“Doing” Sustainability Assessment in Different Consumption and Production Contexts—Lessons from Case Study Comparison

Tobias Engelmann, Daniel Fischer, Marianne Lörchner, Jaya Bowry and Holger Rohn
Additional contact information
Tobias Engelmann: Department of Food, Nutrition, Facilities, FH Münster University of Applied Sciences, 48149 Münster, Germany
Daniel Fischer: Institute for Environmental and Sustainability Communication, Leuphana University of Lüneburg, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany
Marianne Lörchner: Thünen Institute of Rural Studies, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
Jaya Bowry: IZT—Institute for Future Studies and Technology Assessment, 14129 Berlin, Germany
Holger Rohn: Department of Business Engineering, TH Mittelhessen University of Applied Sciences, 61169 Friedberg, Germany

Sustainability, 2019, vol. 11, issue 24, 1-25

Abstract: Sustainability as a guiding idea for societal and economic development causes a growing need for reliable sustainability assessments (SAs). In response, a plethora of increasingly sophisticated, standardizAed, and specialized approaches have emerged. However, little attention has been paid to how applications of SAs in different contexts navigate the challenges of selecting and customizing SA approaches for their research purposes. This paper provides an exploration of the context-specific conditions of SA through a case study of three research projects. Each case study explores the different approaches, methodologies, as well as difficulties and similarities that researchers face in “doing” SA based on the research question “What are common challenges that researchers are facing in using SA approaches?” Our case study comparison follows a most different approach for covering a wide range of SA applications and is structured along with three key challenges of doing SA: (i) Deliberation, learning and assessment; (ii) normative assessment principles; (iii) feasibility, especially regarding data quality/availability. Above all, the comparative case study underlines the role and importance of reflexivity and context: We argue that a more explicit and transparent discussion of these challenges could contribute to greater awareness, and thus, to improving the ability of researchers to transparently modify and customize generic SA methodologies to their research contexts. Our findings can help researchers to more critically appraise the differences between SA approaches, as well as their normative assumptions, and guide them to assemble their SA methodology in a reflexive and case-sensitive way.

Keywords: sustainability assessment; comparative case study; socio-ecological research; nutrition; mindsets; food waste (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/7041/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/7041/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:24:p:7041-:d:295961

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().