IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v165y2019ic10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism

Author

Listed:
  • Goddard, Jessica J.
  • Kallis, Giorgos
  • Norgaard, Richard B.

Abstract

Methodological pluralism has been a tenet of ecological economics since the journal's inauguration. Pluralism has fostered collaboration and forged new insights across disciplines. However, to counter the hegemonic voice of mainstream economics and inspire action on climate change and inequality, ecological economics requires coherence to produce meaningful knowledge from diverse research findings. This has to be done in a world that is increasingly complex and rapidly changing. In this article, we argue that ecological economists should keep multiple antennae up to foresee and respond to the uncertainties of rapid change. Methodological pluralism facilitates diversity of thought, which scholars require in times of rapid change. Responding to previous critiques that methodological pluralism lacks philosophical foundation, we offer tentative conceptual and historical foundations. We ground our understanding of reality and how we partially know that reality in coevolutionary thinking. We illustrate how economistic beliefs (Economism), economic knowledge (episteme), and social-economic reality coevolve together with nature to produce the current era–the Econocene. Our historical tale of the Econocene illuminates how the economic-centric beliefs guiding public and academic knowledge reproduce unsustainable and inequitable outcomes. Ecological economists, we argue, should support guiding beliefs centered on the biosphere, equity, and care while practicing a structured pluralism.

