Framing science-based targets: Reformist and radical discourses in an Earth system governance initiative

Sasha Quahe; Sarah E. Cornell; Simon West

doi:10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196

Framing science-based targets: Reformist and radical discourses in an Earth system governance initiative

Sasha Quahe, Sarah E. Cornell, Simon West

Northern Institute

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

39 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Science-Based Targets (SBTs) are being developed for companies to contribute to global sustainability goals, including for ‘nature’. The literature has not yet explored multiple understandings of SBTs. We adopt an interpretive approach, using Q methodology to explore framings of SBTs amongst 22 scientists and practitioners engaged in SBT development. Results show two distinct framings: ‘we need science-based targets to help economic systems move towards global sustainability’ and ‘the system itself is unsustainable and needs to change – science-based targets can help’, with areas of agreement and disagreement. They lean towards reformist or radical discourse, at times weaving them together. What kinds of ‘transformation’, if any, are SBTs capable of driving? Conceptualising SBTs as a boundary object, we suggest that sustainability transformations involve paradoxical tensions, including where actors appeal to the powerful to drive change, but this inhibits the most radical discourses. We conclude with potential implications for sustainability science and governance.

Original language	English
Article number	100196
Pages (from-to)	1-13
Number of pages	13
Journal	Earth System Governance
Volume	18
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196
Publication status	Published - Dec 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Both factors advocated for a pluralistic global environmental governance for sustainability change in which business, civil society, government and science all act as change agents. This strongly aligned with the reformist version of civic environmentalist discourse ( Bäckstrand and Lövbrand, 2006 ). Business action guided by SBTs was seen as complementary to government policy, part of a broadened conception of sustainability governance. This was supported by interviews – for example, a Factor 1 participant commented:

Funding Information:
We extend our sincere thanks to all the participants in this study who generously provided their time and views. We also thank the participants in seminars at the Stockholm Resilience Centre who provided comments on earlier versions of findings. We are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers whose comments and suggestions helped to improve the paper. S.W. was funded by a Mobility Starting Grant (2017-01631) from the Swedish Research Council Formas. S.Q. was part-funded by the Erling-Persson Family Foundation. S.C. was part-funded by the European Research Council (Earth Resilience in the Anthropocene, ERC-2016-ADG 743080).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors

Access to Document

10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196

87454152-oaFinal published version, 2.78 MBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{7fe092efff3e49b9b47fb09e27baaa0b,

title = "Framing science-based targets: Reformist and radical discourses in an Earth system governance initiative",

abstract = "Science-Based Targets (SBTs) are being developed for companies to contribute to global sustainability goals, including for {\textquoteleft}nature{\textquoteright}. The literature has not yet explored multiple understandings of SBTs. We adopt an interpretive approach, using Q methodology to explore framings of SBTs amongst 22 scientists and practitioners engaged in SBT development. Results show two distinct framings: {\textquoteleft}we need science-based targets to help economic systems move towards global sustainability{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}the system itself is unsustainable and needs to change – science-based targets can help{\textquoteright}, with areas of agreement and disagreement. They lean towards reformist or radical discourse, at times weaving them together. What kinds of {\textquoteleft}transformation{\textquoteright}, if any, are SBTs capable of driving? Conceptualising SBTs as a boundary object, we suggest that sustainability transformations involve paradoxical tensions, including where actors appeal to the powerful to drive change, but this inhibits the most radical discourses. We conclude with potential implications for sustainability science and governance.",

keywords = "Boundary object, Environmental discourse, Framing, Q method, Science-based targets, Transformation",

