AlbanesiC. (2023). Focus Groups. In MagginoF.(Ed.), Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research (pp. 2543–2546). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-031-17299-1_1066
2.
AlexandraJ. (2021). How do the cultural dimensions of climate shape our understanding of climate change? Climate, 9(4), 63. 10.3390/cli9040063
3.
AndrewsR., & EntwistleT. (2010). Does cross-sectoral partnership deliver? an empirical exploration of public service effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(3), 679–701. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40732531
4.
AvelinoF. (2021). Theories of power and social change. Power contestations and their implications for research on social change and innovation. Journal of Political Power, 14(3), 425–448. 10.1080/2158379X.2021.1875307
5.
BaakoI., AlhassanH., & GidisuP. (2022). Understanding and spotting research gaps through a systematic literature review. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, VI(III), 2454–6186. www.rsisinternational.org
6.
BarthelR., & SeidlR. (2017). Interdisciplinary collaboration between natural and social sciences—status and trends exemplified in groundwater research. PloS One, 12(1), e0170754. 10.1371/journal.pone.0170754
7.
BornmannL., HaunschildR., BoyackK., MarxW., & MinxJ. C. (2022). How relevant is climate change research for climate change policy? An empirical analysis based on Overton data. PloS One, 17(9), e0274693. 10.1371/journal.pone.0274693
8.
BrinkmannS. (2020). Unstructured and Semistructured Interviewing. In (LeavyP.Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research Oxford Academic: Sage.
9.
CastreeN. (2016). Broaden research on the human dimensions of climate change. 10.1038/nclimate3078
10.
CastreeN., AdamsW. M., BarryJ., BrockingtonD., BüscherB., et al. (2014). Changing the intellectual climate. 10.1038/NCLIMATE2339
11.
ChenY., & XieL. (2013). Social science research on climate change in China. In World Social Science Report 2013, 207–214. 10.1787/9789264203419-29-en
12.
ClaytonS., Devine-WrightP., SternP. C., WhitmarshL., CarricoA., et al. (2015). Psychological research and global climate change. 10.1038/NCLIMATE2622
13.
ColognaV., & OreskesN. (2022). Don’t gloss over social science! a response to: Glavovic et al. (2021) ‘the tragedy of climate change science’. Climate and Development, 14(9), 839–841. 10.1080/17565529.2022.2076647
14.
CookT. D., & CampbellD. T. (1986). The causal assumptions of quasi-experimental practice: The origins of quasi-experimental practice. Synthese, 68(1), 141–180.
15.
DavidsonD. J. (2022). Climate change sociology: Past contributions and future research needs. PLOS Climate, 1(7), e0000055. 10.1371/journal.pclm.0000055
16.
DebertoliN. S., SaylesJ. S., ClarkD. G., & FordJ. D. (2018). Asystems network approach for climate change vulnerability assessment. Environmental Research Lett, 13; 10.1088/1748-9326/aae24a
17.
DebortoliN. S., SaylesJ. S., ClarkD. G., & FordJ. D. (2018). A systems network approach for climate change vulnerability assessment. Environmental Research Letters, 13(10), 104019. 10.1088/1748-9326/aae24a
18.
DietzT., SovacoolB. K., & SternP. C. (2016). Reply to ‘Broaden research on the human dimensions of climate change’. In Nature Publishing Group. 10.1038/nclimate3156
19.
Feldbacher-EscamillaC. J., GebharterA., & SchurzG. (2017). Philosophy of Science between the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities: Introduction. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 48(3), 317–326. 10.1007/s10838-017-9378-8
20.
FerreiraC., & JanssenM. (2022). Shaping the future of shared services centers: Insights from a delphi study about SSC transformation towards 2030. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 14(4), 4828–4847. 10.1007/s13132-022-01072-0
21.
FieldingJ., FieldingN., & HughesG. (2013). Opening up open-ended survey data using qualitative software. Quality & Quantity, 47(6), 3261–3276. 10.1007/s11135-012-9716-1
22.
FisherE. (2017). 4. The history of environmental law. In Environmental Law: A Very Short Introduction (pp. 36–50). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/actrade/9780198794189.003.0004
23.
FordJ. D., KeskitaloE. C. H., SmithT., PearceT., Berrang-FordL., et al. (2010). Case study and analogue methodologies in climate change vulnerability research. WIREs Climate Change, 1(3), 374–392. 10.1002/wcc.48
24.
FouquerayT., & Frascaria-LacosteN. (2020). Social sciences have so much more to bring to climate studies in forest research a French case study. Annals of Forest Science Full Text. Annals of Forest Science, 77(3). 10.1007/s13595-020-00989-3
25.