Suggested Citation

  • Goddard, Jessica J. & Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2019. "Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:165:y:2019:i:c:10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106420
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800919305294
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106420?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, 1979. "Methods in Economic Science," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 317-328, June.
    2. Nelson, Julie A., 2008. "Economists, value judgments, and climate change: A view from feminist economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 441-447, April.
    3. Norgaard, Richard B., 1989. "The case for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 37-57, February.
    4. Howarth, Richard B & Norgaard, Richard B, 1992. "Environmental Valuation under Sustainable Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 473-477, May.
    5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/67ft27s7u58ocangahl1jigu6p is not listed on IDEAS
    6. John Gowdy & Jon D. Erickson, 2005. "The approach of ecological economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 29(2), pages 207-222, March.
    7. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "La superioridad de los economistas," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 17(33), pages 13-43, July-Dece.
    8. Spash, Clive L., 2013. "The shallow or the deep ecological economics movement?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 351-362.
    9. M. Fourcade & E. Ollion & Y. Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 7.
    10. Costanza, Robert & Stern, David & Fisher, Brendan & He, Lining & Ma, Chunbo, 2004. "Influential publications in ecological economics: a citation analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3-4), pages 261-292, October.
    11. Burgin, Angus, 2012. "The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free Markets since the Depression," Economics Books, Harvard University Press, number 9780674058132, Spring.
    12. Spash, Clive L., 2012. "New foundations for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 36-47.
    13. Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Coevolutionary ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 690-699, February.
    14. Frank H. Knight, 1932. "The Newer Economics and the Control of Economic Activity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(4), pages 433-433.
    15. Hornborg, Alf, 1998. "Towards an ecological theory of unequal exchange: articulating world system theory and ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 127-136, April.
    16. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(1), pages 89-114, Winter.
    17. Jackson, Tim & Victor, Peter A., 2015. "Does credit create a ‘growth imperative’? A quasi-stationary economy with interest-bearing debt," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 32-48.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lieke Brackel, 2021. "Continuous Negotiation in Climate Adaptation: The Challenge of Co-Evolution for the Capability Approach to Justice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Plateau, Lou & Roudart, Laurence & Hudon, Marek & Maréchal, Kevin, 2021. "Opening the organisational black box to grasp the difficulties of agroecological transition. An empirical analysis of tensions in agroecological production cooperatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    3. Muradian, Roldan & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2021. "Beyond ecosystem services and nature's contributions: Is it time to leave utilitarian environmentalism behind?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    4. Kish, K. & Mallery, D. & Yahya Haage, G. & Melgar-Melgar, R. & Burke, M. & Orr, C. & Smolyar, N.L. & Sanniti, S. & Larson, J., 2021. "Fostering critical pluralism with systems theory, methods, and heuristics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    5. Clive L. Spash & Philippe Méral & Olivier Petit, 2023. "A journey into the foundations and transformative implications of social ecological economics: An interview with Clive Spash," Post-Print hal-04192474, HAL.
    6. Farley, Joshua & Melgar, Rigo E.M. & Hasan Ansari, Danish & Burke, Matthew J. & Danielsen, Julia & Egler, Megan & Makombore, Lizah & Neira, Juliana & Poudel, Shashank & Sellers, Shaun & Smolyar, Nina , 2024. "Rethinking ecosystem services from the anthropocene to the Ecozoic: Nature’s benefits to the biotic community," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    7. Kaitlin Kish & Joshua Farley, 2021. "A Research Agenda for the Future of Ecological Economics by Emerging Scholars," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Bliss, Sam & Egler, Megan, 2020. "Ecological Economics Beyond Markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    9. Lundgren, Jakob, 2022. "Unity through disunity: Strengths, values, and tensions in the disciplinary discourse of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. Blignaut, James & Aronson, James, 2020. "Developing a restoration narrative: A pathway towards system-wide healing and a restorative culture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    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. Lundgren, Jakob, 2022. "Unity through disunity: Strengths, values, and tensions in the disciplinary discourse of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Spencer, Phoebe & Perkins, Patricia E. & Erickson, Jon D., 2018. "Re-establishing Justice as a Pillar of Ecological Economics Through Feminist Perspectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 191-198.
    3. Joe Ament, 2019. "Toward an Ecological Monetary Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.
    4. Dube, Benjamin, 2021. "Why cross and mix disciplines and methodologies?: Multiple meanings of Interdisciplinarity and pluralism in ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    5. Røpke, Inge, 2020. "Econ 101—In need of a sustainability transition," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    6. Plumecocq, Gaël, 2014. "The second generation of ecological economics: How far has the apple fallen from the tree?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 457-468.
    7. Anderson, Blake & M'Gonigle, Michael, 2012. "Does ecological economics have a future?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 37-48.
    8. Remig, Moritz C., 2017. "Structured pluralism in ecological economics — A reply to Peter Söderbaum's commentary," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 533-537.
    9. Spash, Clive L., 2013. "The shallow or the deep ecological economics movement?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 351-362.
    10. Ament, Joe, 2020. "An ecological monetary theory," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    11. Sarah-Louise Ruder & Sophia Rose Sanniti, 2019. "Transcending the Learned Ignorance of Predatory Ontologies: A Research Agenda for an Ecofeminist-Informed Ecological Economics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-29, March.
    12. Pirgmaier, Elke, 2017. "The Neoclassical Trojan Horse of Steady-State Economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 52-61.
    13. Castro e Silva, Manuela & Teixeira, Aurora A.C., 2011. "A bibliometric account of the evolution of EE in the last two decades: Is ecological economics (becoming) a post-normal science?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 849-862, March.
    14. Spash, Clive L., 2020. "A tale of three paradigms: Realising the revolutionary potential of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    15. Melgar-Melgar, Rigo E. & Hall, Charles A.S., 2020. "Why ecological economics needs to return to its roots: The biophysical foundation of socio-economic systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    16. Ivan Vargas Roncancio & Leah Temper & Joshua Sterlin & Nina L. Smolyar & Shaun Sellers & Maya Moore & Rigo Melgar-Melgar & Jolyon Larson & Catherine Horner & Jon D. Erickson & Megan Egler & Peter G. B, 2019. "From the Anthropocene to Mutual Thriving: An Agenda for Higher Education in the Ecozoic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, June.
    17. Franco, Marco P.V., 2018. "Searching for a Scientific Paradigm in Ecological Economics: The History of Ecological Economic Thought, 1880s–1930s," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 195-203.
    18. Remig, Moritz C., 2015. "Unraveling the veil of fuzziness: A thick description of sustainability economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 194-202.
    19. Andrew Mearman & Sebastian Berger & Danielle Guizzo, 2016. "Curriculum reform in UK economics: a critique," Working Papers 20161611, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    20. Thoma, Johanna, 2018. "Book review: economics rules," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84173, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:165:y:2019:i:c:10. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.