Our coordinator Jan Cools (University of Antwerp) and our WP leader Antonio Trabucco (CMCC Foundation - Centro Euro Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici) shared experiences on monitoring adaptation activities in projects under the EU mission on adaptation. 🔗 Check out them out here https://lnkd.in/eE8eZEny Universiteit Antwerpen | FEUGA. Fundación Universidad-Empresa Gallega | CMCC Foundation - Centro Euro Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici | Actierra | ADEME | Westcountry Rivers Trust | Water Europe | E3-Modelling Energy-Economy-Environment | PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research | Verhaert | Masters in Innovation | NCSR "DEMOKRITOS" | LUT University | Czech University of Life Sciences Prague | Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) | Universidade de Vigo | Epsilon Malta Ltd | Centro Tecnológico del Mar – Fundación CETMAR | Lappeenrannan kaupunki - City of Lappeenranta | Gjøvik Kommune | MEDSEA / Mediterranean Sea and Coast foundation | Municipality of Egaleo | Euroquality - Tinexta Group | CINEA - European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency | Mission Implementation Platform for Adaptation to Climate Change (MIP4Adapt) | ARSINOE_EU | Climate Impetus | CLIMAAX | Pathways2Resilience | REGILIENCE | REACHOUT
TransformAr’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
Introducing Epistemological Panarchy: This paper is concerned with epistemology, ontology, and the existential threat of climate change. This work highlights a need for us to revisit some of our 'thinking about our thinking'- the need for a meta-epistemology better suited to addressing existential threats. Callaghan, C.W. & Mitchell, A. (2024) Environmental sustainability and management theory development: Post-paradigm insights from the Anthropocene. European Management Review, 21(3), 520–532. https://lnkd.in/ekGjrqZp (ABS3)
Environmental sustainability and management theory development: Post‐paradigm insights from the Anthropocene
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
-
HEC Paris- Joly Family Professor of Purposeful Leadership- Founder and Director: Sustainability and Organizations (S&O) Institute
In this Point-Counterpoint at Journal of Management Studies, Tima Bansal, Markus Kreutzer, Sven Kunisch, Anita McGahan and myself propose to add to the foundations of the Strategy field some new pillars related to planetary boundaries to produce new knowledge always more relevant for practice. Nicolai J. Foss and Peter Klein don’t see the need for such a program since for them Strategy does not need rekindling whereas Jerry Davis and Teddy DeWitt think that such a program is doomed! We all believe that this conversation is timely and that the set of readings masterfully introduced by Christopher Wickert and Daniel Muzio could fuel the emergence of an entirely new model for Strategy research and practice. Who wants to join? #strategy #planetaryboundaries #performance Journal of Management Studies The Strategic Management Society Strategic Management Review Strategy Science Academy of Management
My colleagues (Rodolphe Durand, Markus Kreutzer, Sven Kunisch, Anita McGahan) and I have written an essay for the Journal of Management Studies on how the field of Strategy in business schools has inadvertently contributed to the environmental crisis (climate change, biodiversity loss, soil/water quality). We argue that Strategy has committed an ecological fallacy (double entendre should not be missed) by uncritically applying market/industry-level assumptions from economics to organizational-level strategy. For example, economics offers elegant analysis by assuming corporate self-interests, but the field of Strategy inadvertently assumes that every single corporation must be self-interested. Given planetary limits to growth, it is critical that Strategy scholars consider macro-level considerations in their organization-level analyses. Our article calls for the remediation of this ecological fallacy and offers some directions that this can take. We are delighted that there are two counterpoints to this essay, which should spark considerable dialogue on what we believe to be a critical topic. One Counterpoint by Jerry Davis and Teddy DeWitt agrees with our central thesis, but argues that organizational theory is better positioned to offer organizations a way forward to solve the environmental crisis, and another by Nicolai J. Foss and Peter Klein argues that reforming Strategy is not needed because the field's assumptions are fit for purpose and that suggestions of a planetary crisis is "alarmist". The JMS Editors, Christopher Wickert and Daniel Muzio, round out this group of essays with commentary that identifies 3 critical fault lines in these essays. The list of articles are below. I do hope you read these essays and comment. This dialogue is important to our scholarly endeavours and the way we train managers/executives. Bansal, T., Durand, R., Kreutzer, M., Kunisch, S., & McGahan, A. M. (2024). Strategy can no longer ignore planetary boundaries: A call for tackling strategy’s ecological fallacy. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/erXFpp93 Davis, G. F., & DeWitt, T. (2024). Can strategy address the climate crisis without losing its essence? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/epx4phRB Foss, N. J., & Klein, P. G. (2024). Do we need a ‘new strategy paradigm’? No. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ePC8QJTA Wickert, C., & Muzio, D. (2024). What is the strategy of strategy to tackle climate change? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ehEJWPgc
Strategy Can No Longer Ignore Planetary Boundaries: A Call for Tackling Strategy's Ecological Fallacy
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
-
Check out this lively debate about how the field of strategic management has addressed -- or perhaps even provoked -- corporate contributions to climate change, and possible future directions. The positions laid out could not be more divergent, and you may not be surprised to see where Teddy DeWitt and I land on this question. (Tl;dr: burn it down, because we have no time to waste in decarbonizing business.)