author = "Sasha Quahe and Cornell, {Sarah E.} and Simon West",

note = "Funding Information: Both factors advocated for a pluralistic global environmental governance for sustainability change in which business, civil society, government and science all act as change agents. This strongly aligned with the reformist version of civic environmentalist discourse ( B{\"a}ckstrand and L{\"o}vbrand, 2006 ). Business action guided by SBTs was seen as complementary to government policy, part of a broadened conception of sustainability governance. This was supported by interviews – for example, a Factor 1 participant commented: Funding Information: We extend our sincere thanks to all the participants in this study who generously provided their time and views. We also thank the participants in seminars at the Stockholm Resilience Centre who provided comments on earlier versions of findings. We are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers whose comments and suggestions helped to improve the paper. S.W. was funded by a Mobility Starting Grant (2017-01631) from the Swedish Research Council Formas. S.Q. was part-funded by the Erling-Persson Family Foundation. S.C. was part-funded by the European Research Council (Earth Resilience in the Anthropocene, ERC-2016-ADG 743080). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 The Authors",

year = "2023",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196",

language = "English",

volume = "18",

pages = "1--13",

journal = "Earth System Governance",

issn = "2589-8116",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Framing science-based targets

T2 - Reformist and radical discourses in an Earth system governance initiative

AU - Quahe, Sasha

AU - Cornell, Sarah E.

AU - West, Simon

N1 - Funding Information: Both factors advocated for a pluralistic global environmental governance for sustainability change in which business, civil society, government and science all act as change agents. This strongly aligned with the reformist version of civic environmentalist discourse ( Bäckstrand and Lövbrand, 2006 ). Business action guided by SBTs was seen as complementary to government policy, part of a broadened conception of sustainability governance. This was supported by interviews – for example, a Factor 1 participant commented: Funding Information: We extend our sincere thanks to all the participants in this study who generously provided their time and views. We also thank the participants in seminars at the Stockholm Resilience Centre who provided comments on earlier versions of findings. We are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers whose comments and suggestions helped to improve the paper. S.W. was funded by a Mobility Starting Grant (2017-01631) from the Swedish Research Council Formas. S.Q. was part-funded by the Erling-Persson Family Foundation. S.C. was part-funded by the European Research Council (Earth Resilience in the Anthropocene, ERC-2016-ADG 743080). Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Authors

PY - 2023/12

Y1 - 2023/12

N2 - Science-Based Targets (SBTs) are being developed for companies to contribute to global sustainability goals, including for ‘nature’. The literature has not yet explored multiple understandings of SBTs. We adopt an interpretive approach, using Q methodology to explore framings of SBTs amongst 22 scientists and practitioners engaged in SBT development. Results show two distinct framings: ‘we need science-based targets to help economic systems move towards global sustainability’ and ‘the system itself is unsustainable and needs to change – science-based targets can help’, with areas of agreement and disagreement. They lean towards reformist or radical discourse, at times weaving them together. What kinds of ‘transformation’, if any, are SBTs capable of driving? Conceptualising SBTs as a boundary object, we suggest that sustainability transformations involve paradoxical tensions, including where actors appeal to the powerful to drive change, but this inhibits the most radical discourses. We conclude with potential implications for sustainability science and governance.

AB - Science-Based Targets (SBTs) are being developed for companies to contribute to global sustainability goals, including for ‘nature’. The literature has not yet explored multiple understandings of SBTs. We adopt an interpretive approach, using Q methodology to explore framings of SBTs amongst 22 scientists and practitioners engaged in SBT development. Results show two distinct framings: ‘we need science-based targets to help economic systems move towards global sustainability’ and ‘the system itself is unsustainable and needs to change – science-based targets can help’, with areas of agreement and disagreement. They lean towards reformist or radical discourse, at times weaving them together. What kinds of ‘transformation’, if any, are SBTs capable of driving? Conceptualising SBTs as a boundary object, we suggest that sustainability transformations involve paradoxical tensions, including where actors appeal to the powerful to drive change, but this inhibits the most radical discourses. We conclude with potential implications for sustainability science and governance.

KW - Boundary object

KW - Environmental discourse

KW - Framing

KW - Q method

KW - Science-based targets

KW - Transformation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85172910383&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196

DO - 10.1016/j.esg.2023.100196

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85172910383

SN - 2589-8116

VL - 18

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - Earth System Governance

JF - Earth System Governance

M1 - 100196

ER -

Framing science-based targets: Reformist and radical discourses in an Earth system governance initiative

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this