...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Cleaner Production >Thinking green, circular or bio: Eliciting researchers' perspectives on a sustainable economy with Q method
【24h】

Thinking green, circular or bio: Eliciting researchers' perspectives on a sustainable economy with Q method

机译:思维绿色,通函或生物:引发研究人员对可持续经济的观点,Q方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The continuous emergence of new ideas and terms simultaneously enables and impedes the advancement of sustainability, because of an increasingly complex conceptual landscape. This study aims at highlighting combinations of sustainability concepts (circular, green and bioeconomy) and of development models (growth, steady-state, degrowth) which selected researchers have considered priorities for pursuing sustainability transformations. Leading scholars working on sustainability issues were asked to rank 36 statements describing activities related to either circular, green, bio, growth, steady-state or degrowth economy. Using Q methodology, an exploratory approach to the identification of shared or diverging opinions, three archetypical perspectives were identified across the respondents: 1. circular solutions towards economic-environmental decoupling in a degrowth perspective; 2. a mix of circular and green economy solutions; 3. a green economy perspective, with an emphasis on natural capital and ecosystem services, and critical towards growth. Economic growth was perceived negatively across all perspectives, in contrast to the current lack of political and societal support for degrowth ideas. Neither did bioeconomy-oriented activities have support among the participating researchers, even though half of the respondents were working with bioeconomy issues, which are currently high on the political agenda. The lack of support for pro-growth and bioeconomy solutions are unexpected results given the current political discourses. While the results are not to be generalised beyond the sample, they provide valuable orientation for emerging and under-investigated research and policy directions. If bioeconomy policies are to be implemented on a broader scale, it seems worthwhile evaluating the acceptability of the bioeconomy agenda among various societal actors. Furthermore, our results point to the (still under explored) potential of formulating synergic circular, green and bioeconomy policies, possibly without a focus on economic growth. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
机译:由于越来越复杂的概念景观,新想法和术语的持续出现同时启用和阻碍可持续性的进步。本研究旨在突出可持续发展概念(循环,绿色和生物经济)的组合和开发模型(增长,稳态,神透),这些研究人员认为追求可持续性转变的优先事项。努力排名有可持续发展问题的领导学者对讨论循环,绿色,生物,生长,稳态或神透经济相关的活动进行排名第36个陈述。使用Q方法,在受访者中确定了一个识别共享或发散意见的探索方法,三个原型的观点:1。降解视角下的经济环境去耦的循环解决方案; 2.圆形和绿色经济解决方案的混合; 3.绿色经济的观点,重点是自然资本和生态系统服务,对增长至关重要。与目前对无解思想的政治和社会支持缺乏缺乏政治和社会支持相比,经济增长被认为是负面的。生物经济型活动也不在参与的研究人员中提供支持,尽管有一半的受访者正在使用生物经济问题,目前在政治议程上很高。缺乏对促进增长和生物经济解决方案的支持是出乎意料的结果,因为目前的政治话语是出乎意料的结果。虽然结果不推广在样本之外,但它们为新兴和调查后的研究和政策方向提供了有价值的取向。如果要在更广泛的规模上实施生物经济政策,它似乎有值得评估各种社会行动者中生物经济议程的可接受性。此外,我们的结果指出(仍在探索)潜力,制定协同循环,绿色和生物经济政策,可能没有注重经济增长。 (c)2019年作者。 elsevier有限公司出版

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号