Case 2: transdisciplinary transition

18.2 Case 2: transdisciplinary case studies for sustainable regional and organizational transitions2 18.2.1 What can we learn from this case for environmental literacy?
This section links the idea of transdisciplinarity from Chapter 15 with the HES Postulates and the framework from Chapters 16 and 17 (see Table 18.1). We reconstruct one of our former case studies along the seven HES Postulates (see Figure 18.5*). We want to show: (i) how the HES Postulates may support structuring and mastering complex issues at the interface of different disciplines and serve for integrated modeling of coupled systems; and to exemplify (ii) how a mutual learning process among industry, administration, universities, and the public can be organized as a means of capacity-building. These two issues incorporate both aspects of Part VII, the going beyond disciplines and beyond sciences. It will become evident that (i) and (ii) are closely interlinked, coupled in our transdisciplinary case study (TdCS). The TdCS is a research approach for tackling complex real-world problems in coupled HES from multiple perspectives initiating learning processes at individual, group, organizational, and societal levels. Thus the Hierarchy Postulate P2 is not only applied for analysis but also as a structuring tool for the whole research process, in particular the mutual learning between members of universities and different actors from society.

18.2.2 What is the case about?

The TdCS design evolved out of a large MSc project course (including 330 hours student work) as a framework for learning applied research in a transdisciplinary setting. The approach is based on what we call functional sociocultural constructivism and projectbased learning (Stauffacher et al., 2006). Its ideas can be traced to the beginning of the twentieth century and the works of John Dewey, who advocated learning by doing (Dewey, 1910/1997, 1915 & 1902/2001). The TdCS includes transdisciplinary processes which support regional or organizational transition processes towards sustainable development (Scholz et al., 2006). The example we chose here is the TdCS 2002 Future of traditional industries in the canton Appenzell Ausserrhoden (Scholz & Stauffacher, 2007; Scholz et al., 2003). The initiative for this TdCS 2002 came from the side of the canton, the president of the cantons executive council (head of state) in order to better understand options of sustainable land use in the canton Appenzell Ausserrhoden (AR), as it had been studied before by us for the GermanSwiss Klettgau valley (Scholz et al., 1999, 1998). The project was led jointly by the president of the canton, Dr. Altherr, and Professor Scholz, the academic project director, in a co-leadership. This represents a specific form of mutual participation; the people from AR helped with understanding the methodological and theoretical questions of sustainability, and the university team supported the canton AR in preparing for sustainable transitions. Both parties worked on equal footing, each with their own interests and goals.

Content Case 2
C 2.1 Guiding question and system boundaries as mutually accepted frame for the TdCS 474 C 2.2 Complementarities help structuring complex humanenvironment interactions (P1) 476 C 2.3 Environmental analysis for revealing the dynamics of the environmental system (P7) 477 C 2.4 Hierarchy principle (P2) to identify different levels of the human system and interferences between and within these levels (P3) 479 C 2.5 A decision-theoretic conception for understanding the rationale of human systems (P5) 480 C 2.6 Improved environmental awareness for understanding potential barriers and drivers in human systems (P6) 480 C 2.7 Understanding feedback loops in coupled humanenvironment interactions (P4) for preparing transformations 481

Michael Stauffacher is the lead author of this case.

473

18 Applying the HES framework

Table 18.1 Six steps in TdCS 2002 Future of traditional industries in the canton Appenzell Ausserrhoden and their link to the HES Postulates

Steps (see also Box 15.1) (i) Define a guiding question (ii) Facet the case (iii) Perform system analysis (iv) Construct scenarios using formative scenario analysis (FSA) (v) Perform multi-criteria analysis (MCA) (vi) Develop orientations

Related HES Postulates Preparing for utilizing the HES framework Complementarity Postulate P1 Environment-first Postulate P7, Hierarchy Postulate P2, Interference Postulate P3; Feedback Postulate P4 Decision Postulate P5 Decision Postulate P5; Awareness Postulate P6 Feedback Postulate P4

C2.1 Guiding question and system boundaries as mutually accepted frame for the TdCS
After a first TdCS in the region on landscape development (Scholz et al., 2002), a joint decision was made to focus on traditional industries in the region, since the canton had been historically shaped by these. We implemented the following core elements in six steps (see Table 18.1; see also Box 15.1): (i) define a guiding

question; (ii) facet the case; (iii) perform a system analysis; and (iv) a scenario development; (v) conduct a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) by referring both to science-based arguments (MCA I) and by obtaining individual preferences from different stakeholder groups (MCA II); and, finally (vi), discuss the results and develop orientations (Scholz et al., 2006; Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Overall we wanted to contribute to a

Figure 18.5 An HES framework view on a transdisciplinary process for sustainable transitions of traditional industries. The numbers P1P7 refer to the different HES Postulates and are discussed in detail in previous chapters. Please check as well the call-out boxes for a first reading.

