Coevolution: the challenge of a systemic view

Journal title SOCIOLOGIA URBANA E RURALE
Author/s Ilaria Beretta
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/127
Language Italian Pages 15 P. 79-93 File size 271 KB
DOI 10.3280/SUR2022-127007
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The current pandemic crisis has highlighted the need for the adoption of a co-evolutionary approach in the interpretation of what is happening. The morbidity of the virus correlates with morphological, environmental, cultural, socio-economic factors; the pandemic challenges linear thinking and monocausal explanations. This contribution illustrates how this approach can help to interpret and - why not - to find a solution to the two major current crises: the pandemic and the ecological one.

Keywords: pluralism, socio-environmental system, ecological crisis, pandemic crisis, com-plexity, uncertainty

  1. Cairns J. (2007). Sustainable coevolution. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 14: 103-108. DOI: 10.1080/13504500709469711
  2. Battaglini E. (2020). Coronavirus19 e società. Incontri. -- Testo disponibile al sito: https://www.visioneroma.it/2020/03/covid-19-e-societa-chi-e-nemico-di-chi-parte-i-elena-battaglini-2/
  3. Battaglini E., Palazzo A.L. (2016). Spazio, luogo, territorio variabili-chiave delle scienze sociali e umane. Un’introduzione. Urbanistica tre, 10: 5-10.
  4. Baum J.A.C., Singh J.V. (1994). Organization-environment coevolution. In Baum J.A.C., Singh J.V. (eds.). Evolutionary Dynamics of Organizations. New York: Oxford University Press.
  5. Blankenberg A.K., Buenstorf G. (2016). Regional co-evolution of firm population, innovation and public research? Evidence from the West German laser industry. Research Policy, 45: 857-868.
  6. Boschma R.A., Martin R. (2007). Constructing an evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 7 (5): 537-548.
  7. Ehrlich P.R., Raven P.H. (1964). Butterflies and plants: A study in coevolution. Evolution, 18: 586-608.
  8. Foster J.B. (2000). Marx’s Ecology. Materialism and Nature. New York: Monthly Review Press.
  9. Geels F.W. (2014). Reconceptualising the co-evolution of firms-inindustries and their environments: Developing an inter-disciplinary triple embeddedness framework. Research Policy, 43: 261-277.
  10. Geels F., Kern F., Fuchs G., Hinderer N., Kungl G., Mylan J., Neukirch M., Wassermann S. (2016). The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: a reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990-2014). Research Policy, 45: 896-916.
  11. Giddens A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  12. Goddard J.J., Kallis G., Norgaard R.B. (2019). Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism. Ecological Economics, 165: 106420.
  13. Governa F. (2016). Spazialità molteplici. Aperture e ibridazioni fra territoriale e relazionale. Urbanistica tre, 10: 19-25.
  14. Gual M.A., Norgaard R.B. (2010). Bridging ecological and social systems coevolution: a review and proposal. Ecological Economics, 69: 707-717.
  15. Cantwell J., Dunning J.H., Lundan S.M. (2010). An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41: 567-586.
  16. Clark E., Tsai H.M. (2002). Co-evolution under globalization - boundary lessons from Kinmen island. Taipei: Proceedings of IUCN/WCPA-EA-4 Taipei Conference.
  17. Costanza R., Graumlich L.J., Steffen W. (2005). Sustainability or Collapse? An Integrated History and Future of People on Earth. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press-Dahlem University Press.
  18. Cumming G.S., Cumming D.H.M., Redman C.L. (2006). Scale Mismatches in Socialecological Systems: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions. Ecology and Society, XI (1). DOI: 10.5751/ES-01569-110114.
  19. Dessein J., Battaglini E., Horlings L. (eds). (2015). Cultural Sustainability and Regional Development. Theories and practices of territorialisation. London: Routledge.
  20. Diamond J. (2005). Collasso. Come le società scelgono di morire o vivere. Torino: Einaudi.
  21. Douglas M., Wildavsky A. (1982). Risk and Culture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  22. Magnaghi A. (2013). Riterritorializzare il mondo. Scienze del territorio, 1: 47-58.
  23. Hajer M. (1997). The Politics of Environmental Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. Hannigan J. (1995). Environmental Sociology. London: Routledge.
  25. Holling C.S. (2001). Understanding the Complexity of Economic, Ecological, and Social Systems. Ecosystems, 4: 390-405.
  26. Hulme M. (2020). Do not reduce the future to Covid - 19. Professor Mike Hulme’s Site. -- Testo disponibile al sito: https://mikehulme.org/do-not-reduce-the-future-to-covid-19/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=do-not-reduce-the-future-to-covid-19.
  27. Janssen M.A., Jager W. (2008). Stimulating diffusion of green products. Coevolution between firms and producers. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12: 283-306.
