CASRI Country Report: Summary

What is CASRI all about?

Which research topics must be addressed in order to effectively support the transition towards sustainable development? How can science and politics work together to achieve this? And how can the answers to these complex questions be financed? We are pursuing these questions in a Europe-wide research project together with the Federal Office for the Environment as part of the Horizon Europe CASRI project. Our research in Switzerland showed that the key challenge is not primarily the need for specific technological innovations, but rather a better understanding of how transformative processes can be appropriately designed and implemented.

As part of the CASRI project, we interviewed 20 experts from research funding organisations, research institutions, think tanks and public administration and presented our results to them during a workshop. The following results summarise the key findings of our national study.

Need for research: social justice as an important cross-cutting issue

‘We need to move away from mechanistic and purely technology-focused approaches and instead look closely at how to achieve transformation across society: What models of participation are needed? What role do values, frames of reference and democratic processes play?’ Josephiné von Mitschke Collande, Stiftung Mercator

To address the most pressing challenges of sustainable development, CASRI has identified four key thematic areas:

• Resilient, net-zero and circular production systems,
• Biodiversity and climate,
• Sustainable urban development
• Environmentally friendly energy transformation

This selection is based on their high relevance for the global sustainability goals, their close connection to international research and innovation strategies, and the need to systematically analyse synergies and trade-offs. The survey on the need for research focused on these areas, while also asking about other important topics.

Based on the interviews, the key challenge in the area of resilient, net-zero and circular production systems was to develop a practical understanding of social innovations to strengthen resource-efficient economies. The experts emphasised the need to create framework conditions and incentives that promote a circular economy. They emphasised that economic transformations inherently create winners and losers in society and can lead to social upheaval, which is why a thorough understanding of these dynamics, including their interactions, is essential to anticipating and managing change in a equitable manner. A particular focus is placed on fully understanding the roles and impacts of all actors, from financing, production and logistics to consumers, as this knowledge is crucial for designing fair, sustainable and effective circular economy models across the entire value chain.

In the area of biodiversity and climate, the socially just regeneration of ecosystems was identified as a key priority. Particular attention should be paid to the potential negative impacts of net-zero policies, such as landscape degradation caused by energy production. Furthermore, the need was emphasised to better understand the complex trade-offs and synergies in land use decisions – particularly in the context of food and energy production – taking into account both quantitative and qualitative aspects of land use, as well as the broader value of biodiversity for health, pandemic prevention, food security and cultural aspects, in order to achieve an optimal balance between climate protection, disaster risk reduction and resilience building.

In the area of sustainable urbanisation, research should focus on spatial planning, energy management, water management and dealing with heat stress. The experts interviewed emphasised that greater consideration should be given to social challenges such as segregation and intergenerationally just urban planning, with particular attention also being paid to urban-rural disparities and their complex interrelations in terms of mobility, resource distribution and economic opportunities.

With regard to the topic of environmentally friendly energy transformation, the interviews also emphasised that there are gaps in research, particularly with regard to the social and economic impacts of various transformation paths. The need for a better understanding of mechanisms for the stability of renewable energy systems was particularly emphasised. Furthermore, the experts highlighted important equity issues regarding the spatial distribution of burdens, the different contributions to energy consumption, the economic distribution of benefits, and the possibilities for a fair design of the transformation process.

In addition to these topics, the research on the effects of geopolitical conflicts on the transition to sustainable production systems, and on the harmonisation of health and environmental policy and social cohesion in times of change were highlighted. It is important to analyse the relationships between sustainability goals in a differentiated way in order to identify significant synergies and trade-offs, for example when trade agreements contradict environmental goals.

One of the key recommendations was to replace traditional sectoral thinking in environmental policy and governance with integrated approaches. In addition, social science perspectives should generally be an integral part of research projects from the outset, since the challenges of sustainability cannot be met by technological solutions alone. Rather, they are deeply intertwined with social realities, context-specific dynamics and institutional frameworks.

Financing instruments should promote collaboration in test settings

‘There is a lack of a large funding pot, which is essential for practice-oriented sustainability research. We need a bridge between science and practice. Instead of many funds covering individual elements of this bridge, we need one fund that supports researchers and practitioners alike, thereby enabling them to contribute to sustainable development together.’ Christian Pohl, ETH Zurich

The second part of our study addressed the question of how research and innovation can be optimally promoted in order to effectively support processes of sustainability transformation. It became clear that funding instruments must provide more support for unconventional forms of scientific collaboration and real-world laboratory research.

In discussions with our experts, various exemplary funding models were analysed. In particular, the need for better coordination of various research funding programmes was identified. Respondents also emphasised the importance of the initial phase of transdisciplinary projects, in which partners have to find each other and coordinate. Seed funding was highlighted as an essential tool to enable partners from science, politics and business to take the time needed for project development and role clarification.

According to the experts interviewed, funding programmes that are designed for the long term and enable the development of purpose-oriented networks are particularly effective. This ensures the continuous development and implementation of research results. For researchers in the field of innovation, cooperation with industrial partners is of great importance. However, there is often a lack of financial resources to ensure the bridging between theoretical work and the test phase. The interviewees pointed out that projects are often designed to be too subject-specific and that key aspects such as social issues are neglected due to a lack of time and funding. This makes it more difficult to successfully implement innovations in the context of sustainable development.

Thinking about the dialogue between science, politics and society from the outset

‘The federal offices plays a central role in implementing sustainability. In sustainability research, it is therefore crucial to also involve administrative actors in the science-policy interface. It should be noted that federal administration works differently than politics. Sustainability research must actively understand and take these systemic differences into account.’ Marius Christen, Head of the Network of Cantonal Sustainability Agencies

The third focus of our CASRI research was the interaction between science, politics and practice. The interviews demonstrated that the dialogue between science and politics should not be confined to the end of a research project or rely solely on scientific publications or white papers.

The experts recommended that the dialogue between knowledge producers and knowledge users should be made an integral part of the research process. The early involvement of all relevant stakeholders enables a constructive dialogue and promotes collaboration across fields of expertise, thereby blurring the boundaries between practice, science and politics.

Several key actors and stakeholders were identified as crucial for fostering interactions between science, policy, and practice. These include research institutions and research funders, federal offices, parliamentary commissions, associations and specialised science-policy interface organisations. The latter in particular perform important functions as knowledge brokers and support strategic science communication. In addition, various initiatives exist at universities and academies to actively promote science-policy-practice interaction, with a focus on shaping knowledge-based discourses.