GillingsM., & DayrellC. (2023). Climate change in the UK press: Examining discourse fluctuation over time. Applied Linguistics, 45(1), 111–133. 10.1093/applin/amad007
26.
GlavovicB. C., SmithT. F., & WhiteI. (2022). The tragedy of climate change science. In Climate and Development, 14(9), 829–833. 10.1080/17565529.2021.2008855
27.
GoffmanE. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harper & Row.
28.
GoldbergM. H., GustafsonA., & van der LindenS. (2020). Leveraging social science to generate lasting engagement with climate change solutions. One Earth, 3(3), 314–324. 10.1016/J.ONEEAR.2020.08.011
29.
GoldmanM. J., TurnerM. D., & DalyM. (2018). A critical political ecology of human dimensions of climate change: Epistemology, ontology, and ethics. In: Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change (Vol. 9, Issues 4). Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/wcc.526
30.
GreenJ. (2010). Points of intersection between randomized experiments and quasi-experiments. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 628(1), 97–111.
31.
HansenA., & MachinD. (2008). Visually branding the environment: Climate change as a marketing opportunity. Discourse Studies, 10(6), 777–794. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24049382
32.
HullandJ. (2020). Conceptual review papers: Revisiting existing research to develop and refine theory. AMS Review, 10(1–2), 27–35. 10.1007/s13162-020-00168-7
33.
IslamS., & KieuE. (2021). Sociological perspectives on climate change and society: A review. Climate, 9(1):7. 10.3390/cli9010007
34.
JaffeK., RaulA., & MontoyaH. (2014). Adapted to work for different knowledge landscapes. PLoS ONE, 9(11), 113901. 10.1371/journal.pone.0113901
35.
JorgensonA. K., FiskeS., HubacekK., LiJ., McGovernT., et al. (2019). Social science perspectives on drivers of and responses to global climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Climate Change, 10(1), e554. 10.1002/wcc.554
36.
LentonT. M., RockströmJ., GaffneyO., RahmstorfS., RichardsonK., et al. (2019). Climate tipping points—too risky to be against. Nature, 575(7784), 592–595. 10.1038/d41586-019-03595-0
37.
LeyshonC. (2014). Critical issues in social science climate change research. Contemporary Social Science, 9(4), 359–373. 10.1080/21582041.2014.974890
38.
LiuF., DaiE., & YinJ. (2023). A review of social-ecological system research and geographical applications. Sustainability, 15(8), 6930. 10.3390/su15086930
39.
LiuJ. C. (2023). Public opinion on climate change in China—Evidence from two national surveys. PLOS Climate, 2(2):e0000065. 10.1371/journal.pclm.0000065
40.
Lloyd-EvansS. (2017). Focus groups, community engagement, and researching with young people. In (EvansR, HoltL, & SkeltonT.Eds.), Methodological Approaches (pp. 357–379). Springer: Singapore. 10.1007/978-981-287-020-9_16
41.
MeulenbergC. J. W., HawkeS. M., CavaionI., KumerP., & LenarčičB. (2022). Understanding interdisciplinarity through Adriatic maricultures and climate change adaptation. Visions for Sustainability, 18, 11–36. 10.13135/2384-8677/6945
42.
MorganH. (2022). Conducting a qualitative document analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64–77. 10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044
43.
NielsenJ. Ø., & D’haenS. A. L. (2014). Asking about climate change: Reflections on methodology in qualitative climate change research published in Global Environmental Change since 2000. Global Environmental Change, 24, 402–409. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.10.006
44.
NietoJ., CarpinteroÓ., & MiguelL. J. (2018). Less than 2 °C? An economic-environmental evaluation of the paris agreement. Ecological Economics, 146, 69–84. 10.1016/J.ECOLECON.2017.10.007
45.
OlssonL., JerneckA., ThorenH., PerssonJ., & O’ByrneD. (2015). Why resilience is unappealing to social science: Theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience. Science Advances, 1(4), e1400217. 10.1126/sciadv.1400217
46.
OverlandI., SovacoolB. K. (2020). The misallocation of climate research funding. Energy Research & Social Science, 62, 101349. 10.1016/j.erss.2019.101349
47.
PacheA.-C., FayardA.-L., & GaloM. (2022). How can cross-sector collaborations foster social innovation? a review. In VaccaroA & RamusT.(Eds.), Social Innovation and Social Enterprises: Toward a Holistic Perspective (pp. 35–62). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-030-96596-9_3
48.
PedersenD. B., GrønvadJ. F., & HvidtfeldtR. (2020). Methods for mapping the impact of social sciences and humanities—A literature review. Research Evaluation, 29(1), 4–21. 10.1093/reseval/rvz033
49.
PleinC. (2019). Resilience, adaptation, and inertia: Lessons from disaster recovery in a time of climate change. Social Science Quarterly, 100(7), 2530–2541. 10.1111/ssqu.12658
50.
PorterT. M. (1995). The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton University Press Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7sp8x
51.
PriyaA. (2016). Grounded theory as a strategy of qualitative research: An attempt at demystifying its intricacies. Sociological Bulletin, 65(1), 50–68. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26368064
52.
SchironeM. (2024). The formation of a field: Sustainability science and its leading journals. Scientometrics, 129(1), 401–429. 10.1007/s11192-023-04877-1
53.
ShraimR. (2021). How philosophy is making me a better scientist. Nature; 10.1038/d41586-021-01103-x
54.
SinghaniaM., & ChadhaG. (2023). Thirty years of sustainability reporting research: A scientometric analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 30(46), 102047–102082. 10.1007/s11356-023-29452-2
55.
SkoglundA. (2015). Climate social science—Any future for ‘blue sky research’ in management studies? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(1), 147–157. 10.1016/J.SCAMAN.2014.10.004
56.
SnowD. A., & BenfordR. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1(1), 197–217.
57.
SovacoolB. K., AxsenJ., & SorrellS. (2018). Promoting novelty, rigor, and style in energy social science: Towards codes of practice for appropriate methods and research design. Energy Research & Social Science, 45, 12–42. 10.1016/J.ERSS.2018.07.007
58.
StorchH., von., & ZwiersF. W. (1999). Statistical Analysis in Climate Research. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511612336
59.
TaiT. C., & RobinsonJ. P. W. (2018). Enhancing climate change research with open science. In: Frontiers in Environmental Science (Vol. 6, Issue OCT). Frontiers Media S.A. 10.3389/fenvs.2018.00115
60.
ThomasK., Dean HardyR., LazrusH., MendezM., OrloveB., et al. (2018). Explaining differential vulnerability to climate change: A social science review*. Wiley. 10.1002/wcc.565
61.
ThomasK., HardyR. D., LazrusH., MendezM., OrloveB., et al. (2019). Explaining differential vulnerability to climate change: A social science review. In Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 10 Issue, 2. 10.1002/wcc.565(Wiley-Blackwell.
62.
TimmermansS., & TavoryI. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186.
63.
TurnerG. A., de’DonatoF., HoebenA. D., NordengZ., ColemanS., et al. (2023). Implementation of climate adaptation in the public health sector in Europe: Qualitative thematic analysis. European Journal of Public Health, 34(3), 544–549. 10.1093/eurpub/ckad218
64.
UNFCCC. (2015). Paris Agreement.
65.
van BeekL., HajerM., PelzerP., van VuurenD., & CassenC. (2020). Anticipating futures through models: The rise of integrated assessment modelling in the climate science-policy interface since 1970. Global Environmental Change, 65, 102191; 10.1016/J.GLOENVCHA.2020.102191
66.
van GinkelK. C. H., Wouter BotzenW. J., HaasnootM., BachnerG., SteiningerK. W., et al. (2020). Climate change induced socio-economic tipping points: Review and stakeholder consultation for policy relevant research. Environmental Research Letters, 15(2), 023001. 10.1088/1748-9326/ab6395
67.
van MaanenN., LissnerT., HarmsenM., PiontekF., AndrijevicM., & van VuurenD. P. (2023). Representation of adaptation in quantitative climate assessments. In: Nature Climate Change (Vol. 13, Issue 4, pp. 309–311). Nature Research. 10.1038/s41558-023-01644-1
68.
WeaverC. P., MooneyS., AllenD., Beller-SimmsN., FishT., et al. (2014). From global change science to action with social sciences. Nature Climate Change, 4(8), 656–659. 10.1038/nclimate2319
69.
WellsE. C., LehighG. R., & VidmarA. M. (2020). Stakeholder Engagement for Sustainable Communities. In The Palgrave Handbook of Global Sustainability (pp. 1–13). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-030-38948-2_10-1
70.
XiangW.-N., LiB., ChurchmanW., FullerR. B., MchargI., et al. (2021). Seven approaches to research in socio-ecological practice & five insights from the RWC-Schön-Stokes model. Socio-Ecological Practice Research, 3(1), 71–88. 10.1007/s42532-021-00073-8