Conference Agenda

In late-modern societies more and more people value time over money. Both, time wealth and material wealth are closely related to individual consumption patterns and its environmental footprints. Currently, scientific knowledge on time wealth and its environmental implications is marginal and transformation policies hardly consider time wealth explicitly. However, as time wealth is increasingly valued it could turn out as an emerging key lever for sustainability transformation of consumption.

In a recently finished inter- and transdisciplinary research project[1] we shed light on time wealth from different disciplinary angles (psychology, social sciences, industrial ecology) and synthesized the knowledge in a prospective simulation model. Time wealth was conceptualized and measured on a psychometric scale encompassing the five dimensions speed of life, plannability, synchronization, time sovereignty and free time.

An empirical survey among people at working age in Germany was conducted to measure individual time wealth, time use patterns and adoption of time-efficient practices and to assess associated consumption patterns (before, during and after the COVID-19 lockdown). We observe the adoption of time-efficient practices across different consumption areas such as food and mobility depending on the level of time wealth. For example, people using the fastest means of transport frequently also tend to eat more often cold than warm meals. Age and time wealth correlate best with consumption patterns.

The simulations show that only the combination of time wealth level and age class sufficiently explains the greenhouse gas emissions of consumption of population groups, which makes generations with different time wealth levels meaningful target groups for sustainable consumption policy. Moreover, many positive and negative environmental impacts of different time uses cancel each other out. The major cause is rooted in the property of time: time cannot be saved, but is always filled with activities. Consequently, there is a full rebound effect of time in relation to time-efficient practices albeit different time uses go along with different carbon footprints.

With our paper presentation, we aim for two objectives. First, we want to present major research findings and discuss the usefulness of a time-wealth perspective for the promotion of sustainable consumption with the international sustainability community. Second, we want to reflect upon a number of issues we encountered when working in this highly interdisciplinary context, such as fragmented research communities and institutional preconditions for time-wealth-based sustainability policies.

[1] reference removed to annoymize review process

Responding to the declared climate emergency demands systemic and transformative change in policy and governance systems, and decisive adaptation action to be taken now. Yet, a long-standing ‘adaptation gap’ continues to prevail. This is often symptomatic of hidden path dependencies and self-reinforcing ‘lock-in’ dynamics that work to preserve current regimes and make them highly resistant to change. Uncovering these hidden dynamics is a vital first step, but what this information holds for targeting interventions and designing ‘unlocking’ strategies remains unknown. Taking this next step, this paper examines how an understanding of lock-in dynamics can be used to leverage transformative change and accelerate adaptation action.

Based on empirical research conducted within the [citation removed to anonymize abstract], we draw examples from three countries (UK, the Netherlands and Germany) and across different problem domains (such as coastal adaptation, water scarcity and biodiversity), to illustrate different types of lock-in mechanisms and dynamics in action. From this, we identify certain types of ‘unlocking’ strategies that could be employed to dissolve lock-ins and formulate a typology based on the mode of leverage required (e.g. actor, rule or resource-based) and the point of intervention within complex systems. Observations are made about the extent to which these strategies may be shared or unique to certain types of lock-ins, reflecting on examples of innovative approaches currently taking place in these countries. Attention is also given to critical questions about the potential for reconfiguring lock-in dynamics to ‘lock-out’ maladaptive pathways and prevent detrimental lock-ins for occurring in the future.

With rising environmental pressures on water resources and infrastructure due to climate change, governments are urgently working to build resilience. Within the United States the effort to transform governance of water resources and infrastructure to prepare for intensifying climate effects- including rising sea levels- is especially urgent. While technological innovation can support climate response, technology alone may be insufficient for building resilience. Rather, building resilience requires substantive change in multiple dimensions such as technology and infrastructure, institutional processes, culture, and values, ultimately necessitating a transformative governance approach. Emerging scholarship on transformative governance and resilience suggests building collaborative and inclusive relationships with stakeholders, ensuring reliable funding for resilience programs, establishing legislative support for policies, and the emergence of strong leadership with a vision to move policies forward are important processes for transformation. While process identification helps, little is known about how particular processes work together or how to sequence or bundle processes to achieve transformation in practice. Our study relies on 31 interviews with state wastewater management officials in four New England States- Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. We analyze these interviews using the method of process tracing to code 11 critical processes of transformative governance in key resilience programs within each state. We find that there appears to be important patterns in sequencing of transformation processes and that the co-occurrence of some processes lead to better resilience outcomes than others. The findings from this study present a pathway of priority areas for policy makers to consider when implementing programs to ensure sustained and transformative governance when planning for a climate resilient future.

Only seven years remain to achieve the Agenda 2030 and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). From the start, there have been calls for the transformation of societies so that the ambitious goals can be achieved. Since several of the SDGs seem out of reach, we turn to one of the promised “key factors” for transformation: multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs). MSPs are understood as voluntary collaborative agreements between public actors (incl. international organisations, and states or sub-state public authorities) and non-state actors (incl. non-governmental organisations, companies, and foundations) as a specific form of governance architecture with shared objectives. Earlier assessments have provided mixed results whether MSPs can deliver on the promise.

We ask, if, when and how MSPs can bring about structural and long-lasting effects, what we call transformational effects. To answer this, we distinguish between partnership effects, external effects and transformational effect and investigate what and how mechanisms link these different effects to each other. Our research contributes to the growing literature seeking to understand how and under what circumstances MSPs can contribute to sustainable development.

By exploring successful partnerships, i.e. MSPs with the potential for transformational effect or that have achieved such transformation, led by a diverse set of actors, providing different functions across all pillars of sustainability, we identify factors and mechanisms and combinations thereof (called pathways) that enabled substantial contributions to sustainable development. Cases are chosen based on their (potential for or achievement of) transformational effects, a wide geographical distribution (covering Asia, Africa, Europe, Latin America, and global), and who the lead actor of the MSP is (IO, public or non-state actor). Diversity of cases is also reflected in the selection MSPs focusing on different forms of sustainability (social, economic, environmental).

Drawing from literatures on MSPs (and policy success?), potential factors may include aspects such as institutional design and committed resources of the partnering actors; while mechanisms refer to processes and synergies that are achieved throughout the partnership, enabling not only the fulfilment of goals of individual partnerships but also external effects or even transformational effects.

We thereby not only contribute to advance the research field, but provide avenues through which MSPs can enhance their transformative power in order to achieve the sustainability needed. Thereby, we want to support the MSPs to deliver on the supposed promise to bring transformational change.