Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Population and Environment
Erschienen in: Population and Environment 4/2013

01.06.2013 | Original Paper

Inter- and transdisciplinary approaches to population–environment research for sustainability aims: a review and appraisal

verfasst von: Diana Hummel, Susana Adamo, Alex de Sherbinin, Laura Murphy, Rimjhim Aggarwal, Leo Zulu, Jianguo Liu, Kyle Knight

Erschienen in: Population and Environment | Ausgabe 4/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The causes and consequences of demographic changes for the environment, and the possible ways of influencing population dynamics to achieve ‘sustainability’, have been the subject of many debates in science and policy in recent decades. However, the body of knowledge concerning relationships between population dynamics and sustainability is quite fragmented, dispersed over many disciplines, and encompasses diverse theories, paradigms and methodologies. This paper reviews four selected frameworks: linear, multiplicative, mediated, and system-theoretical approaches and perspectives. We represent how population–environment relationships are conceptualized, provide examples of research questions and accepted approaches, and critically assess their utility for different sorts of research for sustainable development. We note the growing recognition of the value of embracing complexity in population–environment research, and how this is consistent with normative aims of development.
Vorheriger Artikel The future of hunting: an age-period-cohort analysis of deer hunter decline
Nächster Artikel Humans and biodiversity: population and demographic trends in the hotspots

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
1
In this paper, we refer to the background paper of this seminar (Hummel et al. 2009), the expert statements of the invited panelists (Aggarwal 2009; Knight 2009; Liu 2009; Murphy 2009a, b; Zulu 2009) as well as individual contributions of other participants of the cyberseminar to the discussion. The full discussion of the cyberseminar including the several panel contributions is documented at http://​www.​populationenviro​nmentresearch.​org/​seminars022009.​jsp. We wish to acknowledge IUSSP and IHDP as co-sponsors of PERN and the support of the Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE) for the support of this seminar and CIESIN’s SEDAC project for hosting the network.
 
2
Today, population–environment research comprises a multitude of themes, for example, population, poverty and environment (Bremner et al. 2010), migration and the environment (Adamo and Izazola 2010), or population dynamics and tropical deforestation (Carr et al. 2006)—to mention only some of the diverse subjects. Since our focus is on theory and conceptual approaches of P–E research, a review on the different research topics would go beyond the scope of this paper.
 
3
Thus, one of the questions a political ecologist might ask is ‘Under what conditions does rapid population growth lead to environmental degradation or recovery?’
 
4
For instance, a nexus of high (urban) population, poverty, and strong market forces can set limits to the success and suitability of the all ascendant and ubiquitously adopted community-based natural resources management approaches in the developing South by providing ‘irresistible incentives’ for natural resource (e.g., forest) ‘mining’ and raise ‘transaction costs’ of collective action ‘too high to sustain’ community resource management intuitions and sustainable resource utilization (Zulu 2006: 248).
 
5
The SL approach is in this way also similar to the environmental entitlements approach (Leach et al. 1999), except that institutions play the major mediating role in livelihoods related environment–society relationships in the latter approach.
 
6
So far, several universities offer such programs in the area of ‘sustainability science’ or non-disciplinary programs (i.e., IDS, Stockholm/Sweden; Leuphana University, Lueneburg/Germany; ASU School of Sustainability/USA).
 
