Merritt Polk

Are women potentially more accommodating than men to a sustainable transportation system in Sweden

Abstract The attainment of a sustainable transportation system necessitates changes in the travel behavior of individuals. In this article, a descriptive presentation of travel survey data as well as attitude surveys tests the hypothesis that women are potentially more adaptable to a sustainable transportation system than men are. This is accomplished in four parts. First, results from Swedish travel survey data have found that men travel more kilometers per year, use the car more than women with regard to the number of kilometers traveled per day, and make more trips as the sole occupant of a car. Second, results from attitude surveys show that women are more environmentally concerned and express more criticism of automobility than men. Third, women are more positive towards proposals that reduce or eliminate the environmental impact of car use to a greater extent than men. Fourth, women express more willingness to reduce their use of the car than men. In general, while there are not large differences between men and women and their attitudes towards automobility, women consistently show more support of ecological issues and are more positive towards measures which entail reductions in car use, such as improving and expanding public transportation. Women were furthermore more prepared to participate in ecologically benign activities to a greater extent than men, which included reducing car use. Because of the tendencies shown in the empirical results presented here, women are judged to have more potential for accommodating an ecologically sustainable transportation system in Sweden than men are.

Achieving the promise of transdisciplinarity: a critical exploration of the relationship between transdisciplinary research and societal problem solving

Abstract Transdisciplinarity is often presented as a way to effectively use scientific research to contribute to societal problem solving for sustainability. The aim of this paper is to critically explore this statement. This is done in two ways. First, a literature survey of transdisciplinary research is used to identify the assumptions that underlie the positive relationship between transdisciplinarity and societal problem solving for sustainability. This mapping identifies the claim that in-depth participation of users and the integration of relevant knowledge from both practice and research in real-world problem contexts produce socially robust results that contribute to sustainability. Second, the ability to live up to this claim is presented and discussed in five case study projects from Mistra Urban Futures, a transdisciplinary center in Göteborg, Sweden. The conclusions show that transdisciplinary processes, which fulfill the above conditions, do produce different types of socially robust knowledge, but this does not necessarily result in the ability to influence change in a sustainable direction. This instead creates a paradox in that the participation of stakeholders and the integration of knowledge from diverse sources require spaces that are both embedded in and insulated from practice and science proper. Such spaces produce results that are not easily aligned with sector-based target groups and formal policy processes. Institutionalizing transdisciplinarity in a boundary organization therefore solves some problems regarding participation and balanced problem ownership. However, it also creates new, hybrid problems, regarding knowledge transfer and scalability, which bridge the boundaries and challenge the praxis of planning and policy making.

Participation, value rationality and mutual learning in transdisciplinary knowledge production for sustainable development

Given the complexity of current social structures and environmental problems, attaining a truly sustainable society seems rather improbable today. Not only has society not been planned for the complexity of the preconditions and effects that sustainability entails, sustainability is also unlikely given current individual consumption patterns, prevailing economic worldviews, and the short‐term focus of political processes. In this context, transdisciplinary research is seen more and more as key to attaining social change towards sustainability. In order to do this, non‐academic actors must be extensively involved in knowledge production, and normative considerations have to be explicitly incorporated. This paper targets three key areas for discussion. These are participation, value rationality and mutual learning. The interactions of participation and value rationalities through mutual learning processes are developed through two examples of ongoing transdisciplinary research and collaboration in Western Sweden.

Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report

This study addresses whether interdisciplinarity is a prominent feature of climate research by means of a co-citation analysis of the IPCC Third Assessment Report. The debate on interdisciplinarity and bibliometric measures is reviewed to operationalize the contested notion of interdisciplinarity. The results, based on 6417 references of the 96 most frequently used journals, demonstrate that the IPCC assessment of climate change is best characterized by its multidisciplinarity where the physical, biological, bodily and societal dimensions are clearly separated. Although a few fields and journals integrate a wide variety of disciplines, integration occurs mainly between related disciplines (narrow interdisciplinarity) which indicate an overall disciplinary basis of climate research. It is concluded that interdisciplinarity is not a prominent feature of climate research. The significance of this finding is explored, given that the problem scope of climate change necessitates interdisciplinarity. Ways to promote interdisciplinarity are suggested by way of conclusion.

Institutional Capacity-building in Urban Planning and Policy-making for Sustainable Development: Success or Failure?