474

Case 2: transdisciplinary transition

sustainable transition of different industries those jointly chosen were the timber, dairy, and textile industries.
Transdisciplinarity A transdisciplinary project between region and university is set up with co-leadership and collaboration on equal footing.

We defined the problem and the guiding question in a round of intense discussions with a steering group. This group was strongly involved during the entire project, defining the project framework and continuously evaluating the project quality (Scholz et al., 2006). It was here that collaboration in the project was established and a substantial part of the mutual learning between science and practice took place. The steering group was composed of the following stakeholders (key agents; see Scholz & Tietje, 2002): head of office for the promotion of the economy, two heads of administration (agriculture/ forestry, environmental protection), the cantonal historian/archivist, one farmer/mayor of a community, mayor of another community, one independent expert for tourism and landscape, and three independent experts for regional planning/development. Furthermore, the project team of ETH Zurich participated (four senior researchers). Thus, different epistemics were at play in this group and varying perspectives had to be reconciled in the process. Some preliminary media analysis, in-depth interviews with key people from the region, and first experiential case encounters (Scholz & Tietje, 2002, pp. 2416) furthered our understanding of the case and helped us jointly to define the problem, which we will briefly sketch in the following paragraph. Appenzell Ausserrhoden (AR) is a canton (i.e. a small state) of 20 communities with 53 500 inhabitants on 242 km2 of land that lies between 435 and 2500 m above sea level. AR is located in the vicinity of the city of St. Gallen in the Greater Zurich Area (6090 minutes traveling distance to downtown Zurich; see Figure 18.6). During the eighteenth century, production and sales of textiles dominated economic life (Tanner, 1982; Witschi, 2002). At the same time, 56% of the total land area of AR was agricultural, with the vast majority (98%) being utilized for dairy farming. Forests covered 29.6% of the land. AR industrialized rather early, and industries still play an important role (the proportion of people working in the secondary sector was above the

Figure 18.6 Location of Appenzell Ausserrhoden (AR) in the semiurban and urban areas of St. Gallen, near the Greater Zurich Area. Dark and light gray areas are agglomeration regions according to the definition used by the Swiss Federal Statistical Office; light gray areas were designated as agglomeration regions between 1990 and 2000 (Scholz & Stauffacher, 2007, p. 2522).

Swiss average in 1910 and 2001). AR has been relatively slow in tertiary sector development (still much lower than in Switzerland) and still has an above-average proportion of agriculture. Growth of the tertiary sector has stagnated in recent years, even declining in the more isolated areas (Eisenhut & Schnholzer, 2003). Around 1880, AR was the most densely settled canton in Switzerland. From 1597 to 1794 the population even doubled, from 19 000 to 39 000 inhabitants, peaking at 57 973 in 1910 (Witschi, 2002). The population decreased to 44 500 in 1941 and slightly increased thereafter, until another decrease around 1980, which was followed by a definite growth period. This permanent struggle to maintain the number of inhabitants took place at a time of strong population growth in Switzerland. By the end of the 1990s, communities at a large distance from the national traffic infrastructure and the bigger cities suffered from decreasing population, decreasing labor opportunities, and thus decreasing wealth. Landscape was and still is the main capital of the canton, for agriculture and tourism but also for housing (Scholz & Stauffacher, 2002).
Guiding question What are the prerequisites for a sustainable regional economy meeting environmental and socioeconomic needs?

