Bridge over troubled water: Managing compatibility and conflicts among thought collectives in sustainability science

Niko Soininen*, Christopher Raymond, Hanna Tuomisto, Laura Ruotsalainen, Henrik Thorén, Andra-Ioana Horcea-Milcu, Milutin Stojanovic, Sanna Lehtinen, Rachel Mazac, Carlos Lamuela Orta, Noora-Helena Korpelainen, Annukka Vainio, Reetta Toivanen, Timon McPhearson, Michiru Nagatsu

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    1 Citation (Scopus)
    21 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Sustainability transformations call forth new forms and systems of knowledge across society. However, few tools and processes exist for promoting dialogue among different interests and normative stances in knowledge co-creation. In this article, we build on the notion of thought collectives to argue that understanding and moderating normative tensions are necessary if sustainability science is to provide successful solutions. Drawing on an analysis of the normative tensions between rival high-tech and low-tech thought collectives in the mobility and food production sectors, we discuss three strategic approaches: applying common evaluative frameworks, building contextual convergence and embracing complexity. We argue that these strategies indicate a need to distinguish different kinds of reflexivity in managing tensions among thought collectives. As a practical conclusion, we establish sets of reflexive questions to help sustainability scientists deploy the knowledge management strategies discussed.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)27-44
    Number of pages18
    JournalSUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE
    Volume17
    Issue number1
    Early online date1 Dec 2021
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Jan 2022
    MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

    Keywords

    • Sustainability Science
    • transdisciplinary research

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Bridge over troubled water: Managing compatibility and conflicts among thought collectives in sustainability science'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this