My colleagues (Rodolphe Durand, Markus Kreutzer, Sven Kunisch, Anita McGahan) and I have written an essay for the Journal of Management Studies on how the field of Strategy in business schools has inadvertently contributed to the environmental crisis (climate change, biodiversity loss, soil/water quality). We argue that Strategy has committed an ecological fallacy (double entendre should not be missed) by uncritically applying market/industry-level assumptions from economics to organizational-level strategy. For example, economics offers elegant analysis by assuming corporate self-interests, but the field of Strategy inadvertently assumes that every single corporation must be self-interested. Given planetary limits to growth, it is critical that Strategy scholars consider macro-level considerations in their organization-level analyses. Our article calls for the remediation of this ecological fallacy and offers some directions that this can take. We are delighted that there are two counterpoints to this essay, which should spark considerable dialogue on what we believe to be a critical topic. One Counterpoint by Jerry Davis and Teddy DeWitt agrees with our central thesis, but argues that organizational theory is better positioned to offer organizations a way forward to solve the environmental crisis, and another by Nicolai J. Foss and Peter Klein argues that reforming Strategy is not needed because the field's assumptions are fit for purpose and that suggestions of a planetary crisis is "alarmist". The JMS Editors, Christopher Wickert and Daniel Muzio, round out this group of essays with commentary that identifies 3 critical fault lines in these essays. The list of articles are below. I do hope you read these essays and comment. This dialogue is important to our scholarly endeavours and the way we train managers/executives. Bansal, T., Durand, R., Kreutzer, M., Kunisch, S., & McGahan, A. M. (2024). Strategy can no longer ignore planetary boundaries: A call for tackling strategy’s ecological fallacy. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/erXFpp93 Davis, G. F., & DeWitt, T. (2024). Can strategy address the climate crisis without losing its essence? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/epx4phRB Foss, N. J., & Klein, P. G. (2024). Do we need a ‘new strategy paradigm’? No. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ePC8QJTA Wickert, C., & Muzio, D. (2024). What is the strategy of strategy to tackle climate change? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ehEJWPgc
Strategy Can No Longer Ignore Planetary Boundaries: A Call for Tackling Strategy's Ecological Fallacy
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
-
EMFAF co-funded project (DG-MARE): Maritime Spatial Planning as enabler of the European Green Deal
Today we enclose the 1st Round of #FocusGroup sessions to head-start the development of #recommendations for a better integration of the European Green Deal (#EGD) into Maritime Spatial Planning (#MSP)! EU-wide expertise contributions were invited to point key suggestions for the following themes: 1️⃣ Climate change mitigation (including renewable energy production) and Zero pollution; 2️⃣ Climate change adaptation and Biodiversity, ecosystem protection and restoration; 3️⃣ Sustainable food production and Blue circular economy. Given the MSP-GREEN project performed analysis, discussions were based upon the identification of spatial needs for the EGD transition at sea, including the interpretation of a "successful EGD transition" and its potential challenges with respect to the MSP domain. 〰 Current findings (defining the project objective of Task 4.1.) showcased underlining connections with existing #data gaps, managing #uncertainties, the #scope of implementation level, mandate and nature of MSP planning process within different national #contexts but also contrasting #policy objectives. ✨ Thankful to all the participants to rise these important discussions and allowing us productively continue the work on MSP-GREEN project outcomes relevant for the various EU sea basins and beyond on MSP-EGD nexus! What's next? | Led by the Working Package 4 "Towards a Greener MSP for Europe: scaling-up and innovating" representatives: 〰 Draft