475

18 Applying the HES framework

The jointly developed and finally agreed upon guiding question reads: What are the prerequisites for a regional economy that can sustainably operate in harmony with the environment and regional socioeconomic needs? More specifically, we wanted to study which options exist with respect to regional cooperation and business strategies within traditional industries and which of these options are preferred by key stakeholders. Thus, our primary interest focused on sustainable economic development, in particular maintaining employment and supporting the clusters of older industries, as these had been affected by rapid change and decline. The system boundaries have been set at the cantonal level because industrial policy in Switzerland is still decentralized and managed at the regional level (as is also the case in some other countries, such as Austria; see Sturn, 2000). Sawmills, the dairy industry, and the textile industry were chosen because they belong to a business sector that grew in the age of agricultural manufacturing (Phelps & Ozawa, 2003), and which is under strong innovation constraints worldwide. Further, all these industries have played a decisive role in the history of AR. All three so-called traditional industries are currently experiencing a rapid process of consolidation and transition because of ubiquitous globalized product and material flows. These traditional industries exhibit both commonalities and differences. Whereas the textile and, to some extent, the sawmill industries compete in the world market, dairy products are predominantly traded on a regional or continental level. Furthermore, these three industries allow for investigation of different contexts with respect to horizontal and vertical competition and collaboration. Companies from the textile industry cover several vertical stages of the production chain. Sawmills and dairies only cover the first transformation stage, between raw materials and industrial processing. Thus, we are dealing with horizontal competition in those cases.
System definition A view from multiple stakeholder groups and disciplines identified traditional industries and their modes of cooperation as the key system boundary on the human systems side.

in a rural area, it was learned that the canton in fact extends to the fringes of a city and that industrial sites are thus sometimes in conflict with well situated housing areas. On the other hand, people from practice were first more concerned about finding alternative industries and only slowly started to realize that traditional industries might still have a future in the region. Further, it is worth mentioning that the scientific disciplines that offered relevant knowledge for tackling the guiding question were not in the environmental (social) sciences but rather came from (economic) geography, industrial and regional economics, business and management sciences, and regional and economic development disciplines. This variety of different disciplines and the need to integrate such knowledge is not surprising given the approach followed in our case study. In fact, we turn science on its head (German: Die Wissenschaft vom Kopf auf die Fsse stellen). Since we start (quite radically) from the case and develop together with case actors relevant questions, identifying the disciplines that are in position to tackle these questions is hence only a subsequent step. This brings some serious difficulties for science: one has to be very broad in ones knowledge and be flexible in familiarizing oneself with new disciplinary approaches. Of course, this cannot be done by one research group alone; thus, we had to integrate further expertise by contacting colleagues from other institutes (e.g. agricultural economics, regional economics, forest sciences, textile industry engineering). To finalize this preparatory step, we then informed the greater public about the case study and its guiding question and aims with the help of the media.

C2.2 Complementarities help structuring complex humanenvironment interactions (P1)

Both the humanenvironment and the material biophysical vs. socio-epistemic complementarities become evident when looking at traditional industries (see Table 18.2). Taking the example of the textile industry, one can distinguish between the individual firm and its workers as the human system of a company (i.e. organization; see Figure 14.1*) and the equipment and machinery as a specific company-owned material environment (Em). The role and significance a textile company has for elected politicians and inhabitants of AR canton is part of the social environment of a company (see Figure 3.3*). The commitment of many local firm managers to stay in the AR canton is partly due to the fact that many

In this initial project phase, intense learning by all involved could be observed. While, for example, those from science started with the image of the canton being

476

Case 2: transdisciplinary transition

Table 18.2 Basic complementarities in the TdCS 2002 Future of traditional industries in the canton Appenzell Ausserrhoden (see Table 3.1)

Human systems (H) Material (biophysical technological) dimension Social (epistemic cultural) dimension The living bodies (cells) and the physical activities of the owners, managers, and workers of the firms from selected industries Hm The knowledge and capabilities of the firm owners, managers, and workers such as business strategies, technology knowledge, affiliation to other market actors Hs

Environmental systems (E) Water, soil, air, production facilities, raw materials, products, the physical state of buyers, market competitors Em Horizontal/vertical interaction (networking) with actors of the supply chain (e.g. retailers, consumers, the image of the branch for key actors) Es

come from families that had owned the company for more than 100 years. Further, the environment (E) of the textile industry encompasses (i) the natural systems the industry has an impact on (water, soil/land use, air (Em)) and (ii) the horizontal/vertical cooperation within or across the production chain with other market actors (Es). In fact, historical rights for water utilization and hydroelectric plants (Em) still play a decisive role for some companies that require extensive consumption of natural resources, such as textile finishing. For survival, a company must also network with the unions (as a type of non-governmental organization) or the cantonal environmental agencies (i.e. institutions). This nicely illustrates the broader and specific use of the terms human system and environment followed in this book.
Complementarity Postulate P1 The activities of owners, managers, and workers of a textile firm constitute a company as a human system on the level of organization. The company owns, utilizes or affects parts of the material environment (production facilities, water, land, products, etc.). The action of the company (e.g. producing, buying, and selling) is embedded in a network of actors. The products produced, bought, and sold are part of a production chain which is part of the material environment.

