oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Contradictions in multiobjective constructed wetland research
Örebro University, Department of Natural Sciences.
(English)Manuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
National Category
Natural Sciences
Research subject
Enviromental Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-15932OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-15932DiVA, id: diva2:423343
Available from: 2011-06-15 Created: 2011-06-15 Last updated: 2017-10-17Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Theoretical disputes and practical environmental dilemmas: an interdisciplinary study
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Theoretical disputes and practical environmental dilemmas: an interdisciplinary study
2002 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The aim of this thesis is to analyse the scientific basis for diverging recommendations in environmental management. A further aim of this study is to discuss the links and interactions between disciplines related to science of environmental issues, and between natural science and practice in dealing with environmental management and ecological sustainability. The question at issue was whether ontological (how the world is constituted) and epistemological (how achieve knowledge about the world) differences between disciplines lead to opposing conclusions. Scientific disputes were selected systematically to examine and analyse the theoretical characteristics and reasons of these disputes. Two case studies were selected: forest nitrogen fertilisation and constructed wetlands. Content analysis was used to study the theoretical content of and the reasons for the disputes within these two scientific areas. Research articles published in peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, and publications in anthologies were chosen as the empirical material.

 

The results show that theoretical disputes arise from the diversity of disciplines and fragmentation of theoretical frameworks. The conclusions are that one way to overcome scientific disputes and achieve common knowledge and solutions to environmental problems is to identify and compare values and principles of the different scientific research traditions.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Örebro: Örebro universitetsbibliotek, 2002. p. 80
Series
Örebro Studies in Environmental Science, ISSN 1650-6278 ; 3
Keywords
sustainable development, natural science, theoretical disputes, forest nitrogen fertilisation, constructed wetlands, content analysis
National Category
Natural Sciences
Research subject
Enviromental Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-39 (URN)91-7668-319-2 (ISBN)
Public defence
2002-12-06, Hörsal D, Örebro universitet, Örebro, 10:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2002-12-06 Created: 2002-12-06 Last updated: 2017-10-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

By organisation
Department of Natural Sciences
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 30 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf