Ecological Economics Social Learning Research

Romina Rodela^*
*Correspondence: Romina Rodela, Department of Economics, Business Administration and Law, Sfax Universty, Berlin, Germany, Email:

Introduction

This research is motivated by an interest in how social learning is conceptualised, as well as how this research is positioned in terms of process dynamics, causative factors, and learning outcomes. In different sectors of environmental and sustainability research, there is a growing interest in change, transformation, and rejuvenation. Research Scholars have persevered in the face of enormous hardships. It is becoming increasingly clear how, when, and why change happens, and in which direction. The question is how widespread and long-lasting Changes in current unsustainable habits emerge, and what roles do they play? There is a role for knowledge and learning in this has been made possible by numerous scientific communities. Drawing on longheld conceptions and others have discussed policy learning. Political scientists investigated environmental learning issues at the national government and regulatory levels techniques. The Social Learning In terms of natural resources Management and learning concepts have grown in popularity in recent years Analysis. Social learning studies have just lately become a component of the ecological economics research agenda. About how human societies and organisations learn and transition based on environmental information are related to the key notions of ecological economics, which has a pluralistic perspective of human behaviour as opposed to a narrow concentration on incentive-driven behaviour. Over the work has examined the emergence and thematic foci of social learning studies within ecological economics. We chose and analysed peer-reviewed articles from renowned journals that adhere to the epistemological tradition of ecological economics.

Description

Ecological economics arose as a topic of study in which critical thoughts were addressed toward a form of economic system. Oversimplifications of positivistic scientific research difficult issues and methodologically dubious goals forecasts One notable aspect of this The criticism focuses on the denial of major premises about Ingebrigtsen and others on human behaviour in neoclassical economics While the attack on the As a result of the reductionistic focus on self-interest and utility maximisation, as well as conceptions of rational decision-making were crucial from the start The assumption most recently This discussion included extensive consideration of knowledge development, communication, and dissemination procedures.

The third aspect of the argument over what social learning is concerns the level of analysis and observation. Throughout the literature, the amount of aggregation of the studied variables has been discussed. The unit fluctuates, making comparisons difficult. Some studies focus solely on individuals as actors of learning processes. Consider social learning to be the total of individual learning processes. In contrast, other studies use networks, organisations, or entire societies as the unit of analysis. One specific with an added focus on social-ecological systems concentrate on ecological systems and how they interact with humans in a spatially localised ecology these investigations are based on the belief that these social Entities are emergent phenomena that cannot be reduced to a single entity. Persons' level [1-4].

Finally, there is the question of who the actors of social change are earning. There have been numerous debates about social learning. Participatory aspects are incorporated into studies their study designs in order to facilitate learning or change processes. However, in some research, the concept of "social learning" is frequently mixed up with the circumstances or methods required to "Stakeholder participation, for example, can help to enhance social learning" (Reed). This observation implies a degree of perplexity. Concerning what and who resulted from a social learning Are the outcomes the result of a participatory activity or did they appear as a result?

Our bibliographic search targeted the above-described journals by using the keyword and selection combinations mentioned [5,6]

Conclusion

Our sample consists of 54 papers that met our criteria. Ecology publishes the selected papers. Followed by environmental science and Policy as well as Environmental Values a rise in the number of papers published over the years is discernible, indicating a rising interest in this research community's learning and social learning. As well as the results of social learning research in ecological economics the findings show, first, a noticeable growth in social learning studies in the respective publications over the last few years. However, despite the growth in published research, it appears that there is no dominating conceptual approach among social learning studies within ecological economics among the sample of selected papers.

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Grainger, Daniel, and Natalie Stoeckl. "The importance of social learning for non-market valuation." Ecol Econ 164 (2019):106-339.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Pahl-Wostl, Claudia, David Tàbara, Rene Bouwen and Marc Craps, et al. "The importance of social learning and culture for sustainable water management." Ecol Econ 64 (2008): 484-495.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Paavola, Jouni, and W. Neil Adger."Institutional ecological economics."  Ecol Econ 53 (2005): 353-368.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Garmendia, Eneko and Sigrid Stagl. "Public participation for sustainability and social learning: Concepts and lessons from three case studies in Europe." Ecol Econ 8 (2010): 1712-1722.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Coe, Amanda, Gilles Paquet and Jeffrey Roy "E-governance and smart communities: a social learning challenge."  Soc Sci Comput Rev 1 (2001): 80-93.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Söderbaum, Pete "Values, ideology and politics in ecological economics." Ecol Econ 2 (1999): 161-170

Google Scholar, Crossref