Abstract Local and regional governments are facing extreme challenges regarding their ability to plan for sustainable urban development. The ever-present pro-market policy agenda leaves little room regarding global considerations for long-term environmental conservation and social justice. The complexity of sustainable development also defies the traditional management and problem solving capabilities of most local municipalities. Different types of informal and formal partnerships, networks and arenas have been formed to offset such deficiencies. This paper presents an example of a cross-sector, multi-level civil servant arena and examines its ability to provide a more integrative approach to planning and policy-making in western Sweden. The results were assessed using a combination of theory on institutional capacity-building and sustainability learning. The arena increases institutional capacity by promoting relational links across organizational divisions and governance levels, and by increasing substantive knowledge. At the same time, the more radical and innovative results were either avoided or watered down, and opportunities developed through institutional capacity-building were vastly underused.

Sustainability in Practice: The Interpretation of Sustainable Development in a Regional Planning Arena for Dialogue and Learning in Western Sweden

This paper analyses the ways in which top administrators and planners have framed sustainable development in western Sweden and explores the impact of this framing on formal planning processes and decision making at a regional level. Three main conceptualizations of sustainable development are identified, which are here termed the “pro-market”, the “win–win” and the “interdependent” framings. While the “interdependent” framing was most influential in the region studied, the multi-level, multi-sector nature of the network ensured that it was not unchallenged. Instead, an open arena for learning and dialogue about long-term and holistic approaches to planning was established. This allowed a core definition of sustainable development that integrated environmental limits with basic human needs (long term and global) to have a real and practical impact on decision making.

The role of learning in transdisciplinary research: moving from a normative concept to an analytical tool through a practice-based approach

Transdisciplinary (TD) research is an example of a participatory research approach that has been developed to address the complexity of societal problems through the exchange of knowledge and expertise across diverse groups of societal actors. The concept of knowledge exchange is central to the ability of TD research to produce usable knowledge. There is, however, limited theoretical attention to the processes that enable knowledge exchange, namely learning. In this article, we analyze the “transferability” of knowledge generated in TD research settings from a practice-based approach. In this approach, learning and knowing are seen as situated in social practices, in meaning making processes where the involved participants make sense of what they do and why they do it. We describe and analyze three TD projects, and discuss the role of practitioners’ perspectives in the interpretation of the tasks and realization of TD, and in the consequences this has for the organization of the research process and the usability of its results. The analysis shows that while the project teams were given the same task and framework, they did not understand or enact TD in a similar fashion. The three projects created different goals and organizations. They also resulted in different challenges, which could be identified and analyzed by the use of a practice-based approach to learning. In the conclusions, we identify aspects for both practice and research that are important for creating sufficient conditions for learning in TD research processes so that they can better promote contributions to societal change.

Co-producing knowledge for sustainable urban futures

This chapter examines the range of activities in the sphere of urban sustainable futures that Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University has undertaken with partners over the last five years. It elaborates the strategic direction of RMIT and the rationale behind its urban engagement in Melbourne and in the other cities where RMIT has a presence-Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, Barcelona, Singapore, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Shanghai and, soon, Jakarta.At the current time, many issues and problems within sustainable urban development are managed within traditional disciplinary and organizational structures. However, problems such as, climate change, resource constraints, poverty and social tensions all exceed current compartmentalization of policy-making, administration and knowledge production. This book provides a better understanding of how researchers and practitioners together can co-produce knowledge to better contribute to solving the complex challenges of reaching sustainable urban futures. It is written for academic and professional audiences working with urban planning and sustainable cities around the world. Co-producing Knowledge is presented, by way of introduction, as a non-linear, collaborative approach to knowledge production which combines interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, cross sector and policy approaches to societal problem solving. Examples are taken from Cape Town, Gothenburg, Kisumu, Manchester, Melbourne and a selection of cities in Southeast Asia. Each city chapter discusses the drivers and motivations behind knowledge co-production and gives concrete examples of activities and approaches that have been used to promote sustainable urban futures. Each chapter is written to promote mutual learning from the approaches that are already in use. Building upon these city cases, the conclusions outline an international practice and research agenda aimed at strengthening the promotion and implementation of the knowledge co-production for sustainability across diverse urban development contexts. This book provides an overview of the diverse driving forces behind co-production, and their specific contexts and constraints in a variety of cosmopolitan urban contexts. Some of these include institutional and cross-sector barriers to co-production, the need for learning across diverse levels and contexts, and strategies for balancing scientific excellence with the needs of societal change. This book offers valuable lessons regarding the concrete implications and potential impact that co-production processes can have for different user groups, such as planners, politicians, researchers, business interests and NGOs in different urban development contexts.