system (E H). But there is also a social environment. This is the existing cluster of clothing companies in the neighboring canton of St. Gallen as a potential buyer of the products of textile industry and subsistence farmers who have run out of land to cultivate acting as a labor pool for the textile industry. The latter already exemplifies a coupled humanenvironment system (E H). When a given environment is exploited, other human activities become necessary which themselves have again a new and possibly different impact on the environment. Last but not least, industries do of course have direct impacts on different environmental systems (H E). We will discuss this further in the section on the Feedback Postulate P4 below.

C2.3 Environmental analysis for revealing the dynamics of the environmental system (P7) C2.3.1 Material and social environments
A thorough environmental analysis should follow the definition of the guiding question and system boundaries. In this regional economic study, the owners, managers, and the workers of selected companies in three industries (textile, dairy, and sawmills) build the core human system (see Table 18.2). The material environment includes the production facilities of these companies, the raw materials needed for production, products, emissions to the environment resulting from processes, retailers, and market competitors outside the canton, etc. In the TdCS 2002, we undertook several studies that allowed a better understanding of the environmental system in this broader sense. We conducted structured interviews with the owners and CEOs of around 20 companies, covering many topics including confidential financial (e.g. annual turnover) and environmental data (e.g. energy use and related impacts).

The different relationships between human and environment systems can again be illuminated by our TdCS: traditional industries are settled in the canton of AR because of the availability of natural (i.e. material) resources such as water as the energy source for the textile industry and sawmills; water for the textile industry to wash material; forests as wood supply for sawmills; pastures offering food for cows in the dairy industry. This is the impact of the material biophysical environment on the company as a human

477

18 Applying the HES framework

Figure 18.7 Example of material flux analysis in the TdCS 2002: milk fluxes of the production chain in the year 2001 (Scholz et al., 2003, p. 190). Of all the milk produced in AR, approximately 42% is processed in the canton. More than half of the milk goes to dairies outside the canton.

The interviews served to identify the main environmental concerns and impacts of the firms. Results of these interviews served as input for: (i) investigating the materialbiophysical environment with material flow analysis (MFA, exemplarily presented for the dairy industry in Figure 18.7) and added value analyses along the production chain as well as analysis of environmental impacts (water, air, soil, energy use, i.e. Em); and (ii) understanding the socialcultural environment by investigating the present form of collaboration within each of the three industries and between these industries and administration, politics, and science (Es).
Environment-first Postulate P7 Material flux analysis, formative scenario analysis, and added value analyses; analysis of environmental impacts and of the social environment were essential methods to understand the case.

The system analysis part of FSA results in a semi-quantitative system model, which is composed of all impact variables required to describe the current and future states of the case and their mutual interactions sufficiently. Direct impacts between all variables were carefully assessed using an impact matrix, and the results were presented graphically (system grid, system graph see Scholz & Tietje (2002)). The variety of disciplinary foci becomes evident again. Besides those mentioned previously (e.g. economic geography and industrial economics), industrial ecology and environmental natural science-related questions became more prominent with respect to environmental impacts. Further, knowledge of psychology and decision sciences had to be integrated to understand the social dimension.

C2.3.2 Organizing transdisciplinary processes

For each of the three industries, we established a reference group to discuss the project work regularly. In contrast to the steering group, we wanted to cooperate with broader segments of the public therein. To this

In addition, results from a formative scenario analysis (FSA; Scholz & Tietje, 2002; see Chapter 14.3; Wiek et al., 2007) helped us to integrate knowledge.

478

Case 2: transdisciplinary transition

end, an extended range of different people were involved, such as farmers, teachers, a hotel-keeper, housewives, a medical practitioner, a bank manager, architects, planners, foresters, and a pastor. For the system analysis, these reference groups offered their detailed qualitative insights into the components and functions of the system and allowed us a better understanding of the systems functioning. Subsequent results were fed back and discussed with the reference groups. Overall, the system analysis not only integrated knowledge from different scientific sources (beyond disciplines) but also from academia and practice (beyond science). Thereby, the understanding of the case and its problems with respect to the three industries was seriously extended, substantiated, and harmonized as well. The system analysis further helped us in detecting and discussing feedback loops (see below).

