IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v11y2022i10p93-d938204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-Generating Knowledge in Nexus Research for Sustainable Wastewater Treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Tamara Avellán

    (Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources (UNU-FLORES), United Nations University, 01067 Dresden, Germany)

  • Angela Hahn

    (Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources (UNU-FLORES), United Nations University, 01067 Dresden, Germany)

  • Sabrina Kirschke

    (Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources (UNU-FLORES), United Nations University, 01067 Dresden, Germany)

  • Andrea Müller

    (Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources (UNU-FLORES), United Nations University, 01067 Dresden, Germany)

  • Lucia Benavides

    (Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources (UNU-FLORES), United Nations University, 01067 Dresden, Germany)

  • Serena Caucci

    (Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources (UNU-FLORES), United Nations University, 01067 Dresden, Germany)

Abstract

Currently installed wastewater treatment systems in many developing countries are unsustainable, failing in either the social, economic or ecological dimension of sustainability. Nexus research looking at resources involved in wastewater treatment could support the transition towards more sustainable systems. Nexus thinking aims to overcome bio-physical systems thinking by including transdisciplinary research methods. Approaches for integrating results from different types of analysis and disciplinary backgrounds are scarce and have not been described extensively in nexus research. Transdisciplinary research suggests creating system, target and transformation knowledge as a common framework to describe meaningful transformations. Our goal is to show how a better understanding of the level of knowledge created by different types of analysis can pave the way towards integrating results for sustainability. In this article, three types of analysis, namely sustainability assessment, stakeholder perspective analysis and wickedness analysis, were applied in two pilot case wastewater treatment systems in Latin America. Through a three-step process, generated knowledge was assessed for each type of analysis individually while also highlighting synergies between them. The results demonstrate that structuring results by generated knowledge type can help combining outcomes in a meaningful manner. The findings show that technical flaws are present and fixable, and that issues relating to behaviours or values are more challenging to address but arguably more meaningful for systemic change.

Suggested Citation

  • Tamara Avellán & Angela Hahn & Sabrina Kirschke & Andrea Müller & Lucia Benavides & Serena Caucci, 2022. "Co-Generating Knowledge in Nexus Research for Sustainable Wastewater Treatment," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-25, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:93-:d:938204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/11/10/93/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/11/10/93/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertanza, Giorgio & Baroni, Pietro & Canato, Matteo, 2016. "Ranking sewage sludge management strategies by means of Decision Support Systems: A case study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 1-15.
    2. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    3. Sabrina Kirschke & Jens Newig, 2017. "Addressing Complexity in Environmental Management and Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    5. Sabrina Kirschke & Lulu Zhang & Kristin Meyer, 2018. "Decoding the Wickedness of Resource Nexus Problems—Examples from Water-Soil Nexus Problems in China," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-15, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Boncinelli, Fabio & Bartolini, Fabio & Casini, Leonardo, 2018. "Structural factors of labour allocation for farm diversification activities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 204-212.
    2. Caloffi, Annalisa & Freo, Marzia & Ghinoi, Stefano & Mariani, Marco & Rossi, Federica, 2022. "Assessing the effects of a deliberate policy mix: The case of technology and innovation advisory services and innovation vouchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    3. Bach Quang Ho & Yuki Inoue, 2020. "Driving Network Externalities in Education for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Frank, Alejandro Germán & Gerstlberger, Wolfgang & Paslauski, Carolline Amaral & Lerman, Laura Visintainer & Ayala, Néstor Fabián, 2018. "The contribution of innovation policy criteria to the development of local renewable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 353-365.
    5. Daniel Béland & Michael Howlett & Philip Rocco & Alex Waddan, 2020. "Designing policy resilience: lessons from the Affordable Care Act," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 269-289, June.
    6. Sampsa Hyysalo & Jani Lukkarinen & Paula Kivimaa & Raimo Lovio & Armi Temmes & Mikael Hildén & Tatu Marttila & Karoliina Auvinen & Sofi Perikangas & Allu Pyhälammi & Janne Peljo & Kaisa Savolainen & L, 2019. "Developing Policy Pathways: Redesigning Transition Arenas for Mid-range Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, January.
    7. Nina Savela & Jarkko Levänen & Sara Lindeman & Nnenesi Kgabi & Heikki Koivisto & Meri Olenius & Samuel John & Damas Mashauri & Minna M. Keinänen-Toivola, 2020. "Rapid Urbanization and Infrastructure Pressure: Comparing the Sustainability Transition Potential of Water and Energy Regimes in Namibia," World, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Chunhong Sheng & Yun Cao & Bing Xue, 2018. "Residential Energy Sustainability in China and Germany: The Impact of National Energy Policy System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Borozan, Dj, 2022. "Detecting a structure in the European energy transition policy instrument mix: What mix successfully drives the energy transition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    10. Bjerkan, Kristin Ystmark & Seter, Hanne, 2021. "Policy and politics in energy transitions. A case study on shore power in Oslo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    11. Emmanuel Muller & Andrea Zenker & Miriam Hufnagl & Jean-Alain Héraud & Esther Schnabl & Teemu Makkonen & Henning Kroll, 2017. "Smart specialisation strategies and cross-border integration of regional innovation systems: Policy dynamics and challenges for the Upper Rhine," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(4), pages 684-702, June.
    12. Natalie A Jones & Pascal Perez & Thomas G Measham & Gail J Kelly & Patrick D’Aquino & Katherine Daniell & Anne Dray & Nils Ferrand, 2008. "Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    13. Most Asikha Aktar & Mukaramah Binti & Md. Mahmudul Alam, 2020. "Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy for Sustainable Development," Post-Print hal-03519872, HAL.
    14. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    15. Elena Bakhanova & Jaime A. Garcia & William L. Raffe & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "Gamification Framework for Participatory Modeling: A Proposal," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1167-1182, October.
    16. Giliberto Capano & Benedetto Lepori, 2024. "Designing policies that could work: understanding the interaction between policy design spaces and organizational responses in public sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 53-82, March.
    17. Rosa Kuipers-Dirven & Matthijs Janssen & Jarno Hoekman, 2023. "Assessing university policies for enhancing societal impact of academic research: A multicriteria mapping approach," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 371-383.
    18. Pitelis, Alkis & Vasilakos, Nicholas & Chalvatzis, Konstantinos, 2020. "Fostering innovation in renewable energy technologies: Choice of policy instruments and effectiveness," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1163-1172.
    19. Rossing, Walter A.H. & Albicette, Maria Marta & Aguerre, Veronica & Leoni, Carolina & Ruggia, Andrea & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    20. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Paglialunga, Elena, 2023. "Fossil fuels subsidy removal and the EU carbon neutrality policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:93-:d:938204. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.