2008 Edition
Krister Andersson, Michael Burns, Marcel Bursztyn, Adam Douglas Henry, Ann Laudati, Kira Matus, and Elizabeth McNie
CID Graduate Student and Research Fellow Working Paper No. 32
December 2008
Copyright 2008 Krister Andersson, Michael Burns, Marcel Bursztyn, Adam Douglas Henry, Ann Laudati, Kira Matus, Elizabeth McNie, and the President and Fellows of Harvard College
The Ruffolo Curriculum on Sustainability Science
2008 Edition
Krister Andersson, Michael Burns, Marcel Bursztyn, Adam Douglas Henry, Ann Laudati, Kira Matus, Elizabeth McNie
Abstract
The growing attention to sustainability science in recent years underscores the need for more clarification on several key questions that inhibit development within the field. Central among these questions are: What is sustainability science, and how is it distinct from sustainable development or other established disciplines that contribute to sustainability science? What are the key research questions, and how does one engage in sustainability science? How do we teach sustainability science? This working paper, presented as a graduate-level curriculum in sustainability science, represents our attempt to answer these questions. We expect this curriculum to grow and evolve as it is applied in different institutional settings, and we invite users to participate in future revisions or use this curriculum as a template for their own needs. The general format of the curriculum includes a theoretical core of sustainability science, defined collectively by narratives and key readings within 11 individual modules. Modules also emphasize applications of the theoretical concepts to practical problems of sustainability; we suggest various applications that may be substituted with preferred applications as needed.
Keywords: sustainability science, environment, development, curriculum, social-ecological systems, coupled human-natural systems
JEL subject codes:A23, Q01, O13, Q56, Q58
Citation, Context, and Program Acknowledgements
This paper may be cited as:
Andersson, Krister, Michael Burns, Marcel Bursztyn, Adam Douglas Henry, Ann Laudati, Kira Matus, and Elizabeth McNie. 2008. The Ruffolo Curriculum on Sustainability Science: 2008 Edition. CID Graduate Student and Research Fellow Working Paper No. 32. Center for International Development at HarvardUniversity, December 2008.
It is available at Professor William Clark has approved this paper for inclusion in the working paper series. We welcome users to adapt this curriculum in any way that suits their needs, although when using or referencing the Ruffolo Curriculum we would appreciate the use of the citation.We welcome feedback and contributions to this curriculum. Comments may be directed to the managing editor . If you would like to receive periodic updates on the Ruffolo Curriculum, please send an email to with the message, “subscribe ruffolo_curriculum.” This is a self-subscribing list; do not include quotes in the body of your message and leave the subject line blank.
The Ruffolo Curriculum is a collaborative effort amongst authors, who are credited on individual modules, and an editorial board that is directly responsible for the overall content and organization of the curriculum. The directors of the Sustainability Science Program act as “publishers,” and thus make final decisions on content.
The Sustainability Science Program at Harvard’s Center for International Development seeks to advance basic understanding of the dynamics of human-environment systems; to facilitate the design, implementation, and evaluation of practical interventions that promote sustainability in particular places and contexts; and to improve linkages between relevant research and innovation communities on the one hand, and relevant policy and management communities on the other. See
Editorial Board
Adam Douglas Henry (managing editor), Sustainability Science Program, HarvardUniv.
Krister Andersson, Dept. of Political Science, University of Colorado at Boulder
Michael Burns, Sustainability Science Research Programme, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in South Africa
Marcel Bursztyn, Centro de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel – Universidade de Brasilia
Ann Laudati, College of Natural Resources, Utah State Univ.
Kira Matus, Kennedy School of Government, HarvardUniv.
Elizabeth McNie, Dept. of Political Science, PurdueUniv.
Publishers
William Clark, Sustainability Science Program, HarvardUniv.
Nancy Dickson, Sustainability Science Program, HarvardUniv.