recommendations 1.0 (project team) (1st half of April 2024) 〰 Second Focus group round of meetings (2nd half of April 2024) 〰 Comments on Draft recommendations 1.0 (FG members) 〰 Draft recommendations 2.0 (project team) (2nd half May 2024) 〰 EU level workshop back-to-back with #EMD in Svendborg (DK) 〰 Comments on Draft recommendations 2.0 (all participants)) 〰 FINAL Recommendations (project team) (2nd half June 2024) ❕ Dissemination of Final Recommendations to sea-basins communities and the Closing project conference (23-24 October 2024, Marseille FR) Keep following us across MSP-GREEN project platforms to get to know about important events ahead! 📨 https://lnkd.in/dAzgEpyp
-
-
Associate Professor of Economics, Head of the Management Science Research Unit, Northern Border University / Research Fellow, Economic Research Forum, Egypt / Fellow, Global Labor Organization, Germany
📢 Thrilled to announce the publication of our research article in the Journal of Environmental Management (CiteScore: 13.4, Scopus Q1 top 5%; IF: 8.7, WoS Q1), titled "Do institutions contribute to environmental sustainability? A global analysis using the dynamic spatial Durbin and threshold models". This research sheds light on the role of institutional quality in improving the load capacity factor in a sample of 100 countries by accounting for the dynamic spillover and threshold effects. Thanks to my co-author, Dr. Mohammed Alharbey, for the great collaboration! 🔗 link to download the paper freely: https://lnkd.in/dgkFzicv
Do institutions contribute to environmental sustainability? A global analysis using the dynamic spatial Durbin and threshold models
sciencedirect.com
-
In the urgent battle against climate change, strategic management must undergo a profound transformation. Check the list of readings. #ClimateChange #StrategicManagement #Sustainability
My colleagues (Rodolphe Durand, Markus Kreutzer, Sven Kunisch, Anita McGahan) and I have written an essay for the Journal of Management Studies on how the field of Strategy in business schools has inadvertently contributed to the environmental crisis (climate change, biodiversity loss, soil/water quality). We argue that Strategy has committed an ecological fallacy (double entendre should not be missed) by uncritically applying market/industry-level assumptions from economics to organizational-level strategy. For example, economics offers elegant analysis by assuming corporate self-interests, but the field of Strategy inadvertently assumes that every single corporation must be self-interested. Given planetary limits to growth, it is critical that Strategy scholars consider macro-level considerations in their organization-level analyses. Our article calls for the remediation of this ecological fallacy and offers some directions that this can take. We are delighted that there are two counterpoints to this essay, which should spark considerable dialogue on what we believe to be a critical topic. One Counterpoint by Jerry Davis and Teddy DeWitt agrees with our central thesis, but argues that organizational theory is better positioned to offer organizations a way forward to solve the environmental crisis, and another by Nicolai J. Foss and Peter Klein argues that reforming Strategy is not needed because the field's assumptions are fit for purpose and that suggestions of a planetary crisis is "alarmist". The JMS Editors, Christopher Wickert and Daniel Muzio, round out this group of essays with commentary that identifies 3 critical fault lines in these essays. The list of articles are below. I do hope you read these essays and comment. This dialogue is important to our scholarly endeavours and the way we train managers/executives. Bansal, T., Durand, R., Kreutzer, M., Kunisch, S., & McGahan, A. M. (2024). Strategy can no longer ignore planetary boundaries: A call for tackling strategy’s ecological fallacy. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/erXFpp93 Davis, G. F., & DeWitt, T. (2024). Can strategy address the climate crisis without losing its essence? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/epx4phRB Foss, N. J., & Klein, P. G. (2024). Do we need a ‘new strategy paradigm’? No. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ePC8QJTA Wickert, C., & Muzio, D. (2024). What is the strategy of strategy to tackle climate change? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ehEJWPgc
