Sustainable Development is a challenge not only for natural science but also for the social sciences. In the case of social science, positivism has a role but also hermeneutics and other perspectives that emphasize the subjective aspects of human behaviour. The subjective perceptions and value orientation of different actors play a central role in influencing development patterns and institutional change processes.
It is argued that the conceptual framework of economics plays a key role in the ‘mental maps’ of influential actors. But mainstream neoclassical economics was designed for other purposes and does not go well with the present sustainability challenge. An alternative conceptual framework more in line with institutional economics is proposed. Individuals are understood as Political Economic Persons and organizations as Political Economic Organizations. Individuals and organizations are actors with their specific agendas, appearing on arenas to exchange ideas and commodities. Analysis is multidimensional and there is a role for ethics and ideology in economic behaviour and action. Institutional change is understood in terms of the processes of interpreting a phenomenon, naming it, its manifestations and acceptance (legitimacy achievement). A scheme of analysis for actor-institution studies is proposed.
BakanJoel (2004). The Corporation. The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power. Free Press, New York.
2.
BeckerEgonThomasJahn, (Editors) (1999). Sustainability and the Social Sciences. A cross-disciplinary approach to integrating environmental considerations into theoretical reorientation. UNESCO, Paris. Zed Books, London.
3.
ClarkWilliam C.DicksonNancy M. (2003). Science and Technology for Sustainable Development Special Feature: Sustainability Science: The emerging research program. Proceedings National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS). 100(14), 8059–8061.
4.
CostanzaRobertCumberlandJohnDalyHermanGoodlandRobertNorgaardRichard (1997). An Introduction to Eclogical Economics. St Lucie Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
5.
DalyHerman E.CobbJr.JohnR. (1989). For the Common Good. Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment and a Sustainable Future. Beacon Press, Boston.
6.
The Economist (2006). The heat is on. The uncertainty surrounding climate change argues for action, not inaction. America should lead the way, 380(8494), 9–10.
7.
FayBrian (1996). Contemporary Philosophy of Social Science. A Multicultural Approach. Blackwell Publ. Oxford.
8.
FlyvbjergBent (2001). Making Social Science Matter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
FullbrookEdward (Ed.) (2003). The Crisis in Economics. The post-autistic economics movement: the first 600 days. London: Routledge..
10.
FullbrookEdward (2004). A Guide to What’s Wrong with Economics. Anthem, London.
11.
FullbrookEdward (2007). Real World Economics. A post-autistic economics reader. London: Anthem.
12.
FusfeldDaniel R. (1994). The Age of the Economist (Seventh ed.). New York: Harper Collins.
13.
Global Reporting Initiative (2000). Sustainability Reporting Guidelines on Economic, Environmental, and Social Performance (June2000). Boston: GRI Secretariat.
14.
HajerMarten A. (1995). The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford: Clarendon.
15.
HarremoësPoulGeeDavidMacGarvin, MalcolmSterlingAndyKeysJaneWynneBrianVazSofial Guedes (2002) The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century. Late Lessons from Early Warnings. London: Earthscan.
16.
ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) (2006). www.iclei.org Accessed 2007–11–07.
KortenDavid C. (Second edition) (2001). When Corporations Rule the World (Second ed.). Bloomfield, Connecticut: Kumarian Press.
19.
KuhnThomas S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Second ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
MishanEzra J. (1971). Cost-Benefit Analysis. London: Allen & Unwin.
21.
MishanEzra J. (1980). How valid are economic evaluations of allocative changes?Journal of Economic Issues, 14(1), 143–161.
22.
MyrdalGunnar (1978). Institutional Economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 12(4), 771–783.
23.
NorgaardRichard B. (1994). Development Betrayed. The end of progress and a coevolutionary revisioning of the future. London: Routledge.
24.
NorthDouglass C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
NorthDouglass C. (2005). Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Oxford: Princeton University Press.
26.
OstromElinor (1990). Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
PuskasNordin, Anna-CarinSoderbaumPeter (2004). Regionala aktörers tankar om hållbar utveckling. Kalmar och Uppsalaregionerna som exempel. (Interpretations of Sustainable Development by regional actors. The Kalmar and Uppsala regions as examples), Mälardalens högskola, Ekonomihogskolan, Forskningsrapport 2004:1. Västerås.
28.
RutherfordMalcolm (1994). Institutions in Economics. The Old and the New Institutionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
SagoffMark (1988). The Economy of the Earth. Philosophy, law and the environment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
ScottW. Richard (1995). Institutions and Organizations. London: Sage.
31.
ShiTian (2004). Ecological Economics: moving towards trans-disciplinary research on sustainability, Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 15(1), 61–81.
32.
ShiTian (2005). The Domain and Essence of Ecological Economics, Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 16(4), 441–461.
33.
SöderbaumPeter (1992). Neoclassical and institutional approaches to development and the environment, Ecological Economics, 5, 127–144.
34.
SöderbaumPeter (2000). Ecological Economics. A Political Economics Approach to Environment and Development. London: Earthscan.
35.
SöderbaumPeter (2002). Business Corporations, Markets and the Globalisation of Environmental Problems, Ch. 8, 179–200 in Havila, Virpi, Forsgren, Mats och Håkansson, Håkan (Editors), Critical Perspectives on Internationalisation. Pergamon Amsterdam.
36.
SöderbaumPeter (2004a). Democracy, Markets and Sustainable Development: The European Union as an Example. European Environment, 14, 342–355.
37.
SöderbaumPeter (2004b). Decision Processes and Decision-making in Relation to Sustainable Development and Democracy – Where Do we Stand?Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 14, 41–60.
38.
SöderbaumPeter (2004c). Democracy and the need for pluralism in economics, 94–96 in EdwardFullbrook, (Ed.) A Guide to What’s Wrong with Economics. Anthem Press, London.
39.
SöderbaumP. (2006). Cost-Benefit Analysis, Democracy, and Sustainable Development – What is the alternative to CBA?Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM), 2(2) (April), 182–190.
40.
SöderbaumP. (2007). Issues of paradigm, ideology and democracy in sustainability assessment, Ecological Economics, 60, 613–626.
41.
ThompsonJohn B. (1981). Critical Hermeneutics. A study of the thought of Paul Ricoeur and Jürgen Habermas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
ToulminStephen (1990). Cosmopolis. The Hidden Agenda of Modernity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43.
WackernagelMathisReesWilliam E. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint. Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publisher.
44.
World Commission on Dams (2000). Dams and Development. A New Framework for Decision-making (The Report by the World Commission on Dams). London: Earthscan.
45.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