Literatur
Adamo, S. (2007). Reflexiones sobre la complejidad: Investigación y formación en el área de estudios de población y medio ambiente. Paper presented at the 1º Taller sobre Dimensiones Humanas del Cambio Ambiental en Argentina, Luján, Argentina, August 8–10 August, 2007.
Adamo, S. B., & Guzmán, B. (2001). Influence of environmental, demographic and structural factors on water strategies in the Great Plains. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, Washington, DC.
Adamo, S., & Izazola, H. (2010). Human migration and the environment. Population and Environment, 32(2–3), 105–108.CrossRef
Aggarwal, R. M. (2006). Globalization, local ecosystems, and the rural poor. World Development, 34(8), 1405–1418.CrossRef
Aggarwal, R. M., Netanyahu, S., & Romano, C. (2001). Access to natural resources and the fertility decision of women: The case of South Africa. Environment and Development Economics, 6, 209–236.CrossRef
Alkire, S. (2002). Dimensions of human development. World Development, 30(2), 181–205.CrossRef
An, L., Linderman, M. A., Shortridge, A., Qi, J., & Liu, J. (2005). Exploring complexity in a human-environment system: An agent-based spatial model for multidisciplinary and multiscale integration. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 95, 54–79.CrossRef
An, L., Liu, J., Ouyang, Z., Linderman, M. A., Zhou, S., & Zhang, H. (2001). Simulating demographic and socioeconomic processes on household level and implications for giant panda habitats. Ecological Modelling, 140, 31–50.CrossRef
An, L., Lupi, F., Liu, J., Linderman, M. A., & Huang, J. (2002). Modeling the choice to switch from fuelwood to electricity. Ecological Economics, 42, 445–457.CrossRef
Bebbington, A. (2003). Global networks and local developments: Agendas for development geography. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 94(3), 297–309.CrossRef
Becker, E., Jahn, T., & Hummel, D. (2006). Gesellschaftliche Naturverhältnisse. In E. Becker & T. Jahn (Eds.), Soziale Ökologie. Grundzüge einer Wissenschaft von den gesellschaftlichen Naturverhältnissen (pp.174–197). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Bergmann, M., & Schramm, E. (Eds.). (2008). Transdisziplinäre Forschung. Integrative Forschungsprozesse verstehen und bewerten. Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2003). Navigating social-ecological systems. Building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biddlecom, A. E., Axinn, W., & Barber, J. S. (2005). Environmental effects on family size preferences and subsequent reproductive behavior in Nepal. Population and Environment, 26(3), 583–621.CrossRef
Blaikie, P., & Brookfield, B. (1987). Land degradation and society. London, NY: Methuen.
Boserup, E. (1965). The conditions of agricultural progress. London: Allen and Unwin.
Boserup, E. (1981). Population and technological change: A study of long-term trends. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bremner, J., et al. (2010). Population, poverty, environment, and climate dynamics in the developing world. Interdisciplinary Environmental Review, 11(2–3), 127–161.
Brown, J. C., & Purcell, M. (2005). There’s nothing inherent about scale: Political ecology, the local trap, and the politics of development in the Brazilian Amazon. Geoforum, 36, 607–624.CrossRef
Bunders, J. F. G., Broerse, J. E. W., & Keil, F. (2010). How can transdisciplinary research contribute to knowledge democracy? In R. J. in’t Veld (Ed.), Knowledge democracy. Consequences for science, politics, and Media (pp. 125–152). Berlin: Springer.
Caldas, M., Walker, R., Arima, E., Perz, S., Aldrich, S., & Simmons, C. (2007). Theorizing land cover and land use change: The Peasant economy of amazonian deforestation. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(1), 86–110.CrossRef
Carney, D. (Ed.). (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods. What contribution can we make? London: Department for International Development (DFID).
Carr, D. L., Suter, L., & Barbieri, A. (2006). Population dynamics and tropical deforestation: State of the debate and conceptual challenges. Population and Environment, 25(6), 585–612.CrossRef
Chambers, R., & Conway, G. R. (1991). Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century. IDS Discussion Paper 296.
Chen, X., Lupi, F., An, L., Sheely, R., Viña, A., & Liu, J. (2011). Agent-based modeling of the effects of social norms on enrollment in payments for ecosystem services. Ecological Modelling (in press). doi:10.​1016/​j.​ecolmodel.​2011.​06.​007.
Chen, X., Lupi, F., He, G., & Liu, J. (2009). Linking social norms to efficient conservation investment in payments for ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 11812–11817.CrossRef
Chen, X., Lupi, F., Viña, A., He, G., & Liu, J. (2010). Integrating household characteristics into targeting of conservation investments in payments for ecosystem services. Conservation Biology, 24, 1469–1478.CrossRef
Cohen, J. E. (1995). How many people can the earth support?. New York: Norton & Company.
Curran, S. R., & de Sherbinin, A. (2004). Completing the picture: The challenges of bringing ‘consumption’ into the population-environment equation. Population and Environment, 26(2), 107–131.CrossRef
Dasgupta, P. (2000). Population and resources: An exploration of reproductive and environmental externalities. Population and Development Review, 26, 643–689.CrossRef
de Sherbinin, A. (1995). World population growth and U.S. national security. Environmental Change and Security Project Report, Issue 1.
de Sherbinin, A., Carr, D., Cassels, S., & Jiang, L. (2007). Population and environment. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32, 345–373.CrossRef
de Sherbinin, A., VanWey, L. K., McSweeney, K., Aggarwal, R., Barbieri, A., Henry, S., et al. (2008). Rural household demographics, livelihood and the environment. Global Environmental Change, 18, 38–53.CrossRef
De Souza, R.-M., Williams, J. S., & Meyerson, F. A. B. (2003). Critical links: Population, health, and the environment. Population Bulletin (Vol. 58(3)). Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau.
Dietz, T., & Rosa, E. A. (1994). Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence, and technology. Human Ecology Review, 1, 277–300.
Dietz, T., Rosa, E. A., & York, R. (2007). Driving the human ecological footprint. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 5(1), 13–18.CrossRef
Domingo, A. (2008). Demodystopias: Prospects of demographic hell. Population and Development Review, 34(4), 725–745.CrossRef
Donner, W. R. (2007). The political ecology of disaster: an analysis of factors influencing U.S. tornado fatalities and injuries, 1998–2000. Demography, 44(3), 669–685.CrossRef
Duncan, O. D. (1966). Human ecology and population studies. In P. M. Hauser & O. D. Duncan (Eds.), The study of population (pp. 678–716). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ehrlich, P. R. (1968). The population bomb. New York: Ballantine.
Ehrlich, P. R., & Holdren, J. P. (1971). Impact of population growth. Science, 171, 1212–1217.CrossRef
Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering development. The making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Fairhead, J., & Leach, M. (1996). Rethinking the forest-savanna mosaic. In M. Leach & R. Mearns (Eds.), The lie of the land—Challenging the received wisdom on the African environment (Vol. 2, pp. 105–121). London: The International African Institute.
Fearnside, P. M. (1986). Human carrying capacity of the Brazilian rainforest. New York: Columbia University Press.
Ferguson, J. (1990). The anti-politics machine: Development, depolitization and bureautization in Lesotho. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Folke, Carl. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective of social-ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16, 253–267.CrossRef
Gallopín, G., Funktowicz, S., O’Connor, M., & Ravez, J. (2001). Science for the 21st century: From social contract to the scientific core. International Social Science Journal, 168, 219–229.CrossRef
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzmann, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage Publications.
Glaser, M., Krause, G., Halliday, A., & Glaeser, B. (2012). Towards global sustainability analysis in the anthropocene. In M. Glaser, G. Krause, B. Ratter, & M. Welp (Eds.), Human nature interactions in the anthropocene (pp. 193–222). London: Routledge (in print).
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.CrossRef
Gunderson, L. H., & Holling, C. S. (Eds.). (2002). Panarchy. Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Gutmann, M. P., Parton, W. J., Bohren, L., Burke, I., Galvin, K., Riebsame, W. et al. (1996). Demographic responses to climate change in the U.S. Great Plains, 1930–1980. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, New Orleans.
Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 152, 1243–1248.
Hartmann, B. (1995). Reproductive rights and wrongs. The global politics of population control. Boston: South End Press (2nd Ed.).
He, G., Chen, X., Liu, W., Bearer, S., Zhou, S., Cheng, L., et al. (2008). Distribution of economic benefits from ecotourism. Environmental Management, 42, 1017–1025.CrossRef
Hirsch Hadorn, G., Hoffman-Riem, H., Biber-Klemm, S., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Joye, D., Pohl, Ch., et al. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Berlin: Springer.
Hummel, D. (2008). Population changes, water conflicts, and governance in the Middle East. In D. Hummel (Ed.), Population dynamics and supply systems. A transdisciplinary approach (pp. 181–210). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Hummel, D. (2012). Population dynamics and adaptive capacity of supply systems. In M. Glaser, G. Krause, B. Ratter, & M. Welp (Eds.), Human nature interactions in the anthropocene (pp. 123–138). London: Routledge.
Hummel, D., & Lux, A. (2006). Bevölkerungsentwicklung. In E. Becker & T. Jahn. (Eds.), Soziale Ökologie. Grundzüge einer Wissenschaft von den gesellschaftlichen Naturverhältnissen (pp. 409–422). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Hummel, D., Lux, A., de Sherbinin, A., & Adamo, S. (2009). Theoretical and methodlogical issues in the analysis of population dynamics and supply systems. Background Paper for the Population-Environment Research Network (PERN) Cyberseminar on Theoretical and Methological Issues in the Analysis of Population Dynamics and the Environment, 2–13 February 2009. www.​populationenviro​nmentresearch.​org. Retrieved 30 April 2012.
Hummel, D., Hertler, Ch., Niemann, S., Lux, A., & Janowicz, C. (2008). The analytical framework. In D. Hummel (Ed.), Population dynamics and supply systems. A transdisciplinary approach (pp. 11–69). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Hunter, L. M. (2000). The environmental implications of population dynamics. Santa Monica: RAND.
Hunter, L. M., Twine, W., & Johnson, A., (2005). Population dynamics and the environment: Examining the natural resource context of the African HIV/AIDS Pandemic. Paper presented at the XXV International Population Conference, Tours, France, July 18–23, 2005.
Jahn, T. (2008). Transdisziplinarität in der Forschungspraxis. In M. Bergmann & E. Schramm (Eds.), Transdisziplinäre Forschung. Integrative Forschungsprozesse verstehen und bewerten (pp. 21–37). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Janowicz, C. (2008). The world goes urban: Food supply systems and urbanization processes in Africa. In D. Hummel (Ed.), Population dynamics and supply systems. A transdisciplinary approach (pp. 129–160). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Jolly, C. L. (1994). Four theories of population change and the environment. Population and Environment, 16(1), 61–90.CrossRef
Klein, J. T. (2004). Interdisciplinarity and complexity: An evolving relationship. E:CO Special Double Issue, 6(1–2), 2–10.
Leach, M., & Mearns, R. (1996). The lie of the land: Challenging received wisdom on the African environment. London: James Currey.
Leach, M., Mearns, R., & Scoones, I. (1999). Environmental entitlements: Dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resource management. World Development, 27(2), 225–247.
Leach, M., Scoones, I., & Stirling, A. (2007). Pathways to sustainability: An overview of the STEPS centre approach. STEPS Approach Paper, Brighton: STEPS Centre.
Leach, M., Scoones, I., & Stirling, A. (2010). Dynamic sustainabilities. Technology, environment, social justice. London: Earthscan.
Linderman, M. A., An, L., Bearer, S., He, G., Ouyang, Z., & Liu, J. (2005). Modeling the spatio-temporal dynamics and interactions of households, landscape, and giant panda habitat. Ecological Modelling, 183(1), 47–65.CrossRef
Little, P. D. (1994). The social context of land degradation (‘Desertification’). In dry regions. In L. Arizpe, P. M. Stone & D. Major (Eds.), Population and environment. Rethinking the debate (pp. 209–251). Boulder: Westview Press.
Liu, J. (1993). ECOLECON: A spatially-explicit model for ECOLogical-ECONomics of species conservation in complex forest landscapes. Ecological Modelling, 70, 63–87.CrossRef
Liu, J., Cubbage, F., & Pulliam, H. R. (1994). Ecological and economic effects of forest structure and rotation lengths: Simulation studies using ECOLECON. Ecological Economics, 10, 249–265.CrossRef
Liu, J., Daily, G. C., Ehrlich, P. R., & Luck, G. W. (2003). Effects of household dynamics on resource consumption and biodiversity. Nature, 421, 530–533.CrossRef
Liu, J., Dietz, Th., Carpenter, S. R., Alberti, M., Folke, C., Moran, E., et al. (2007a). Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science, 317, 1513–1516.CrossRef
Liu, J., Dietz, Th., Carpenter, S. R., Folke, C., Alberti, M., Redman, C. L., et al. (2007b). Coupled human and natural systems. Ambio, 36, 639–649.CrossRef
Liu, J., Li, S., Ouyang, Z., Tam, C., & Chen, X. (2008). Ecological and socioeconomic effects of China’s policies for ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 9477–9482.CrossRef
Liu, J., Linderman, M., Ouyang, Z., An, L., Yang, J., & Zhang, H. (2001). Ecological degradation in protected areas: The case of Wolong nature reserve for giant pandas. Science, 292, 98–101.CrossRef
Liu, J., Ouyang, Z., Tan, Y., Yang, J., & Zhou, S. (1999a). Changes in human population structure and implications for biodiversity conservation. Population and Environment, 21, 45–58.
Liu, J., Ouyang, Z., Taylor, W., Groop, R., Tan, Y., & Zhang, H. (1999b). A framework for evaluating effects of human factors on wildlife habitat: The case of the giant pandas. Conservation Biology, 13(6), 1360–1370.CrossRef
Lutz, W., Prskawetz, A., & Sanderson, W. C. (2002a). Introduction. In W. Lutz, A. Prskawetz & W. C. Sanderson (Eds.), Population and environment: Methods of analysis (pp. 1–21). Special Supplement to the Population and Development Review, 28. New York: The Population Council.
