Ann Kristin Eide

Avoiding whinges from various and potentially conflicting stakeholders is a major challenge for sustainable development and for the identification of sustainability scenarios or policies for biodiversity and ecosystem services. It turns out that independently complying with whinge thresholds and constraints of these stakeholders is not sufficient because dynamic ecological-economic interactions and uncertainties occur. Thus more demanding no whinge standards are needed. In this paper, we first argue that these new boundaries can be endogenously exhibited with the mathematical concepts of viability kernel and viable controls. Second, it is shown how these no whinge kernels have components, such as harvesting of resources, that should remain within safe corridor while some other components, in particular biodiversity, have only lower conservation limits. Thus, using radar charts, we show how this no whinge kernels can take the shape of a tree that we name viability tree. These trees of viability capture the idea that the unbounded renewal potential of biodiversity combined with a bounded use of the different ecosystem services are crucial ingredients for the sustainability of socio-ecosystems and the design of no whinge policies reconciling the different stakeholders involved.

This article explores the way in which certain theoretical frameworks and analytical procedures combine to present stories about experience as objects of no depth, confusing this artefact with the phenomenon studied. By pointing out abusive potentials in a constructivist approach, it is argued that critical realism is needed in the field of narrative analysis. The creation of life stories as well as the project of analysing them involve interaction with a material world, and elaboration on it. We meet the Other, not as disembodied spirits, but in and through our bodies, which allow us to infer realities beyond language. We need to open up the field of empirical study to include the plurality of all experienced facts. What is more, this plurality must be firmly grounded within theoretical frameworks that cultivate humility, contending that there will always be more to reality than what meets the researcher’s eye. And we need a theoretical framework that dares to use the concept of truth. Only by doing so may we accord our informants the status of making relevant truth claims. Critical realism provides a much needed theoretical framework and sensitizing concepts, allowing for life stories to bear witness to the multidimensional realities from which they emerge