Research for sustainable development: Foundations, experiences, and perspectives

Research for Sustainable Development is based on the experiences of a decade of inter- and transdisciplinary research in partnership in nine regions of the world. It presents 29 articles in which interdisciplinary teams reflect on the foundations of sustainability-oriented research, propose and illustrate concrete concepts, tools, and approaches to overcome the challenges of such research, and show how research practice related to specific issues of sustainable development has led to new thematic and methodological insights. The book seeks to stimulate the advancement of research towards more relevant, scientifically sound, and concrete contributions to realising the vision of sustainable development.

Local environmental knowledge: a key input for the sustainable development of Andean mountain communities

Local knowledge is crucial to both human development and environmental conservation. This is especially the case in mountain regions, where a combination of remoteness, harsh climatic conditions, rich cultural heritage, and high biological diversity has led to the development of complex local environmental knowledge systems. In the Andes for instance, rural populations mainly rely on their own environmental knowledge to ensure their food security and health. Recent studies conducted within Quechua communities in Peru and Bolivia showed that this knowledge was both persistent and dynamic, and that it responded to socio-economic and environmental changes through cultural resistance and adaptation. As this paper argues, combining local knowledge and so-called scientific knowledge – especially in development projects – can lead to innovative solutions to the socio-environmental challenges facing mountain communities in our globalized world. Based on experiences from the Andes, this paper will provide concrete recommendations to policymakers and practitioners for integrating local knowledge into development and natural resource management initiatives.

Ethics in science: enhancing the democratisation of knowledge production in transdisciplinary research partnerships for sustainable development

Better access to knowledge and knowledge production has to be reconsidered as key to successful individual and social mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change. Indeed, concepts of sustainable development imply a transformation of science towards fostering democratisation of knowledge production and the development of knowledge societies as a strategic goal. This means to open the process of scientific knowledge production while simultaneously empowering people to implement their own visions for sustainable development. Advocates of sustainability science support this transformation. In transdisciplinary practice, they advance equity and accountability in the access to and production of knowledge at the science–society interface. UNESCO points to advancements, yet Northern dominance persists in knowledge production as well as in technology design and transfer. Further, transdisciplinary practice remains experimental and hampered by inadequate and asymmetrically equipped institutions in the North and South and related epistemological and operational obscurity. To help identify clear, practicable transdisciplinary approaches, I recommend examining the institutional route – i.e., the learning and adaptation process – followed in concrete cases. The transdisciplinary Eastern and Southern Africa Partnership Programme (1998–2013) is a case ripe for such examination. Understanding transdisciplinarity as an integrative approach, I highlight ESAPP’s three key principles for a more democratised knowledge production for sustainable development: (1) integration of scientific and “non-scientific” knowledge systems; (2) integration of social actors and institutions; and (3) integrative learning processes. The analysis reveals ESAPP’s achievements in contributing to more democratic knowledge production and South ownership in the realm of sustainable development.

Knowledge as a resource: enhancing the democratisation of knowledge production in transdisciplinary research partnerships for sustainable development

Better access to knowledge and knowledge production has to be reconsidered as key to successful individual and social mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change. Indeed, concepts of sustainable development imply a transformation of science (Lubchenco 1998; WBGU 2011 and 2012) towards fostering democratisation of knowledge production as a contribution to the development of knowledge societies as a strategic goal (UNESCO 2005). This means to open the process of scientific knowledge production while simultaneously empowering people to implement their own visions for sustainable development. Advocates of sustainability science support this transformation. In transdisciplinary practice, they advance equity and accountability in the access to and production of knowledge at the science–society interface (Hirsch Hadorn et al 2006; Hirsch Hadorn et al 2008; Jäger 2009; Adger and Jordan 2009; KFPE 2012). UNESCO (2010) points to advancements, yet Northern dominance persists in knowledge production as well as in technology design and transfer (Standing and Taylor 2007; Zingerli 2010). Further, transdisciplinary practice remains experimental and hampered by inadequate and asymmetrically equipped institutions in the North and South and related epistemological and operational obscurity (Wiesmann et al 2011). To help identify clear, practicable transdisciplinary approaches, I recommend examining the institutional route (Mukhopadhyay et al 2006) – i.e., the learning and adaptation process – followed in concrete cases. The transdisciplinary Eastern and Southern Africa Partnership Programme (1998–2013) is a case ripe for such examination. Understanding transdisciplinarity as an integrative approach (Pohl et al 2008; Stock and Burton 2011), I highlight ESAPP’s three key principles for a more democratised knowledge production for sustainable development: (1) integration of scientific and “non-scientific” knowledge systems; (2) integration of social actors and institutions; and (3) integrative learning processes. The analysis reveals ESAPP’s achievements in contributing to more democratic knowledge production and South ownership in the realm of sustainable development.

Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Land Management in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai Mountains

This Strategy and Action Plan was written within the framework of the project on Sustainable Land Management in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai Mountains (PALM). PALM is an integrated transboundary initiative of the governments of the Kyrgyz Republic and the Republic of Tajikistan. It aims to address the interlinked problems of land degradation and poverty within a region that is one of Central Asia’s crucial sources of freshwater and a location of biodiversity hotspots. The project is executed by the Committee on Environment Protection in Tajikistan and the National Center for Mountain Regions Development in Kyrgyzstan, with fi nancial support from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and other donors. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the GEF Implementing Agency for the project, and the United Nations University (UNU) is the International Executing Agency. This Strategy and Action Plan integrates the work of three main teams of experts, namely the Pamir-Alai Transboundary Strategy and Action Plan (PATSAP) team, the Legal Task Forces, and a team of Natural Disaster Risk specialists. The PATSAP team was coordinated by the Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, Switzerland. The Legal Task Force was led by the Australian Centre for Agriculture and Law of the University of New England (UNE), and responsibility for the Natural Disaster Risk assessment was with the Central- Asian Institute of Applied Geosciences (CAIAG) in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. The development of the strategy took place from June 2009 to October 2010. The activities included fi eld study tours for updating the information base with fi rst-hand information from the local level, coordination meetings with actors from the region, and two multi-level stakeholder forums conducted in Khorog and Osh to identify priorities and to collect ideas for concrete action plans. The baseline information collected for the Strategy and Action Plan has been compiled by the experts and made available as reports1. A joint multi-level stakeholder forum was conducted in Jirgitol, Tajikistan, for in-depth discussion of the transboundary aspects. In August 2010, the draft Strategy and Action Plan was distributed among local, national, and international actors for consultation, and their comments were discussed at feedback forums in Khorog and Bishkek. This Strategy and Action Plan is intended as a recommendation. Nevertheless, it proposes concrete mechanisms for implementing the proposed sustainable land management (SLM) activities: The Regional Natural Resources Governance Framework provides the legal and policy concepts, principles, and regulatory requirements needed to create an enabling environment for SLM in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai region at the transboundary, national, and local levels. The priority directions outlined provide a framework for the elaboration of rayon-level strategies and for strategies on specifi c topics (forestry, livestock, etc.), as well as for further development of government programmes and international projects. The action plans may serve as a pool of concrete ideas, which can be taken up by diff erent institutions and in smaller or larger projects. Finally, this document provides a basis for the elaboration and signing of targeted cooperation agreements on land use and management between the leaders of Osh oblast (Kyrgyz Republic), Gorno Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast, and Jirgitol rayon (Republic of Tajikistan).

Challenges in the participatory assessment of sustainable management practices in dryland ecosystems under regime shifts

Regime shifts, defined as a radical and persistent reconfiguration of an ecosystem following a disturbance, have been acknowledged by scientists as a very important aspect of the dynamic of ecosystems. However, their consideration in land management planning remains marginal and limited to specific processes and systems. Current research focuses on mathematical modeling and statistical analysis of spatio-temporal data for specific environmental variables. These methods do not fulfill the needs of land managers, who are confronted with a multitude of processes and pressure types and require clear and simple strategies to prevent regime shift or to increase the resilience of their environment. The EU-FP7 CASCADE project is looking at regime shifts of dryland ecosystems in southern Europe and specifically focuses on rangeland and forest systems which are prone to various land degradation threats. One of the aims of the project is to evaluate the impact of different management practices on the dynamic of the environment in a participatory manner, including a multi-stakeholder evaluation of the state of the environment and of the management potential. To achieve this objective we have organized several stakeholder meetings and we have compiled a review of management practices using the WOCAT methodology, which enables merging scientific and land users knowledge. We highlight here the main challenges we have encountered in applying the notion of regime shift to real world socio-ecological systems and in translating related concepts such as tipping points, stable states, hysteresis and resilience to land managers, using concrete examples from CASCADE study sites. Secondly, we explore the advantages of including land users’ knowledge in the scientific understanding of regime shifts. Moreover, we discuss useful alternative concepts and lessons learnt that will allow us to build a participatory method for the assessment of resilient management practices in specific socio-ecological systems and to foster adaptive dryland management.

Implications of the sustainable development paradigm for Switzerland

The sustainable development paradigm raises issues of global, intra- and intergenerational social equity as well as respect for nature, and economic welfare. Switzerland is confronted by these issues within its own country, and has a moral responsibility vis-a-vis the rest of the world. Syndromes of global change are affecting many eco-regions, not only in developing and transition countries, but to a lesser extent also the affluent countries. Switzerland as a nation has an impact on syndromes through its far-reaching economic activities, which are non-sustainable. At the global level, more modest consumption patterns, a considerably slowed demographic change, a nonconsumptive but sustainable use of natural resources, and conflict transformation are the main prerequisites for improving sustainability. Switzerland's current contribution to sustainability is much less than what it could be, hence the need for additional action along general principles in,accordance with Swiss traditions and innovative potentials. A number of concrete actions could be taken immediately. These are: labelling the socially and ecologically sustainable production of goods and services, and their negotiation at WTO level; enhancing international cooperation and research; strengthening education and research for sustainability, and emphasizing energy and material flux efficiency at home and abroad.