Lutz, W., & Scherbov, S. (2000). Quantifying vicious circle dynamics: The PEDA model for population, environment, development and agriculture in African countries. In E. J. Dockner, R. F. Hartl, M. Luptacik, & G. Sorger (Eds.), Optimization, dynamics, and economic analysis. Essays in Honor of Gustav Feichtinger (pp. 311–322). Heidelberg: Physica.
Lutz, W., Scherbov, S., Makinwa-Adebusoye, P. K., & Reniers, G. (2004). Population-environment-development-agriculture interactions in Africa: A case study in Ethiopia. In W. Lutz, W. C. Sanderson, & S. Scherbov (Eds.), The end of world population growth in the 21st century (pp. 187–225). London: IIASA and Earthscan.
Lutz, W., Scherbov, S., Prskawetz, A., Dworak, M., & Feichtinger, G. (2002b). Population, natural resources, and food security: Lessons from comparing full and reduced-form models. In W. Lutz, A. Prskawetz, & W. C. Sanderson (Eds.), Population and environment: Methods of analysis. (pp. 199–224). Special Supplement to the Population and Development Review, 28. New York: The Population Council.
Lux, A. (2008): Shrinking cities and water supply. In D. Hummel (Ed.), Population dynamics and supply systems. A transdisciplinary approach (pp. 161–179). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Malthus, T. R. (1826) [1986]. An essay on the principle of population; or, a view of its past and present effects on human happiness; with an inquiry into our prospects respecting the future removal or mitigation of the evils which it occasions. 6th Ed. London: William Pickering.
Marquette, C. M., & Bilsborrow, R. E. (1999). Population and Environment Relationships in Developing Countries: Recent Approaches and Methods. In B. Sundberg Baudot, & W. R. Moomaw (Eds.), People and their planet. Searching for balance (pp. 29–44). Wiltshire: Antony Rowe Ltd.
McConnell, W. J., Millington, J. D. A., Reo, N. J., Alberti, M., Asbjornsen, H., Baker, L. A., et al. (2011). Research on coupled human and natural systems (CHANS): Approach, challenges and strategies. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 92, 218–228.CrossRef
McKellar, L. F., Lutz, W., Prinz, Ch., & Goujon, A. (1995). Population, households, and CO2 emissions. Population and Development Review, 21(4), 849–865.CrossRef
Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W. (1972). The limits to growth: A report for the club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. New York: Universe Books.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment—MEA (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being. Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Mosse, D. (2005). Cultivating development. An ethnography of development aid policy and practice. London: Pluto Press.
Niemann, S. (2008). Spatial aspects of supply: Migration, water transfer, and IWRM. In D. Hummel (Ed.), Population dynamics and supply systems. A transdisciplinary approach (pp. 99–128). Frankfurt, NY: Campus.
Nussbaum, M. (2011). Creating capabilities. The human development approach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRef
Nussbaum, M., & Sen, A. (Eds.). (1993). The quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
O’Neill, B. C., Dalton, M., Fuchs, R., Jiang, L. W., Pachauri, S., & Zigova, K. (2010). Global demographic trends and future carbon emissions. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(41), 17521–17526.CrossRef
Ostrom, E. (2007). A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(39), 15181–15187.CrossRef
Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325, 419–422.CrossRef
Peet, R., & Watts, M. (1996). Liberation ecology. Development, sustainability, and environment in an age of market triumphalism. In R. Peet, & M. Watts (Eds.), Liberation ecologies: Environment, development, social movements (pp. 1–45). New York: Routledge.
Pohl, C., & Hirsch Hadorn, G. (2007). Principles for designing transdisciplinary research. Oekom: Proposed by the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences. Muenchen.
Preston, S. (1996). The effect of population growth on environmental quality. Population Research and Policy Review, 15, 101–107.CrossRef
Robbins, P. (2012). Political ecology: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Rockstrom, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, A., Chapin, F. S., I. I. I., Lambin, E. F., et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–475.CrossRef
Rosa, E., Dieckmann, A., Dietz, Th., & Jaeger, C. C. (Eds.). (2010). Human footprints on the global environment: Threats to sustainability. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Rosa, E., & Dietz, T. (2010). Human dimensions of coupled human and natural systems: A look backward and forward. In E. Rosa, A. Dieckmann, T. Dietz, & C. C. Jaeger (Eds.), Human footprints on the global environment: Threats to sustainability (pp. 295–314). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Sachs, W. (2010). The development dictionary. A guide to knowledge as power (2nd ed.). London: ZED Books.