Strategy Can No Longer Ignore Planetary Boundaries: A Call for Tackling Strategy's Ecological Fallacy
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
-
Some great recent papers here - now how to get the world to adopt this sort of thinking is the main challenge going forward Important to stress that Western only strategies and thinking won’t cut it given the global challenge climate change poses Think of Degrowth in the context of economic realities in countries like China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia Or a world facing selfishness in the wealthy developed West The search goes on for what is truly needed but we remain convinced, especially to get democratic countries onboard, that we need to build a new global majority, where families understand that action will benefit them more than inaction Without that mechanisms such as carbon pricing will fail, degrowth won’t work etc Countries need the economic wherewithal to respond to the low carbon imperative before us all, directly in contrast to environmental imperatives So we will need more corporate action, more globally deployed innovation, more targeted investment but most of all, a global majority without which policy won’t help
My colleagues (Rodolphe Durand, Markus Kreutzer, Sven Kunisch, Anita McGahan) and I have written an essay for the Journal of Management Studies on how the field of Strategy in business schools has inadvertently contributed to the environmental crisis (climate change, biodiversity loss, soil/water quality). We argue that Strategy has committed an ecological fallacy (double entendre should not be missed) by uncritically applying market/industry-level assumptions from economics to organizational-level strategy. For example, economics offers elegant analysis by assuming corporate self-interests, but the field of Strategy inadvertently assumes that every single corporation must be self-interested. Given planetary limits to growth, it is critical that Strategy scholars consider macro-level considerations in their organization-level analyses. Our article calls for the remediation of this ecological fallacy and offers some directions that this can take. We are delighted that there are two counterpoints to this essay, which should spark considerable dialogue on what we believe to be a critical topic. One Counterpoint by Jerry Davis and Teddy DeWitt agrees with our central thesis, but argues that organizational theory is better positioned to offer organizations a way forward to solve the environmental crisis, and another by Nicolai J. Foss and Peter Klein argues that reforming Strategy is not needed because the field's assumptions are fit for purpose and that suggestions of a planetary crisis is "alarmist". The JMS Editors, Christopher Wickert and Daniel Muzio, round out this group of essays with commentary that identifies 3 critical fault lines in these essays. The list of articles are below. I do hope you read these essays and comment. This dialogue is important to our scholarly endeavours and the way we train managers/executives. Bansal, T., Durand, R., Kreutzer, M., Kunisch, S., & McGahan, A. M. (2024). Strategy can no longer ignore planetary boundaries: A call for tackling strategy’s ecological fallacy. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/erXFpp93 Davis, G. F., & DeWitt, T. (2024). Can strategy address the climate crisis without losing its essence? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/epx4phRB Foss, N. J., & Klein, P. G. (2024). Do we need a ‘new strategy paradigm’? No. Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ePC8QJTA Wickert, C., & Muzio, D. (2024). What is the strategy of strategy to tackle climate change? Journal of Management Studies. https://lnkd.in/ehEJWPgc
Strategy Can No Longer Ignore Planetary Boundaries: A Call for Tackling Strategy's Ecological Fallacy
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
-
Senior Ecological Specialist and Project Manager. SACNASP Pr.Sci.Nat. Ecological Science. IAIAsa President (2024/2025). IAIAsa 2025 Conference Co-Chair. IAIAsa 2024 Conference Committee Member.
