Matching Items (6)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Sustainability
- All Subjects: Environmental ethics
- Genre: Doctoral Dissertation
- Creators: Minteer, Ben A
- Member of: ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Description
The greatest challenge facing humanity in the twenty-first century is our ability to reconcile the capacity of natural systems to support continued improvement in human welfare around the globe. Over the last decade, the scientific community has attempted to formulate research agendas in response to what they view as the problems of sustainability. Perhaps the most prominent and wide-ranging of these efforts has been sustainability science, an interdisciplinary, problem-driven field that seeks to address fundamental questions on human-environment interactions. This project examines how sustainability scientists grapple with and bound the deeply social, political and normative dimensions of both characterizing and pursuing sustainability. Based on in-depth interviews with leading researchers and a content analysis of the relevant literature, this project first addresses three core questions: (1) how sustainability scientists define and bound sustainability; (2) how and why various research agendas are being constructed to address these notions of sustainability; (3) and how scientists see their research contributing to societal efforts to move towards sustainability. Based on these results, the project explores the tensions between scientific efforts to study and inform sustainability and social action. It discusses the implications of transforming sustainability into the subject of scientific analysis with a focus on the power of science to constrain discourse and the institutional and epistemological contexts that link knowledge to societal outcomes. Following this analysis, sustainability science is repositioned, borrowing Herbert Simon's concept, as a "science of design." Sustainability science has thus far been too focused on understanding the "problem-space"--addressing fundamental questions about coupled human-natural systems. A new set objectives and design principles are proposed that would move the field toward a more solutions-oriented approach and the enrichment of public reasoning and deliberation. Four new research streams that would situate sustainability science as a science of design are then discussed: creating desirable futures, socio-technical change, sustainability values, and social learning. The results serve as a foundation for a sustainability science that is evaluated on its ability to frame sustainability problems and solutions in ways that make them amenable to democratic and pragmatic social action.
ContributorsMiller, Thaddeus R. (Author) / Minteer, Ben A (Thesis advisor) / Redman, Charles L. (Committee member) / Sarewitz, Daniel (Committee member) / Wiek, Arnim (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Cities around the globe struggle with socio-economic disparities, resource inefficiency, environmental contamination, and quality-of-life challenges. Technological innovation, as one prominent approach to problem solving, promises to address these challenges; yet, introducing new technologies, such as nanotechnology, into society and cities has often resulted in negative consequences. Recent research has conceptually linked anticipatory governance and sustainability science: to understand the role of technology in complex problems our societies face; to anticipate negative consequences of technological innovation; and to promote long-term oriented and responsible governance of technologies. This dissertation advances this link conceptually and empirically, focusing on nanotechnology and urban sustainability challenges. The guiding question for this dissertation research is: How can nanotechnology be innovated and governed in responsible ways and with sustainable outcomes? The dissertation: analyzes the nanotechnology innovation process from an actor- and activities-oriented perspective (Chapter 2); assesses this innovation process from a comprehensive perspective on sustainable governance (Chapter 3); constructs a small set of future scenarios to consider future implications of different nanotechnology governance models (Chapter 4); and appraises the amenability of sustainability problems to nanotechnological interventions (Chapter 5). The four studies are based on data collected through literature review, document analysis, participant observation, interviews, workshops, and walking audits, as part of process analysis, scenario construction, and technology assessment. Research was conducted in collaboration with representatives from industry, government agencies, and civic organizations. The empirical parts of the four studies focus on Metropolitan Phoenix. Findings suggest that: predefined mandates and economic goals dominate the nanotechnology innovation process; normative responsibilities identified by risk governance, sustainability-oriented governance, and anticipatory governance are infrequently considered in the nanotechnology innovation process; different governance models will have major impacts on the role and effects of nanotechnology in cities in the future; and nanotechnologies, currently, do not effectively address the root causes of urban sustainability challenges and require complementary solution approaches. This dissertation contributes to the concepts of anticipatory governance and sustainability science on how to constructively guide nanotechnological innovation in order to harvest its positive potential and safeguard against negative consequences.
ContributorsFoley, Rider Williams (Author) / Wiek, Arnim (Thesis advisor) / Guston, David H. (Committee member) / Seager, Thomas P (Committee member) / Minteer, Ben A (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
The National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS) is a collection of more than 800 areas designated as wilderness under the Wilderness Act of 1964. The Act defines wilderness as an “area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.” Wilderness lands are supposed to be pristine examples of nature where the overseeing agency has not allowed any post-designation development. The language of the act describes land designated as wilderness as “untrammeled” by people, discounting thousands of years of human influence. It also discounts the potential effect of surrounding lands and visitors on the wilderness. The management of these lands falls to all four federal land management agencies, and they each had – and still have – their own organizational perspectives on the Wilderness Act and their agency’s role in its implementation. Although the Act provided criteria for designating and managing wilderness, concrete guidance is lacking. This ambiguity has allowed a rift to emerge between those who believe that wilderness should be actively managed and those who believe that wilderness should be preserved and left alone as much as possible. The diversity of views and agency approaches have created administrative divides between wilderness lands and other land types. In parallel, the introduction of subsequent environmental laws have placed additional legal boundaries on the land, creating parcels next to and within wilderness that are subject to different uses and requirements. This study, which marshals dozens of expert interviews and explores a series of wilderness cases across the United States, focuses on several unanticipated challenges of stewarding the NWPS in the 21st Century. These include: the impacts of public land parceling due to legal obligations; how statuary ossification affects current interpretations of the various laws bearing on wilderness lands; and ultimately how land managers and agencies – who are looking toward a future of increased anthropogenic impacts on wildlife biodiversity and endangered/threatened species on wilderness lands – approach these challenges.
