Institutional logics as an object of change: the experiences of a water organization using design thinking for climate adaptation in a multi-stakeholder process.

IF 5.1 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Sustainability Science Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-24 DOI:10.1007/s11625-025-01660-4
Florian Goldschmeding, René Kemp, Véronique Vasseur, Christian Scholl
{"title":"Institutional logics as an object of change: the experiences of a water organization using design thinking for climate adaptation in a multi-stakeholder process.","authors":"Florian Goldschmeding, René Kemp, Véronique Vasseur, Christian Scholl","doi":"10.1007/s11625-025-01660-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the search for solutions to complex challenges posed by climate change and sustainability transitions, organizations often turn to innovative approaches and new cognitive frames. Particularly in the public sector, however, entrenched institutional logics often impede progress toward novel solutions. This paper explores how a public organization in the Dutch water sector navigates competing and sometimes conflicting frames and institutional logics through design-thinking. The object of study is a 6-month project initiated by a regional water authority in response to a severe flooding in 2021. The project aimed to develop and reimagine instruments for inclusive and climate-adaptive water management in collaboration with diverse actors. Based on participant observation and qualitative interviews, we analyze a series of design-thinking workshops where diverse stakeholders co-created tools for climate-adaptive water management. The findings disclose the existence of significant conflicts between the frames and institutional logics and offer details on how these were addressed through repeated stakeholder interaction and institutional work. We found that individuals showed varied responses to the emerging institutional logics, and that dominant institutional logics were diversely interpreted by different actors within the organization. Our research shows how iterative, participatory design methods can help actors temporarily shift institutional logics, but also reveals persistent challenges in achieving enduring changes to dominant institutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":49457,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability Science","volume":"20 3","pages":"759-776"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12033102/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainability Science","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-025-01660-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the search for solutions to complex challenges posed by climate change and sustainability transitions, organizations often turn to innovative approaches and new cognitive frames. Particularly in the public sector, however, entrenched institutional logics often impede progress toward novel solutions. This paper explores how a public organization in the Dutch water sector navigates competing and sometimes conflicting frames and institutional logics through design-thinking. The object of study is a 6-month project initiated by a regional water authority in response to a severe flooding in 2021. The project aimed to develop and reimagine instruments for inclusive and climate-adaptive water management in collaboration with diverse actors. Based on participant observation and qualitative interviews, we analyze a series of design-thinking workshops where diverse stakeholders co-created tools for climate-adaptive water management. The findings disclose the existence of significant conflicts between the frames and institutional logics and offer details on how these were addressed through repeated stakeholder interaction and institutional work. We found that individuals showed varied responses to the emerging institutional logics, and that dominant institutional logics were diversely interpreted by different actors within the organization. Our research shows how iterative, participatory design methods can help actors temporarily shift institutional logics, but also reveals persistent challenges in achieving enduring changes to dominant institutions.

作为变革对象的制度逻辑:一个水务组织在多利益相关者过程中使用设计思维进行气候适应的经验。
在寻找应对气候变化和可持续转型带来的复杂挑战的解决方案时,组织经常求助于创新方法和新的认知框架。然而,特别是在公共部门,根深蒂固的制度逻辑往往阻碍了新解决方案的进展。本文探讨了荷兰水务部门的公共组织如何通过设计思维来驾驭竞争,有时甚至是冲突的框架和制度逻辑。研究对象是一个为期6个月的项目,由地区水务局发起,以应对2021年的严重洪水。该项目旨在与不同行为体合作,开发和重新设计包容性和气候适应性水管理工具。基于参与者观察和定性访谈,我们分析了一系列设计思维研讨会,在这些研讨会上,不同的利益相关者共同创造了气候适应性水管理工具。研究结果揭示了框架和制度逻辑之间存在重大冲突,并提供了如何通过反复的利益相关者互动和制度工作来解决这些冲突的细节。我们发现,个体对新兴的制度逻辑表现出不同的反应,而主导的制度逻辑被组织内不同的行动者所解释。我们的研究表明,迭代的参与式设计方法可以帮助参与者暂时改变制度逻辑,但也揭示了在实现主导制度的持久变革方面的持续挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sustainability Science
Sustainability Science 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
174
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The journal Sustainability Science offers insights into interactions within and between nature and the rest of human society, and the complex mechanisms that sustain both. The journal promotes science based predictions and impact assessments of global change, and seeks ways to ensure that such knowledge can be understood by society and be used to strengthen the resilience of global natural systems (such as ecosystems, ocean and atmospheric systems, nutrient cycles), social systems (economies, governments, industry) and human systems at the individual level (lifestyles, health, security, and human values).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信