Your browser has javascript turned off or blocked. This will lead to some parts of our website to not work properly or at all. Turn on javascript for best performance.

The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

sanna.jpg

Sanna Stålhammar

Visiting researcher

sanna.jpg

Putting relational thinking to work in sustainability science–reply to Raymond et al.

Author

  • Simon West
  • L. Jamila Haider
  • Sanna Stålhammar
  • Stephen Woroniecki

Summary, in English

We welcome Raymond et al.’s invitation to further discuss the ‘pragmatics’ of relational thinking in sustainability science. We clarify that relational approaches provide distinct theoretical and methodological resources that may be adopted on their own, or used to enrich other approaches, including systems research. We situate Raymond et al.’s characterization of relational thinking in a broader landscape of differing approaches to mobilizing ‘relationality’ in sustainability science. A key contribution of relational thinking in the process-relational, pragmatist and post-structural traditions is the focus on the generation and use of concepts. This focus is proving methodologically useful for sustainability scientists. We caution against viewing the generation of concepts purely in terms of ‘applying the knife’ to ‘divide components.’ Relational thinking offers alternatives more congruent with complexity: away from an ‘external’ actor cutting away at the world with an ‘either/or’ logic, towards an ‘immersed’ actor contributing generatively within it using a ‘both/and not only’ logic. The pragmatics of relational thinking will vary according to purposes. We describe two possible pathways for using relational thinking in research practice–(i) working forwards from relations, and (ii) working backwards from existing concepts–and discuss how relational thinking can contribute to complexity-oriented visions of ‘solutions-oriented sustainability science.’.

Department/s

  • LUCSUS (Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies)
  • BECC - Biodiversity and Ecosystem services in a Changing Climate

Publishing year

2021

Language

English

Pages

108-113

Publication/Series

Ecosystems and People

Volume

17

Issue

1

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

Taylor & Francis

Topic

  • Social Sciences Interdisciplinary

Keywords

  • complex adaptive systems
  • human-nature connection
  • leverage points
  • Maraja Riechers and Alexander van Oudenhoven
  • Relational ontology
  • relational values
  • social-ecological systems
  • transformations

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 2639-5908