ContributorsFacemire, Challie Renee (Author) / Minteer, Ben A (Thesis advisor) / Ellison, Karin (Thesis advisor) / Bradshaw, Karen (Committee member) / Hahn, Beth (Committee member) / Budruk, Megha (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
With global environmental systems under increasing Anthropogenic influence, conservationists and environmental managers are under immense pressure to protect and recover the world’s imperiled species and ecosystems. This effort is often motivated by a sense of moral responsibility, either to nature itself, or to the end of promoting human wellbeing over the long run. In other words, it is the purview of environmental ethics, a branch of applied philosophy that emerged in the 1970s and that for decades has been devoted to understanding and defending an attitude of respect for nature, usually for its own sake. Yet from the very start, environmental ethics has promoted itself as contributing to the resolution of real-world management and policy problems. By most accounts, however, the field has historically failed to deliver on this original promise, and environmental ethicists continue to miss opportunities to make intellectual inroads with key environmental decisionmakers. Inspired by classical and contemporary American philosophers such as Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, John Dewey, and Richard Rorty, I defend in this dissertation the virtues of a more explicitly pragmatic approach to environmental ethics. Specifically, I argue that environmental pragmatism is not only commensurate with pro-environmental attitudes but that it is more likely to lead to viable and sustainable outcomes, particularly in the context of eco-social resilience-building activities (e.g., local experimentation, adaptation, cooperation). In doing so, I call for a recasting of environmental ethics, a project that entails: 1) a conceptual reorientation involving the application of pragmatism applied to environmental problems; 2) a methodological approach linking a pragmatist environmentalism to the tradition and process of adaptive co-management; and 3) an empirical study of stakeholder values and perspectives in conservation collaboratives in Arizona. I conclude that a more pragmatic environmental ethics has the potential to bring a powerful set of ethical and methodological tools to bear in real-world management contexts and, where appropriate, can ground and justify coordinated conservation efforts. Finally, this research responds to critics who suggest that, because it strays too far from the ideological purity of traditional environmental ethics, the pragmatic decision-making process will, in the long run, weaken rather than bolster our commitment to conservation and environmental protection.
ContributorsRojas, Christopher A (Author) / Minteer, Ben A (Thesis advisor) / Carr Kelman, Candice (Committee member) / Kinzig, Ann (Committee member) / Schoon, Michael (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
ABSTRACT
Understanding complex and adaptive socio-ecological systems (SES) to deal with our most challenging and overlapping problems such as global climate change, biodiversity loss, and rising consumption rates requires sustainability theory that is commensurate with these problems’ size and complexity. The received United Nations-based sustainability framework aims to achieve a balance among three pillars—economics, environment, and social equity—for today and for future generations. Yet, despite applying this sustainability framework for over a quarter of a century, the Earth is less sustainable, not more. Theoretical trade-offs between environmental conservation and economic growth have often reinforced business-as-usual practices and educational paradigms, and emphasized economic values over ecological limits.
How can the principles of foundational naturalists help clarify, enhance, and advance sustainability discourse? I propose that the principles of Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862), Aldo Leopold (1887-1948), Rachel Carson (1907-1964), and Edward O. Wilson (1927-), express a worldview that captures and integrates a range and depth of historical, normative, economic, ecological, scientific, and social values for a viable and applicable discourse of sustainability.
This analytical study relies on (i.) textual analysis and interpretation of four key naturalists and humanists, (ii.) analysis of secondary sources that illuminate their proto- ecological and sustainability principles, and (iii.) interviews with leading sustainability scholars. Because these thinkers integrate science and ethics, natural history and philosophy, ecology and society, and environmental and economic problems within a holistic worldview, I call them systems naturalists. Their transdisciplinary worldview of one holistic system, with economics subordinated to environmental limits, links important values from the natural sciences and the humanities. The writings and examples of systems naturalists provide more robust historical sustainability principles that can help solve our most challenging SES problems by synthesizing a broad range of knowledge in the sciences, social sciences, and the humanities to inform sustainability paradigm, practices, and pedagogy.