Contents
Preface to the Ruffolo Curriculum
Introduction to Sustainability Science
Values and Principles in Sustainability Science
Trends and Transitions
Resilience Theory
Tools for Complex Systems Analysis
Introduction to Governance for Sustainability
Introduction to the Analysis of Governance
Governance of Cross-scale Human-Environment Interactions
Transdisciplinarity
Linking Knowledge with Action
Learning, Reflection and Evaluation
Preface to the Ruffolo Curriculum
The Ruffolo Curriculum is the product of a seminar organized by research fellows and faculty within the Sustainability Science Program at HarvardUniversity’s Center for International Development. This seminar was meant to be a forum for fellows to discuss key research questions within sustainability science and to collectively work to advance the practice of sustainable development—that is, to ensure the long-term well-being of humans without jeopardizing the integrity of ecological systems. Of course, dealing with problems of sustainability requires the synthesis of ideas and methodologies from a wide range of disciplines. We quickly realized that successfully working together depends, first and foremost, on our ability to speak a common language in which to discuss issues of sustainability. This curriculum represents our shared efforts to develop such a language.
We had three main goals in preparing this curriculum. First, this curriculum attempts to define the field of sustainability science by collecting multiple research traditions into a central theoretical core. Our interpretation of this “central core” is reflected in the narratives that appear in each of the eleven modules that comprise the Ruffolo Curriculum. Second, this curriculum demonstrates how one engages in sustainability science by providing applications of the core ideas to practical problems of sustainable development. Although these applications are less well-developed, each module contains at least a few readings that illustrate how the theoretical ideas presented in each module have been applied to real-world problems. Our third goal is to emphasize that sustainability science requires a conception of “knowledge” and “science” that transcends classical boundaries. We argue that sustainability science requires soliciting diverse experiences and world views—thus we encourage teaching sustainability science in a way that reflects this knowledge integration characteristic by encouraging active dialogue and learning.
This curriculum is not meant to be the final word on sustainability science, but is rather a starting point. We therefore expect the Ruffolo Curriculum to grow and evolve as is it applied in different institutional settings, and as we benefit from the input of new talent and fresh ideas. To accomplish this, we plan to reproduce this curriculum on a yearly basis, and to maintain an online library of additional media that may be used as supplemental teaching materials.
The Ruffolo Curriculum is named in honor of Giorgio Ruffolo, Italy’s first minister of the environment. In 2007, the Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land, and Sea made a generous gift to the Center for International Development to support the Giorgio Ruffolo Fellowships in Sustainability Science. This fellowship program provides a forum for scholars and practitioners from around the world to advance the field of sustainability science, one result of which was our seminar series and this curriculum project.
Module 1
Introduction to Sustainability Science
Adam Douglas Henry
Sustainability science is an emerging field of research that seeks to promote sustainable futures by developing a better understanding of the complex interactions between human and natural systems. The need for a science of sustainability is demonstrated by long-standing difficulties in promoting sustainable development—broadly defined as the practice of enhancing human well-being whilst preserving fragile ecological systems. The concept of “sustainability” as a policy goal has influenced the official policy agendas of governance institutions at multiple scales, and yet there is no broad consensus on the best way to meet this challenge. A strategy to achieve the seemingly conflicting goals of sustainability and development must be grounded in a better understanding of the relationships between coupled social and ecological systems. The central purpose of sustainability science is to use rigorous scientific methods to better understand these relationships, but with the underlying normative purpose of promoting a sustainable future.
To accomplish this goal, sustainability science must borrow theoretical concepts and methodologies from a wide range of established fields. Despite this, sustainability science is more than the sum of its disciplinary parts. But if sustainability science is not merely a collection of established research programs related to human-environment interactions, then what is it? How does one actually engage in sustainability science? Perhaps the best place to begin is with the core research questions—a scientific field, after all, is defined largely by the puzzles it seeks to explain. One representative instantiation of these core questions is reported in Kates et al. (2001), and includes seven broad queries and scientific challenges ranging from the identification of tipping points at which ecological systems face a significantly increased risk of degradation (Kates et al., core question #4) to the delineation of incentive structures that can promote more sustainable human-environment interactions (Kates et al., core question #5).