C2.4 Hierarchy principle (P2) to identify different levels of the human system and interferences between and within these levels (P3) C2.4.1 What hierarchy levels
Hierarchy Postulate P2 Assigning all people involved in the study to their hierarchy level helped in understanding the influence they have and facilitated defining their roles.

It is on this level that most of the essential business decisions are taken (see Decision Postulate P5 below). Further, we realized collaboration with the Swiss Textile Association, labor unions, and other organizations at the national level as well. Likewise, we took into account the multilevel political system in Switzerland and the (inter)national integration of these industries since Swiss regulations and international treaties (but also national and international cooperation) are critical boundary conditions for industry in the canton AR. At the group and individual levels, a multitude of individuals were involved. Moreover, representatives from all the above-mentioned representatives of the higher system levels are, at the same time, individuals (see the discussion on interference (P3) below). Additionally, surveys (with approximately 200 respondents) and more than 50 individual face-to-face interviews allowed the investigation of the individual perceptions of the issue and thus of the so-called public. At the group level, the above-mentioned steering group and reference groups served as examples of where opinions were formed and group effects could be observed. A critical issue of HES analysis is that people can take different roles. One and the same person can take the role of a worker, mother or president of the national sports association. Assigning and eliciting the specific role facilitates the analysis of the human system and conflicts among the hierarchy levels.

As mentioned above, industrial policy in Switzerland is managed at the cantonal level. The canton AR is a small state, semi-autonomous with its own constitution, political system, and has administrative and budgetary independence on many issues. Thus, AR can be considered as a society (as a level of human system) which is represented by the government, which is a legitimized decision-maker (see Chapter 15). This level was included in the TdCS 2002 as the president of canton was an active co-leader of the project. Thus the orientations and outcomes elaborated in the transdisciplinary process, which should provide socially robust solutions, had a good chance of being heard. Further down the hierarchical levels, we collaborated with several institutions, like the cantonal offices of agriculture, forestry and of environmental protection and the cantonal promoter of the economy. At the organizational level, more than 20 individual firms from textile, milk, and sawmill industries participated, each represented by their owners or CEOs.

C2.4.2 What conflicts and interferences?

Interference Postulate P3 Potential conflicts exist within hierarchy (between firms) and between hierarchy levels (e.g. between firms and cantonal offices).

With respect to interferences, we can theoretically distinguish trade-offs and conflicts of human systems within hierarchy levels from conflicts between hierarchy levels. Further, we should note that a multilevel conflict may also occur in one and the same person. For both interferences, we would like to mention some insights gained in the TdCS 2002. A classical interference between hierarchy levels was visible from the beginning: the promoter of economic development for canton AR (institution), perceiving the canton as modern, primarily supported modern industries such as information technology and biotechnology, while more traditional industries (organization) were mostly neglected, leading to an interesting political lock-in

479

18 Applying the HES framework

(Hassink & Shin, 2005). The value of traditional industries became apparent for this institution only after having participated in the TdCS. At the institutional level, for example, when individual CEOs negotiated with heads of the cantonal government and administration, they sought benefits for their own firms, which at times clashed with the interests of the industry as a whole. This was a conflict within a hierarchy level but was probably driven by a multilevel conflict within the same person. A further conflict within hierarchy levels became visible between different cantonal institutions when, for example, an increased use of local wood was promoted by the office for agriculture and forestry while at the same time the office for the environment insisted on protecting natural resources. The latter office was, of course, frequently in conflict with industry (i.e. conflicts between hierarchy levels). Also interesting was the practically non-existent interference within the organizational level across different industries (see below Awareness Postulate P6).