Schmink, M. (1994). The socioeconomic matrix of deforestation. In L. Arizpe, P.M. Stone, & D. Major (Eds.), Population and environment. Rethinking the debate (pp. 253–275). Boulder: Westview Press.
Scoones, I., Leach, M., Smith, A., Stagle, S., Stirling, A., & Thompson, J. (2007). Dynamic systems and the challenge of sustainability. STEPS Working Paper 1, Brighton, UK: STEPS Center.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sen, A. (2007). The idea of justice. London: Penguin Books.
Simon, J. (1986). Theory of population and economic growth. New York: Blackwell.
Stonich, S. C. (1989). The dynamics of social processes and environmental destruction: A Central American case study. Population and Development Review, 15(2), 269–296.CrossRef
Thompson-Klein, J., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Häberli, R., Bill, A., Schoz, R., & Welti, M. (Eds.). (2001). Transdisciplinarity: Joint problem solving among science, technology and socitey. An effective way for managing complexity. Basel: Birkhäuser.
Tiffen, M., Mortimore, M., & Gichuki, F. (1994). More people less erosion: Environmental recovery in Kenya. London: Wiley.
Turner, B. L. II, Matson, P. A., McCarthy, J. J., Corell, R. W., Christensen, L., Eckley, N. et al. (2003). Illustrating the coupled human-environment system for vulnerability analysis: three case studies. Proceedings of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8080–8085.
United Nations Population Fund—UNFPA. (2011). Population dynamics in the least developed countries: Challenges and opportunities for development and poverty reduction. New York: UNFPA.
VanWey, L., Ostrom, E., & Meretsky, V. (2005). Theories underlying the study of human-environment interactions. In E. Moran, & E. Ostrom (Eds.), Seeing the forest and the trees. Human-environment interactions in forest ecosystems (pp. 25–56). Cambridge: MIT-Press.
Viña, A., Bearer, S., Chen, X., He, G., Linderman, M., An, L., et al. (2007). Temporal changes in connectivity of GiantPanda Habitat across the boundaries of Wolong Nature Reserve (China). Ecological Applications, 17, 1019–1030.CrossRef
Viña, A., Bearer, S., Zhang, H., Ouyang, Z., & Liu, J. (2008). Evaluating MODIS data for mapping wildlife habitat distribution. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 2160–2169.CrossRef
Walker, P. A. (2005). Political ecology: Where is the ecology? Progress in Human Geography, 29(1), 73–82.CrossRef
Walker, P. A. (2006). Political ecology: Where is the policy? Progress in Human Geography, 30(3), 382–395.CrossRef
Walker, P. A. (2007). Political ecology: Where is the politics? Progress in Human Geography, 31(3), 363–369.CrossRef
Watts, M., & Peet, R. (2004). Liberating political ecology. In R. Peet, & M. Watts (Eds.), Liberation ecologies: Environment, development, social movements (pp. 1–45). 2nd edn. London, NY: Routledge.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford Paperbacks.
York, R. (2007). Demographic trends and energy consumption in European Union Nations, 1960–2025. Social Science Research, 36, 855–872.CrossRef
Zaba, B., & Clarke, J. (1994). Introduction: Current directions in population-environment research. In B. Zaba & J. Clarke (Eds.), Environment and population change (pp. 9–43). Liege: Derouaux Ordina Editors.
Zimmerer, K. S., & Bassett, T. J. (2003). Future directions in political ecology. In K. S. Zimmerer & T. J. Bassett (Eds.), Political ecology: An integrative approach to geography and environment-development studies (pp. 274–296). New York: The Guilford Press.
Zulu, L. C. (2006). Politics of scale: The political ecology of community-based forest management in Sounthern Malawi. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Metadaten
Titel
Inter- and transdisciplinary approaches to population–environment research for sustainability aims: a review and appraisal
verfasst von
Diana Hummel
Susana Adamo
Alex de Sherbinin
Laura Murphy
Rimjhim Aggarwal
Leo Zulu
Jianguo Liu
Kyle Knight
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2013
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Population and Environment / Ausgabe 4/2013
Print ISSN: 0199-0039
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7810
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-012-0176-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2013

Population and Environment 4/2013 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

The future of hunting: an age-period-cohort analysis of deer hunter decline

Original Paper

Rainfall variations and child mortality in the Sahel: results from a comparative event history analysis in Burkina Faso and Mali

Original Paper

Humans and biodiversity: population and demographic trends in the hotspots

Review

Rural–urban migration, agrarian change, and the environment in Kenya: a critical review of the literature