Further scholarship has refined and complemented these questions, and we move closer to a comprehensive list of puzzles to address in sustainability science. Core research questions such as those proposed by Clark, Crutzen, and Schellnhuber (2004) lend more clarity to the structure of a future research program by focusing on four basic types of queries: analytical, operational, normative, and strategic. Although these questions are generally more specific than those of Kates et al. (2001), they still present daunting methodological challenges (e.g., “How are abrupt and extreme events processed through nature-society interactions?”—an analytical question) and questions whose answer is highly dependent on location and context (e.g., “What is the structure of an effective and efficient system of global environment and development institutions?”—a strategic question).
All of the core questions that have been proposed in sustainability science belie a rich and complex landscape of inquiry within individual fields. Tackling any of these puzzles will require a great deal of prior “micro-questioning,” and will likely involve research efforts that transcend multiple disciplines and employ multiple methodologies. The overarching purpose of this curriculum is to provide guidance on how one can make a practical start in sustainability science by outlining a set of knowledge with which all sustainability scientists should be familiar.
We introduce sustainability science by focusing first on characteristics that we believe collectively define the field. These characteristics are interwoven throughout the individual modules, and each carry implications for the way in which various disciplinary perspectives are employed within sustainability science.
Sustainability science is problem-driven
Sustainability science emerged from the recognition that we face severe problems of ecological degradation and human poverty, and that these problems are inextricably related. This implies that normative goals and questions play a prominent role in sustainability science, since at some point we are required to make judgments regarding the problems to be solved and the tradeoffs that we are willing to make in solving these problems.
But while the issue of which problems we are going to study is a normative question, how we study them is a positive question. Because of the critical importance of these normative concerns in sustainability science, the best strategy is to explicitly address the normative component of our research questions rather than assume them away or work to build an artificial separation between the positive and normative aspect of scientific research. We do this by immersing sustainability science in a pool of competing values, rather than avoiding values.
Sustainability science focuses on the interactions between human and natural systems
Although sustainability science draws upon many different research traditions, we focus in particular on how those research traditions help to understand the complex intersections between social and ecological systems. Focused study of individual systems (e.g., social or ecological) is certainly important, but that is left to other fields of inquiry.
This means that sustainability science faces the particularly difficult problem of creating a common language between scholars who have traditionally studied social systems and scholars who have traditionally studied ecological systems.
Building a science of sustainability requires integrating multiple forms of knowledge
In addition to building a common language between scholars of natural and social systems, a major goal of sustainability science is to build dialogue and collaboration across different sectors of the knowledge enterprise, such as academics, practitioners in the field, and local stakeholder groups. Sustainability science must also accommodate multiple knowledge systems, from local traditional knowledge to standard reductionist “scientific” knowledge, even though these systems are traditionally at odds with each other.
Study Questions
1)What distinguishes sustainability science from sustainable development? What defines the science portion of sustainability science?
2)Why are cross-scale perspectives important to sustainability science?
3)How do we engage in sustainability science? How do we work at the boundary between practice and theory?
Key Readings
Liu, J., T. Dietz, S. R. Carpenter, M. Alberti, C. Folke, E. Moran, A. N. Pell, P. Deadman, T. Kratz, J. Lubchenco, E. Ostrom, Z. Ouyang, W. Provencher, C. L. Redman, S. H. Schneider, and W. W. Taylor (2007). “Complexity of Coupled Human and Natural Systems.” Science 317(5844): 1513–1516.
Kates, R. W., W. C. Clark, R. Corell, J. M. Hall, C. C. Jaeger, I. Lowe, J. J. McCarthy, H. J. Schellnhuber, B. Bolin, N. M. Dickson, S. Faucheux, G. C. Gallopin, A. Grübler, B. Huntley, J. Jäger, N. S. Jodha, R. E. Kasperson, A. Mabogunje, P. Matson, H. Mooney, B. Moore III, T. O’Riordan, and U. Svedlin (2001). “Sustainability Science.” Science 292: 641–642.
