51
3.6 Conclusion
The aim of this chapter has been to present four approaches for framing complex
sustainability challenges. It was done from the perspective of how the approaches
are learned by graduate students in one course of an international, interdisciplinary
graduate education program. Student reflections on approach competency development show that there have been challenges in achieving adequate depth in understanding of each approach. Experiences also revealed that there will be more modest
ongoing challenges in student comprehension based on individual learning style
preferences of students. Positive attributes for learning the framing approaches have
been mainly the single topic/theme used throughout the course.
References
Avelino F, Rotmans J (2009) Power in transition: an interdisciplinary framework to study power in
relation to structural change. Eur J Soc Theory 12(4):543–569
Baccarne B, Logghe S, Schuurman D, De Marez L (2016) Governing quintuple helix innovation:
urban living labs and socio-ecological entrepreneurship. Technol Innov Manag Rev 6(3):22–30
Bidone ED, Lacerda LD (2004) The use of DPSIR framework to evaluate sustainability in coastal
areas. Case study: Guanabara Bay basin, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Reg Environ Chang 4(1):5–16
Bowen RE, Riley C (2003) Socio-economic indicators and integrated coastal management. Ocean
Coast Manag 46:299–312
Buhr K, Federley M, Karlsson A (2016) Urban living labs for sustainability in suburbs in need of
modernization and social uplift. Technol Innov Manag Rev 6(1):27–34
Bulkeley H, Betsill MM (2013) Revisiting the urban politics of climate change. Environ Polit
22(1):136–154
Burns HL (2015) Transformative sustainability pedagogy: learning from ecological systems and
indigenous wisdom. J Transform Educ 13(3):259–276
Cash DW, Moser SC (2000) Linking global and local scales: designing dynamic assessment and
management processes. Glob Environ Chang 10:109–120
Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003)
Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8086–8091
Clark WC, Tomich T, van Noordwijk M, Guston D, Catacutan D, Dickson NM, McNie E (2016)
Boundary work for sustainable development: natural resource management at the consultative group on international agricultural research (CGIAR). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
113(17):4615–4622
Crnogaj K, Miroslav R, Bradac HB, Omerzel GD (2014) Building a model of researching the sustainable entrepreneurship in the tourism sector. Kybernetes 43(3/4):377–393
Daniell KA, Coombes PJ, White I (2014) Politics of innovation in multi-level water governance
systems. J Hydrol 519:2415–2435
Di Lucia L, Ericsson K (2014) Low-carbon district heating in Sweden—examining a successful
energy transition. Energy Res Soc Sci 4:10–20
EEA (1999) Environmental indicators: typology and overview, technical report no. 25/1999, EE
Agency, Editor
Evans J, Karvonen A (2014) ‘Give me a laboratory and I will lower your carbon footprint!’– urban
laboratories and the governance of low-carbon futures. Int J Urban Reg Res 38(2):413–430
3 Approaches for Framing Sustainability Challenges: Experiences from Swedish…
3.6 Conclusion
The aim of this chapter has been to present four approaches for framing complex
sustainability challenges. It was done from the perspective of how the approaches
are learned by graduate students in one course of an international, interdisciplinary
graduate education program. Student reflections on approach competency development show that there have been challenges in achieving adequate depth in understanding of each approach. Experiences also revealed that there will be more modest
ongoing challenges in student comprehension based on individual learning style
preferences of students. Positive attributes for learning the framing approaches have
been mainly the single topic/theme used throughout the course.
References
Avelino F, Rotmans J (2009) Power in transition: an interdisciplinary framework to study power in
relation to structural change. Eur J Soc Theory 12(4):543–569
Baccarne B, Logghe S, Schuurman D, De Marez L (2016) Governing quintuple helix innovation:
urban living labs and socio-ecological entrepreneurship. Technol Innov Manag Rev 6(3):22–30
Bidone ED, Lacerda LD (2004) The use of DPSIR framework to evaluate sustainability in coastal
areas. Case study: Guanabara Bay basin, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Reg Environ Chang 4(1):5–16
Bowen RE, Riley C (2003) Socio-economic indicators and integrated coastal management. Ocean
Coast Manag 46:299–312
Buhr K, Federley M, Karlsson A (2016) Urban living labs for sustainability in suburbs in need of
modernization and social uplift. Technol Innov Manag Rev 6(1):27–34
Bulkeley H, Betsill MM (2013) Revisiting the urban politics of climate change. Environ Polit
22(1):136–154
Burns HL (2015) Transformative sustainability pedagogy: learning from ecological systems and
indigenous wisdom. J Transform Educ 13(3):259–276
Cash DW, Moser SC (2000) Linking global and local scales: designing dynamic assessment and
management processes. Glob Environ Chang 10:109–120
Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003)
Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8086–8091
Clark WC, Tomich T, van Noordwijk M, Guston D, Catacutan D, Dickson NM, McNie E (2016)
Boundary work for sustainable development: natural resource management at the consultative group on international agricultural research (CGIAR). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
113(17):4615–4622
Crnogaj K, Miroslav R, Bradac HB, Omerzel GD (2014) Building a model of researching the sustainable entrepreneurship in the tourism sector. Kybernetes 43(3/4):377–393
Daniell KA, Coombes PJ, White I (2014) Politics of innovation in multi-level water governance
systems. J Hydrol 519:2415–2435
Di Lucia L, Ericsson K (2014) Low-carbon district heating in Sweden—examining a successful
energy transition. Energy Res Soc Sci 4:10–20
EEA (1999) Environmental indicators: typology and overview, technical report no. 25/1999, EE
Agency, Editor
Evans J, Karvonen A (2014) ‘Give me a laboratory and I will lower your carbon footprint!’– urban
laboratories and the governance of low-carbon futures. Int J Urban Reg Res 38(2):413–430
3 Approaches for Framing Sustainability Challenges: Experiences from Swedish…