C2.5 A decision-theoretic conception for understanding the rationale of human systems (P5)
Following a decision-theoretic conception, we have to distinguish between players, or agents, their strategies (or the combination of strategies of all players, i.e. the outcome), and utilities. With respect to the guiding question on options for regional cooperation and their perception, we distinguished the following key agents in the TdCS 2002: firms at different positions in the production chain as the decision-makers and stakeholder group (e.g. sawmills vs. wood processing vs. forestry; dairy managers vs. dairy traders) and cantonal authorities, both from government (society) and administration (institution), providing the necessary framework conditions. Also, the representatives of university working on sustainability may be viewed as representatives of society (see Figure 1.7*). ETH Zurich is a federal school which is controlled and financed by the national government.
Decision Postulate P5 Individual firms (players) can choose between different options for collaboration (strategies), which are differently preferred by various key players (utilities).

choose between more/less cooperation outside the production chain with, for instance, cantonal administration or research institutions/universities (strategies). These different possibilities needed to be investigated more thoroughly and analytically. We used the area development negotiation (ADN) method, which includes FSA (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). The way in which this is done is described in Box 15.1, Table iiiv. Based on a thorough system (see P7 above) and consistency analysis (Scholz & Tietje, 2002, p. 105; Tietje, 2005), a few scenarios were jointly selected with all key agents. These scenarios represent different contrasting strategies. For example, for textile industry these were the following business strategies: minimal cooperation (firms remain economically independent); resource sharing (joint utilization and management of resources); AR textile network (firms remain autonomous but use a regional label following similar quality standards); full integration (all firms join a holding or merge into a single large company). To assess utilities for all strategies, we applied an adapted stakeholder-based multi-criteria analysis (MCA) using six evaluation criteria (see Box 15.1, Table 15.3, vi; McDaniels & Trousdale, 2005; Scholz & Stauffacher, 2007). We applied two different approaches of MCA: (i) a data-based evaluation relying on literature studies and expert interviews (MCA I); and (ii) a stakeholder-based evaluation including the representatives of industry, cantonal authorities, and sustainability researchers as groups. The stakeholder-based evaluations were made in two steps, the first being overall and intuitive, and the second using the criteria from the MCA I to provide an MCA II. It was also possible to compare utilities between different players and different assessment methods (e.g. between intuitive and criteria-based evaluation, between cantonal authorities and industry, between the view of cantonal authorities vs. industry vs. the sustainability researchers). Thus, it was possible to map a spectrum of diverse views and alternatives as a component of capacity-building but at the same time to detect potentials for reaching consensus (van Asselt & Rijkens-Klomp, 2002).

In principle, all firms can choose between (i) more or less cooperation either (ii) horizontally or vertically along the production chain, and (iii) they can further

C2.6 Improved environmental awareness for understanding potential barriers and drivers in human systems (P6)
Being aware of ones environment is a necessary condition for coping with it. In addition, a proper

480

Case 2: transdisciplinary transition

awareness has to be developed also for the social environment (see P6aP6c in Figure 18.5). However, in the beginning this prerequisite was not met by many of the firms involved in the TdCS (non-awareness of environmental systems both the material technological and the socialepistemic). We often encountered a situation where other firms (which are part of the social environment Es) were primarily or even exclusively seen as market competitors, and the potential of cooperating in clusters (see Capello & Faggian, 2005; Torre & Gilly, 2000) was not properly seen. This is not surprising if one refers to the differentiation between cooperation and learning dynamics in horizontal and vertical clusters (Malmberg & Maskell, 2002; Newlands, 2003).
Awareness Postulate P6 Other firms are often perceived only as competitors (restricted awareness of social environment). The potential market benefits were not explicitely perceived and assessed.

all participants. As such, the TdCS offers an example of how transdisciplinarity can be a tool for capacity-building through improving environmental awareness. This could be seen by many examples. In the textile industry, the scenario of full integration was intuitively disliked by all respondents. It caused emotional resistance and contrasting traditional patterns of competition. This negative attitude was reversed in the criteria-based evaluation (MCA II). Here the full integration scenario is the most preferred. This multi-criteria-based, analytic judgment can be taken as an indication for a developing changed environmental awareness. Missing environmental awareness often originates in cognitive lock-ins (Grabher, 1993; Hassink & Shin, 2005; Maskell & Malmberg, 1999). A thorough quantitative analysis 2 years after the TdCS, including 88 stakeholders, revealed that besides capacity-building cooperation and networking were the key benefits of the transdisciplinary process (Walter et al., 2007b).