Application Readings: Giant Panda Conservation
Liu, J., M. Linderman, Z. Ouyang, L. An, J. Yang, and H. Zhang (2001). “Ecological Degradation in Protected Areas: The Case of Wolong Nature Reserve for Giant Pandas.” Science 292: 98–101.
Liu J., Z. Ouyang, W. W. Taylor, R. Groop, Y. Tan, and H. Zhang. “A Framework for Evaluating the Effects of Human Factors on Wildlife Habitat: the Case of Giant Pandas.” Conservation Biology 13(6): 1360–1370.
Schaller, G. B. (1993). The Last Panda. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Supplemental Readings
Clark, W. C., and N. M. Dickson (2003) “Sustainability Science: The Emerging Research Program.” Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences 100(14): 8059–8061.
Clark, W. C. (2007) “Sustainability Science: A Room of Its Own.” Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences 104(6): 1737–1738.
Clark, W. C., P. J. Crutzen, and H. J. Schellnhuber (2004). “Science for Global Sustainability: Toward a New Paradigm.” In H. J. Schellnhuber, P. J. Crutzen, W. C. Clark, M. Claussen, and H. Held (Eds.). Earth Systems Analysis. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Module 2
Values and Principles in Sustainability Science
Marcel Bursztyn
Krister Andersson
Adam Douglas Henry
Since the 1972 Stockholm UN Conference on Human Environment many events occurred and blueprints have been produced stating values and principles understood to be basic to sustainability. In the 1970s environmental values were influenced by the search for better life quality in developed countries. The situation now is very different, however—the whole world must be involved. But in a diverse and unequal world, where a wide range of lifestyles and cultural standards co-exist, the perceptions and willingness to change vary greatly from one society to the next. In spite of a general concern over negative global environmental change, there are widely different views over the correct set of priorities and distribution of responsibilities. Values and beliefs guide these positions.
Values and sustainability
One of humanity’s great contemporary challenges is to agree on a set of foundational values that are congruent with a desired direction of societal change. This does not mean that these foundational values need to be identical—these values are going to look very different in varied cultural and historical contexts—but it does mean that these foundational values must be compatible with each other and compatible with the goal of supporting a sustainability transition.
The discourses of national leaders often seem congruent with a unified and harmonized strategy for a transition toward sustainability. This is evidenced by global environmental treaties, speeches in global forums, and the UN Charter on Human Rights. Despite this, however, actual flows of resources and actions on the ground bear witness to discrepancies between those values that are openly declared and the values that actually determine actions
The study of values, despite its apparent intangibility, has practical implications for short-term policy decisions. Most tools for decision making (such as benefit-cost analysis) require many value-based judgments, such as the definition of how future benefits will be valued. In the area of climate change policy, for example, the so-called “Stern Report” stirred up controversy when it applied an unconventionally low discount rate of 0.1 percent, implying that future generations’ well-being is just as important as our own today. Other economists, such as William Nordhaus and Partha Dasgupta, have argued that a higher discount rate would be more defensible when analyzing today’s policy options. So, who is right? The choice of an appropriate social time discount rate has long been debated. Some scholars argue that giving future generations less weight than the current generation is ethically indefensible. There is no definitive answer to this question because it requires a moral judgment comparing the well-being of those alive today and those who will be alive in 50 or 100 years. The right answer depends ultimately on the values of the person who ventures an answer.
Philosophically, the notion of value is different from the narrow economistic view. While the latter is related to the utility and desirability of a certain object, the former concerns the broader ethical fundaments that guide behavior. Values and principles are the results of historical processes. For instance, since the 18th century “all men are created equal” became a value spread worldwide (although its effective adoption has taken more than a century). Here it is worth noting that there is a difference between values as the valuation of something (e.g., of future generation’s utility) versus an object that is “valued” as being intrinsically good in of itself (e.g., peace or environmental well-being or sustainable development).