Search

The COVID-19 pandemic has jolted societies out of normality, possibly creating new conditions for sustainability transformations. What does this mean for sustainability research? Because of the scope of the crisis, researchers have been heavily involved: not only have they had to speed up the pace of scientific production to provide urgently needed COVID-19 knowledge, but they have also been affected citizens. For sustainability science, this calls for an experience-based reflection on the positionality and orientation of research aiming to support sustainability transformations. Twenty sustainability researchers discussed their sustainability research on COVID-19 in three workshops based on the following questions: How does the pandemic—and the measures taken to deal with it—affect sustainable development? What can we learn from the pandemic from the perspective of societal transformation? The present discussion paper emerged from this multidisciplinary exchange among sustainability researchers, considering five topics: impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on sustainability transformations; learning for sustainability transformations; the role of solidarity; governance and political steering; and the role of science in society. Our discussions led to a meta-level reflection on what sustainability research can learn from research on COVID-19 regarding topics and disciplinary angles, time dimensions, the role of researchers, and how adequate preparation for both crises and long-term transformations requires interdisciplinary interaction.

Sustainable consumption has become an important field of research by social sciences and humanities in recent years. Trying to report the broad body of (inter)disciplinary research would be presumptuous. Therefore, we limit ourselves to summarizing some points that are key to us. Consumption does not begin with people setting foot in a store (or accessing the online shop), and it does not end with people leaving the store (or the online shop). Reducing consumption to the act of buying would be reductionist. Acts of consumption are not ending in themselves but serve diverse functional and symbolic purposes. In order to find out how the concept of consumption corridors would be received in Switzerland, we conducted a representative survey in which we asked respondents to react to arguments in favour and against this concept. The results indicate that it is not out of question to discuss fundamental questions about sustainable consumption in Switzerland – this could be a promising focus for both policy design and future research., Cite as: Di Giulio, Antonietta & Rico Defila (2021): Sustainable consumption: from environmental concerns to including justice and quality of life, in: Konsum: Auf dem Weg zu einer nachhaltigen Transformation? (Bulletin of the Swiss Academy of Humanities and Social Sciences 27,2), pp. 42-46.

Consumption Corridors: Living a Good Life within Sustainable Limits explores how to enhance peoples’ chances to live a good life in a world of ecological and social limits. Rejecting familiar recitations of problems of ecological decline and planetary boundaries, this compact book instead offers a spirited explication of what everyone desires: a good life. Fundamental concepts of the good life are explained and explored, as are forces that threaten the good life for all. The remedy, says the book’s seven international authors, lies with the concept of consumption corridors, enabled by mechanisms of citizen engagement and deliberative democracy. Across five concise chapters, readers are invited into conversation about how wellbeing can be enriched by social change that joins "needs satisfaction" with consumerist restraint, social justice, and environmental sustainability. In this endeavour, lower limits of consumption that ensure minimal needs satisfaction for all are important, and enjoy ample precedent. But upper limits to consumption, argue the authors, are equally essential, and attainable, especially in those domains where limits enhance rather than undermine essential freedoms. This book will be of great interest to students and scholars in the social sciences and humanities, and environmental and sustainability studies, as well as to community activists and the general public., List of fgures ..... xi List of boxes ..... xiii Acknowledgments ..... xv 1 Living well within limits ..... 1 2 Our vision: the good life ..... 6 But what is a good life? ..... 8 Focusing on needs ..... 12 Slipping through our fngers ..... 17 Can we be responsible for a good life for others? ..... 22 3 Consumption corridors as a vehicle to pursue the good life ..... 33 The idea ..... 33 Limits are already out there ..... 38 What kind of processes are needed? ..... 45 Getting started and building momentum ..... 52 4 What’s stopping us? ..... 55 Limits to the salvation potential of technological innovation ..... 55 Limits to effciency and markets as solutions ..... 59 Limits to consumer sovereignty and responsibility ..... 61 No limits to freedom in democratic societies? ..... 67 Shedding myths in pursuit of social change ..... 69 5 Visionary change: corridors as a pathway to the good life ..... 71 Annex 1: Needs ..... 77 Annex 2: Indicators of quality of life ..... 82 Annex 3: Estimates of upper and lower sustainable limits in foor space ..... 84 References ..... 85 Index ..... 91, Finanziert durch den Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2021 der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster (WWU Münster)

Die wissenschaftspolitischen Empfehlungen rund um die Förderung von Reallaboren, die das Begleitforschungsvorhaben der Universität Basel zu den Baden-Württembergischen Reallaboren vorlegt, zielen in erster Linie darauf, das Format Reallabor als Förderformat voranzubringen. Die Empfehlungen des 'BF-Teams Basel' rücken daher die Perspektive von Fördergebern in den Vordergrund. Entsprechend fokussieren sie nicht darauf, die Rahmenbedingungen für die Arbeit in Reallaboren zu optimieren, die Qualität ihrer Arbeit sicherzustellen oder deren Wirkung für eine Nachhaltige Entwicklung zu stärken. Vielmehr nehmen die Empfehlungen Aspekte auf einer übergeordneten Ebene in den Blick, die relevant werden, wenn ein Fördergeber prüft, das Format Reallabor in seinen Förderkanon aufzunehmen bzw. auf Dauer vorzusehen. Dies sind Aspekte wie die Frage, welche strategischen Ziele durch das Format bedient werden können oder ob sich spezielle ethischen Aufgaben stellen, es sind aber auch Fragen von der Art, welcher Zeithorizont für Ausschreibungen anzustreben ist. Die zehn wissenschaftspolitischen Empfehlungen zum Forschungs- und Förderformat Reallabor sprechen drei sich ergänzende Perspektiven an: das Format ernst nehmen, das Format gezielt einsetzen, das Format richtig fördern.