1) The document discusses how Swedish social science research can better contribute to international sustainability science.
2) It notes that currently, social science research is often seen as only filling in "social boxes" in systems frameworks, rather than taking a leading role.
3) The author argues that Swedish funders need an explicit strategy to promote social science research that actively engages with emerging international sustainability agendas and challenges like integrated analysis of global change. This should include specific funding calls, review processes, and evaluations.
3. You have to agree
Agenda vision mismatch
Lack of innovation
Quality versus relevance
Limited view on relevance
Imbalanced focus
Career trajectories
4. Forward looking
The international
sustainability science
landscape
The role of Swedish funders
in promoting innovative
research
5. The international sustainability
science landscape
IHDP
Earth System
Science ESG
IGBP
Partnerhip
International Council
DIVERSITAS for Science
PECS IPBES
6. The international sustainability
science landscape
IHDP Multi-disciplinary
Earth System
Science ESG
IGBP Integrated
Partnerhip
International Council Policy-relevant
DIVERSITAS for Science
PECS IPBES
7. What is the role of Swedish social
sciences in this new international
context?
8. “The systems approach has been very
useful to research […]. However, this
systems framework limits the range of
social science in circulation in that it tends
to position social researchers as those
who can fill in the ‘social’ boxes, e.g. with
data on economic, social and demographic
trends.
pp. 31
9. RISK
“The systems approach has been very
useful to research […]. However, this
MONODISCI
systems framework limits the range of
social science in circulation in that it tends
to position social researchers as those
PLINARY
who can fill in the ‘social’ boxes, e.g. with
data on economic, social and demographic
trends.
WALLS pp. 31
10. Environment and
sustainability “as a case of”
general monodisciplinary
research
- very high relevance for one discipline
- little, if any, interest for the
international sustainability research
community
11. The question is how to contribute
constructively to integrated analysis of
global change challenges.
12. The question is how to contribute
constructively to integrated analysis of
global change challenges.
Swedish funders need an explicit
strategy (calls, review process,
evaluation) to make sure social science
research actively contributes to an
emerging international sustainability
research agenda.
13. Innovation
Yes, innovation is
important, yet risks
becoming an empty
buzzword
Organization? Methods?
Theoretical approaches?
Communication? Science-
policy interface?
14. Arizona State University
Institutional innovation
Cross-disciplinary institutes
From theoretical to practical
Commitment to innovation
15. Arizona State University
Institutional innovation
Cross-disciplinary institutes
From theoretical to practical
Commitment to innovation
17. Common vision
of innovation
Innovation
capability
Based on Skarzynski & Gibson 2008
18. Common vision
of innovation
Collaborative
Innovation environment that
reward
capability challenging the
“status quo”
Based on Skarzynski & Gibson 2008
19. Common vision
of innovation
Collaborative
Innovation environment that
reward
capability challenging the
“status quo”
Building
innovation
capabilities
Based on Skarzynski & Gibson 2008
20. Common vision
of innovation
Supporting
Collaborative
tools,
processes Innovation environment that
to enable reward
idea
capability challenging the
generation “status quo”
Building
innovation
capabilities
Based on Skarzynski & Gibson 2008
27. Example -
emerging infectious diseases
Institutional analysis
Narratives
Cultural and
ethical
dimensions
Systems
perspective ....
Notas del editor
Sweden is the first and only country, as
far as we know, to undertake such a multi-institutional self-
examination. This augurs well for the social science commu-
nity and the pursuit of sustainable development.
But, I’m not here tp praise the report, but rather highlight some forward looking issues, or some of the issues that the report does not cover, but should cover.
The systems approach has been very useful to research on
water management, climate change, air pollution, and many
other environmental problems, and has identified a number
of important social factors that influence – or are influenced
by – the environment. However, this systems framework limits
the range of social science in circulation in that it tends to
position social researchers as those who can fill in the ‘social’
boxes, e.g. with data on economic, social and demographic
trends.
There is a risk here of decoupling. By that I mean the risk of going back to a model where social science is produced to communicate with peers within the discipline, rather than with a wider sustainability science community.
If funders are too eager to create an isolated social science infrastructure with calls, reviews and evaluation that DOES NOT link to the international agenda, we are again building monodisciplinary walls.
The issue is not whether social scientists should avoid a systems approach, or whether they should but rather. Funders
My hypothesis is that innovation does not really happen in isolated departments, but rather in tightly coupled networks.
First, joint vision. All other are related to the infrastructure of research, funders play an enormously important work
First, joint vision. All other are related to the infrastructure of research, funders play an enormously important work
First, joint vision. All other are related to the infrastructure of research, funders play an enormously important work
First, joint vision. All other are related to the infrastructure of research, funders play an enormously important work
First, joint vision. All other are related to the infrastructure of research, funders play an enormously important work
Funders have a critical, fundamental role to play here in helping make the transition.
Funders have a critical, fundamental role to play here in helping make the transition.
Funders have a critical, fundamental role to play here in helping make the transition.
Funders have a critical, fundamental role to play here in helping make the transition.
Funders have a critical, fundamental role to play here in helping make the transition.
Funders have a critical, fundamental role to play here in helping make the transition.
Funders have a critical, fundamental role to play here in helping make the transition.
There is no need to make a choice really, not mutually exclusive, but rather make sure to make these two communicate. It might sound easy, but in fact, the whole system - educational and financial - is not set up to deal with this interplay between systems analysis, and human dimensions of GEC.
This is the sort of product we want to see, but for the social sciences! The question is: how do we create a funding infrastructure that promotes this sort of synthesis work, that forces us to work in transdisciplinary teams ACROSS the social sciences?
