Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAlroe, Hugo F
dc.contributor.authorSautier, Marion
dc.contributor.authorLegun, Katharine A
dc.contributor.authorWhitehead, Jay
dc.contributor.authorNoe, Egon
dc.contributor.authorMoller, Henrik
dc.contributor.authorManhire, Jon
dc.date.available2017-05-09T04:48:48Z
dc.date.copyright2017-02-23
dc.identifier.citationAlroe, H. F., Sautier, M., Legun, K. A., Whitehead, J., Noe, E., Moller, H., & Manhire, J. (2017). Performance versus Values in Sustainability Transformation of Food Systems. Sustainability, 2017(9(3), 332). doi:doi:10.3390/su9030332en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10523/7304
dc.description.abstractQuestions have been raised on what role the knowledge provided by sustainability science actually plays in the transition to sustainability and what role it may play in the future. In this paper we investigate different approaches to sustainability transformation of food systems by analyzing the rationale behind transformative acts-the ground that the direct agents of change act upon- and how the type of rationale is connected to the role of research and how the agents of change are involved. To do this we employ Max Weber’s distinction between instrumental rationality and value-rationality in social action. In particular, we compare two different approaches to the role of research in sustainability transformation: (1) Performance-based approaches that measure performance and set up sustainability indicator targets and benchmarks to motivate the agents in the food system to change; (2) Values-based approaches that aim at communicating and mediating sustainability values to enable coordinated and cooperative action to transform the food system. We identify their respective strengths and weaknesses based on a cross-case analysis of four cases, and propose that the two approaches, like Weber’s two types of rationality, are complementary-because they are based on complementary observer stances—and that an optimal in-between approach therefore cannot be found. However, there are options for reflexive learning by observing one perspective-and its possible blind spots-from the vantage point of the other, so we suggest that new strategies for sustainability transformation can be found based on reflexive rationality as a third and distinct type of rationality.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenen_NZ
dc.publisherMDPI AG, Basel, Switzerlanden_NZ
dc.relation.ispartofSustainabilityen_NZ
dc.relation.urihttp://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/3/332en_NZ
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectcomplementarity; food systems; perspectives; rationality; sustainability assessment; sustainability transformation; sustainability transition; sustainability scienceen_NZ
dc.titlePerformance versus Values in Sustainability Transformation of Food Systemsen_NZ
dc.typeJournal Articleen_NZ
dc.date.updated2017-05-08T22:26:44Z
otago.schoolCentre for Sustainabilityen_NZ
otago.relation.issue9(3), 332en_NZ
otago.relation.volume2017en_NZ
dc.identifier.doidoi:10.3390/su9030332en_NZ
otago.openaccessOpenen_NZ
dc.rights.statementThis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).en_NZ
dc.description.refereedPeer Revieweden_NZ
 Find in your library

Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International