Understanding complex and adaptive socio-ecological systems (SES) to deal with our most challenging and overlapping problems such as global climate change, biodiversity loss, and rising consumption rates requires sustainability theory that is commensurate with these problems’ size and complexity. The received United Nations-based sustainability framework aims to achieve a balance among three pillars—economics, environment, and social equity—for today and for future generations. Yet, despite applying this sustainability framework for over a quarter of a century, the Earth is less sustainable, not more. Theoretical trade-offs between environmental conservation and economic growth have often reinforced business-as-usual practices and educational paradigms, and emphasized economic values over ecological limits.
How can the principles of foundational naturalists help clarify, enhance, and advance sustainability discourse? I propose that the principles of Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862), Aldo Leopold (1887-1948), Rachel Carson (1907-1964), and Edward O. Wilson (1927-), express a worldview that captures and integrates a range and depth of historical, normative, economic, ecological, scientific, and social values for a viable and applicable discourse of sustainability.
This analytical study relies on (i.) textual analysis and interpretation of four key naturalists and humanists, (ii.) analysis of secondary sources that illuminate their proto- ecological and sustainability principles, and (iii.) interviews with leading sustainability scholars. Because these thinkers integrate science and ethics, natural history and philosophy, ecology and society, and environmental and economic problems within a holistic worldview, I call them systems naturalists. Their transdisciplinary worldview of one holistic system, with economics subordinated to environmental limits, links important values from the natural sciences and the humanities. The writings and examples of systems naturalists provide more robust historical sustainability principles that can help solve our most challenging SES problems by synthesizing a broad range of knowledge in the sciences, social sciences, and the humanities to inform sustainability paradigm, practices, and pedagogy.
ContributorsThomas, Craig (Craig F.) (Author) / Minteer, Ben A (Thesis advisor) / Pijawka, David K (Committee member) / Hirt, Paul W (Committee member) / Boone, Christopher (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
The complexity and interconnectedness of sustainability issues has led to the joining of disciplines. This effort has been primarily within the sciences with minimal attention given to the relationship between science and art. The exclusion of art is problematic since sustainability challenges are not only scientific and technical; they are also cultural, so the arts, as shapers of culture, are critical components that warrant representation. In addition to contributing to the production of culture, arts have also been credited as catalysts for scientific breakthroughs; thus it stands to reason that understanding art-science integration will benefit sustainability’s focus on use-inspired basic research. I focus on placing art and science on equal footing to enhance understanding of how individual artists-scientists and collaborative artist-scientist teams creatively address sustainability challenges. In other words, I address the question “What does it take to develop high functioning artists-scientists or artist-scientist collaborations?”
To answer this question, I used a multipronged approach to triangulate a richer understanding of what art-science synthesis offers sustainability and how it functions. First, I performed an historical analysis of a maladapted wilderness aesthetic and turned to the work Aldo Leopold – an exemplar of an artist-scientist – for a new sustainability aesthetic. Then, I engaged in an individual contemporary art practice, culminating in a gallery exhibit, which displayed ecologically-informed work from a three year study of my backyard. Finally, I conducted small group research of artist-scientist teams tasked with developing interpretive signage for the Tres Rios wetland site. For this final element, I collected survey, wearable sensor, and ethnographic data.
Through this composite research, I found that successful art-science practices require significant energy and time investment. Although art-science is most intensive in an individual practice where the person must become “fluent” in two disciplines, it is still challenging in a group setting where members must become “conversational” in each other’s work. However, successful art-science syntheses appear to result in improved communication skills, better problem articulation, more creative problem solving, and the questioning of personal and disciplinary mental models. Thus, the outcomes of such syntheses warrant the effort required at both the individual and collaborative level.
To answer this question, I used a multipronged approach to triangulate a richer understanding of what art-science synthesis offers sustainability and how it functions. First, I performed an historical analysis of a maladapted wilderness aesthetic and turned to the work Aldo Leopold – an exemplar of an artist-scientist – for a new sustainability aesthetic. Then, I engaged in an individual contemporary art practice, culminating in a gallery exhibit, which displayed ecologically-informed work from a three year study of my backyard. Finally, I conducted small group research of artist-scientist teams tasked with developing interpretive signage for the Tres Rios wetland site. For this final element, I collected survey, wearable sensor, and ethnographic data.
Through this composite research, I found that successful art-science practices require significant energy and time investment. Although art-science is most intensive in an individual practice where the person must become “fluent” in two disciplines, it is still challenging in a group setting where members must become “conversational” in each other’s work. However, successful art-science syntheses appear to result in improved communication skills, better problem articulation, more creative problem solving, and the questioning of personal and disciplinary mental models. Thus, the outcomes of such syntheses warrant the effort required at both the individual and collaborative level.
ContributorsCardenas, Edgar (Author) / Klett, Mark (Thesis advisor) / Minteer, Ben A (Thesis advisor) / Hackett, Edward J (Committee member) / Childers, Dan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015