IAIAsa Annual National Conference 2024 August 27 - 30 ANEW Resort Hunters Rest Rustenburg Rustenburg, North West, South Africa Call for Abstracts - Extended until 13 May 2024 The 2024 IAIAsa Conference, with its reimagined theme “Roar to Revolution: Unleashing the future of IEM” is poised to promote and create an enabling environment for inclusive dialogue, share experiences and communicate best practices between practitioners, private sector, academics, policymakers and local communities on current scientific research and practices in environmental management. Conference Topics - Achieving Biodiversity Conservation/Protection beyond the regulatory framework. - Revitalizing Ecosystems, and Restoring Prosperity: Financial Investment in Sustainable Futures. - Public Participation, Land acquisition, Involuntary Resettlement and Livelihood Restoration. - Environmental Legislation: Updates, Application and Compliance. - Meeting the Regulatory Requirements (checking boxes) or achieving positive outcomes (EIA, Auditing and EAs). - Just Energy Transition and Energy Expansion. - The Future of Mining and IEM. - Harmony in Innovation: Unleashing the Power of Big Data, AI/Machine Learning, and Space Technology in IEM. - Circular economy through sustainable waste management and IEM. - The role of IEM in navigating towards a pollution-free world. - Towards a Nexus Framework (e.g., Water, Energy and Food nexus). - Thriving in the era of Climate Change (Risk and Vulnerability, Adaptation, Mitigation and Resilience). - Connecting the dots: Systems thinking, SDGs, ESG for cross-cutting performance. https://lnkd.in/ddpBQUZB https://lnkd.in/deQZwBnz IAIAsa - International Association for Impact Assessment South Africa
-
-
📣A big thanks to the authors Helena Calado and Débora Gutierrez 🌊 Creative Solutions/ Project Management (University of the Azores), Cristina Cervera-Núñez (IEO, CSIC, Spain), and Ivana Stojanović (s.Pro – sustainable projects GmbH, Germany)! 👏 📄This paper explores the critical intersection of #MaritimeSpatialPlanning (MSP) and #climatechange adaptation and mitigation strategies. 👉🏻It highlights the outcomes of discussions among experts, stakeholders and policy makers at the Satellite Event of the 2024 UN Ocean Decade Conference Delivering the science we need for the ocean we want. 👉🏻It focuses on the need to #integrate #climateadaptation and #mitigation #strategies into MSP practices, focusing on protecting carbon sinks, promoting clean energy, and fostering sustainable ocean use. Don’t miss it! 👉🏻 Check it out here: https://lnkd.in/grMnzp8e HELCOM - Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission CMCC Foundation - Centro Euro Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici WWF Mediterranean VLIZ - Flanders Marine Institute CINEA - European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency European Research Executive Agency (REA)
-
-
I explore quantum, AI, neuroscience, energy, space, geopolitics, and entrepreneurship. My goal: ethical tech advancements and cutting-edge research
Horizon Europe strategic plan 2025-2027 for research and innovation to underpin journey to a green, digital and resilient future The second Horizon Europe strategic plan for (2025-2027) has been published. The Horizon Europe strategic plan 2025-2027 steers research and innovation funding 2025-2027, addressing the key global challenges such as climate change, loss of biodiversity, the digital transition and an ageing population. The strategic plan sets out 3 strategic orientations for research and innovation investment under Horizon Europe for the years 2025-2027: Green transition Digital transition A more resilient, competitive, inclusive and democratic Europe Open strategic autonomy and securing Europe’s leading role in developing and deploying critical technologies are overarching principles that apply across all 3 key strategic orientations. The strategic plan raises the ambition of Horizon Europe on biodiversity and commits to a target of 10% of Horizon Europe’s total budget 2025-2027 being dedicated to biodiversity-related topics. This new commitment complements existing targets for climate expenditure (35% over the lifetime of Horizon Europe) and main digital activities (€13 billion over the same period). Key elements 3 key strategic orientations for Horizon Europe research and innovation activities in 2025-2027 32 expected impacts distributed across clusters 9 new co-programmed and co-funded European Partnerships EU Missions and an overview on their achievements of the first years New European Bauhaus Facility Background The Horizon Europe strategic plan for 2025-2027 builds on an extensive analysis conducted by the Commission services, the Horizon Europe strategic plan 2025–2027 analysis. The strategic plan was co-created by Commission services and co-designed with Member States and Associated Countries, the European Parliament and more than 2000 stakeholders and citizens, who have contributed at various stages of the strategic planning process for Horizon Europe, such as the largest ever public consultation on European Research and Innovation Framework Programmes and a dedicated citizens’ engagement even
-
