingdifferent perspectives. WIREs Climate Change 8: 482. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.482.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献