  28. Kallis G., Norgaard R.B. (2010). Coevolutionary ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 69 (4): 690-699.
  29. Latour B. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  30. Lewin A.Y., Volberda H.W. (1999). Prolegomena on coevolution: a framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms. Organization Science, 10 (5): 519-534.
  31. McKelvey B. (1982). Organizational Systematics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  32. Mela A. (2014). Resilienza e vulnerabilità nella fase dell’emergenza e della ricostruzione. Culture della sostenibilità, 7: 241-252.
  33. Mela A. (2013). Verso una sociologia dell’ambiente costruito. Sociologia e ricerca sociale, 102: 19-30. DOI: 10.3280/SR2013-102002
  34. Mol A.P.J. (1997). Ecological modernization: industrial transformations and environmental reform. In Redclift M., Woodgate G. (eds.). The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology. Second Edition. Cheltenham: Elgar.
  35. Moore J. (2011). Transcending the metabolic rift: a theory of crises in the capitalist world ecology. Journal of Peasant Studies, 38(1): 1-46. DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2010.538579
  36. Moreno-Peñaranda R., Kallis G. (2010). A coevolutionary understanding of agroenvironmental change. A case-study of a rural community in Brazil. Ecological Economics, 69: 770-778.
  37. Murmann J.P.M. (2003). Knowledge and Competitive Advantage. The Coevolution of Firms, Technology and National Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  38. Nelson R.R. (2002). Bringing institutions into evolutionary growth theory. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12: 17-28.
  39. Norgaard R.B. (2010). A coevolutionary interpretation of ecological civilization. Prepared for the Fourth International Symposium on Ecological Civilization. Claremont, California, May 3-4 2010.
  40. Norgaard R.B. (1984). Coevolutionary agricultural development. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 32 (3): 525-546. DOI: 10.1086/451404
  41. Norgaard R.B. (1994). Development Betrayed: The End of Progress and a Coevolutionary Revisioning of the Future. London: Routledge.
  42. Norgaard R.B., Kallis G. (2011). Coevolutionary contradictions: prospects for a research programme on social and environmental change. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 93 (4): 289-300.
  43. O’Connor J. (1973). The Fiscal Crisis of the State. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
  44. Porter T.B. (2006). Coevolution as a research framework for organizations and the natural environment. Organization and Environment, 19 (4): 479-504. DOI: 10.1177/1086026606294958
  45. Raffestin C. (2012). Space, territory and territoriality. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 30 (1): 121-141.
  46. Safarzynska K., van den Bergh J.C.J.M. (2010). Demand-supply coevolution with multiple increasing returns: policy analysis for unlocking and system transitions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77 (2): 297-317.
  47. Saint Jean M. (2005). Coevolution of suppliers and users through an evolutionary modelling. The case of environmental innovations. European Journal of Economic and Social Systems, 18: 255-284.
  48. Schnaiberg A. (1975). Social syntheses of the societal-environmental dialectic: the role of distributional impacts. Social Science Quarterly, 56: 5-20.
  49. Schnaiberg A. (1980). The Environment: From Surplus to Scarcity. New York: Oxford University Press.
  50. Shove E., Walker G. (2014). What is energy for? Social practice and energy demand. Theory, Culture & Society, 31(5): 41-58. DOI: 10.1177/0263276414536746
  51. Van den Bergh J., Stagl S. (2003). Coevolution of economic behaviour and institutions: towards a theory of institutional change. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 13: 289-317.
  52. Waltner-Toews D., Biggeri A., De Marchi B., Funtowicz S., Giampietro M., O’Connor M., Ravetz J.R., Saltelli A., van der Sluijs J.P. (2020). Post-normal pandemics: why covid-19 requires a new approach to science. Steps centre. -- Testo disponibile al sito https://steps-centre.org/blog/postnormal-pandemics-why-covid-19-requires-a-new-approach-to-science/.
  53. Ward H. (2003). The co-evolution of regimes of accumulation and patterns of rule: state autonomy and the possibility of functional responses to crisis. New Political Economy, 8(2): 179-202. DOI: 10.1080/13563460307172
  54. Warde A. (2005). Consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2): 131-153. DOI: 10.1177/1469540505053090
  55. Weick K.E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  56. Windrum C.T., Ciarli T., Birchenhall C. (2009). Consumer heterogeneity and the development of environmentally friendly technologies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76: 533-551.

Ilaria Beretta, Coevoluzione: la sfida di uno sguardo sistemico in "SOCIOLOGIA URBANA E RURALE" 127/2022, pp 79-93, DOI: 10.3280/SUR2022-127007