No abstract

This paper describes a process by which anthropologists, computer scientists, and social welfare case managers collaborated to build a stochastic model of welfare advising in Kentucky. In the process of collaboration, the research team rethought the Bayesian network model of Markov decision processes and designed a new knowledge elicitation format. We expect that this model will have wide applicability in other domains.

The current enthusiasm for circular economy (CE) offers a unique opportunity to advance the impact of research on sustainability transitions. Diverse interpretations of CE by scholars, however, produce partly opposing assessments of its potential benefits, which can hinder progress. Here, we synthesize policy-relevant lessons and research directions for a sustainable CE and identify three narratives – optimist, reformist and skeptical – that underpin the ambiguity in CE assessments. Based on 54 key CE scholars’ insights, we identify three research needs: the articulation and discussion of ontologically distinct CE narratives; bridging of technical, managerial, socio-economic, environmental and political CE perspectives; and critical assessment of opportunities and limits of CE science-policy interactions. Our findings offer practical guidance for scholars to engage reflexively with the rapid expansion of CE knowledge, identify and pursue high-impact research directions, and communicate more effectively with practitioners and policymakers.

Drawing on three years of ethnographic research on the decision making processes of welfare case managers in urban Kentucky, we focus here on a group of case managers who subvert the demands placed on them by neoliberal welfare policy. These women refer to their own experiences as low-income, single parents to reconceptualize notions of the "un/deserving" poor, the welfare contract, and what it means to be "self-sufficient." Case manager resistance and moral constructs are instructional, making explicit the dehumanizing aspects of the system and valuing a rights-based discourse which recognizes the state's obligation to ensure the welfare of all citizens.

The circular economy (CE) has emerged with the promise of conserving resources through approaches such as durability and extended product lifetimes. At the same time, buildings negatively contribute to resource use and waste production, making buildings a key target for CE strategies. However, the question of how durability and lifetimes affect the social and environmental impacts of building products remains largely unexplored. In this study, we applied environmental and social life cycle assessments (E-LCA and S-LCA, respectively) to a common building component, roof covering, to investigate the effects of durability and different lifespans, and the tradeoffs between social and environmental impacts. We tested different lifespan scenarios for three materials with different durability: thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO), zinc-coated steel, and galvanized aluminum sheets. The results suggest that it is critical to consider the tradeoffs of social and environmental benefits: steel had the most promising social performance, followed closely by aluminum, while the least durable material (TPO) had the worst environmental and social performance. However, the environmental impacts resulting from the production of aluminum sheets were significantly lower than the impacts from steel, which made aluminum the preferred choice for this case study. Moreover, product lifespans impacted the results in both E-LCA and S-LCA due to the number of replacements needed over the life of a 100year building. We discuss key limitations of integrating E-LCA and S-LCA approaches, such as data aggregation and spatial issues, lack of standards on how to account for product durability, and concerns surrounding S-LCA results interpretation.