C2.6.1 Different benefits from cooperation and competitions in clusters

The sawmills and dairies that were investigated were involved in the first transformation stage between raw materials and industrial processing. Thus, we were dealing with horizontal clustering where, obviously, competition is much more prevalent. None the less, most of the social environment is the same for all firms (e.g. see the conflicts between hierarchy levels with the cantonal institutional and the societal level; Hierarchy Postulate P2 above) and becoming aware of this was one of the outcomes in the process. On the other hand, the clustering of the textile industry involved the vertical stages of the production chain. Hence, collaboration could be more straightforward. Yet, a lack of trust existed among the family dynasty-based companies, who have been competitors for some time, and this has prevented more intense forms of collaboration in the previous decades just as certainly as has a lack of environmental awareness. Awareness of impacts on the social environment caused by ones behavior has certainly grown among local participants throughout the study. This is related to changing secondary feedback (see Feedback Postulate P4). Joint dependence on natural resources (Em), as well as the necessity for collaboration with other firms (Es), became evident in the study and were acknowledged by

C2.7 Understanding feedback loops in coupled humanenvironment interactions (P4) for preparing transformations
Feedback loops were not a direct focus of this TdCS but were investigated in the system analysis part (see Environment-first Postulate P7 above) when impacts among different factors were assessed. FSA as a method of systems analysis includes tools to identify multiple feedback loops among the impact factors, which provides a better insight into the importance of different variables.
Feedback Postulate P4 In the TdCS, university, firms, and the canton learned how to cope with feedback loops in human and environmental systems.

Further, the whole TdCS actually serves as a tool to learn about feedback loops. Recognizing that not only individuals, but also groups, organizations, and institutions learn (Tbara & Pahl-Wostl, 2007), a societal sustainability learning process was the focus. The very process of assessing the present situation and developing future scenarios, as well as their detailed evaluation, can stimulate learning among all participants of the TdCS (feedback loop in human system). Transdisciplinary processes empower and motivate stakeholders to contribute more actively in subsequent implementation of ideas and change future

481

18 Applying the HES framework

decision processes (Brown et al., 2001; Sheppard & Meitner, 2005). The latter can actually lead to a feedback loop between human and environmental systems.

distinguishing between actors (players), their strategies, and respective utilities. Various disciplines, such as psychology and economics, help to identify potential drivers and rationales at work in transition processes.

C2.7.1 Key messages

The transdisciplinary case study (TdCS) at ETH Zurich was developed to support regional and organizational transition processes towards sustainable development The TdCS is conceptualized as a mutual learning process among science and practice. The study provided incremental deepening of insights about feedback loops when cooperating with the social environment (market competitors). This can be conceived as extending environmental awareness. The HES Postulates and the TdCS design with its six steps help in structuring transdisciplinary processes The TdCS starts (quite radically) from the case in developing together with case actors relevant questions; identifying the disciplines to tackle these questions is hence only a subsequent step. Thus the Environment-first Postulate P7 is essential. This asks for knowledge from multiple disciplines for analysis of the human and environmental systems involved. Thus, scientists in TdCS need a broad disciplinary background to organize disciplined interdisciplinarity in transdisciplinary processes The rationale of the human system can be better understood using a decision-theoretic conception

18.3 Case 3: agro-fuel3 18.3.1 What can we learn from this case for environmental literacy
We elaborate what (possible) benefits and unwanted negative impacts would result if the option agrofuel was taken by many countries. Using the HES framework (Figure 18.8) we reveal some unsustainable dynamics that were not satisfactorily acknowledged by science and society.

18.3.2 What is the case about?

Increased concern about peak oil, energy security, and climate change has caused many countries to explore renewable energy alternatives to fossil fuel. In some countries, biofuel has become a favorite option for substituting oil as vehicle fuel. Bioethanol is considered as renewable energy as it receives its energy from the Sun and is (fallaciously as we show) supposed to be infinitely producible. As we elaborate below, in February 2006 the government of Sweden decided to become an oil-free society until 2020 and to subsidize E85 strongly; that is, 85% ethanol fuel for private cars.

Content Case 3
C 3.1 Defining the guiding question: Swedens decision on bioethanol, a sustainable one? 483 C 3.2 A national perspective on human systems 484 C 3.3 Why an environmental analysis should come first (P7) 485 C 3.4 Awareness of essential, critical feedback loops (P4 & P6) 491 C 3.5 Interferences from feedbacked multi-actor decisions (P3) 491 C 3.6 Conflicting variants of environmental awareness with respect to biomass ecosystem functions (P6) 492 C 3.7 Incomplete hierarchy: the missing supranational systems (P2) 494

Roland W. Scholz is the lead author of this case, which has been written in late 2008.

482