9,499
Views
27
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Advanced Review

Towards a Paradigmatic Shift in Sustainability Studies: A Systematic Review of Peer Reviewed Literature and Future Agenda Setting to Consider Environmental (Un)sustainability of Digital Communication

ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 567-581 | Received 21 May 2018, Accepted 11 Mar 2019, Published online: 08 May 2019

References

  • Aristarkhova, I. (2005). All like one in cyberspace: The homogenizing logic of net communities. In Z. Baber (Ed.), CyberAsia: The Internet and Society in Asia (pp. 159–177). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
  • Casemajor, N. (2015). Digital materialisms: Frameworks for digital media studies. Westminster Papers in Culture and Communication, 10(1), 4–17. doi: 10.16997/wpcc.209
  • Chen, S. (2016). The materialist circuits and the quest for environmental justice in ICT’s global expansion. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 14(1), 121–131. doi: 10.31269/triplec.v14i1.695
  • Comfort, S. E., & Park, Y. E. (2018). On the field of environmental communication: A systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. Environmental Communication, 12(7), 862–875. doi: 10.1080/17524032.2018.1514315
  • Crist, E. (2016). The reaches of freedom: A response to an ecomodernist manifesto. Environmental Humanities, 7(1), 245–254. doi: 10.1215/22011919-3616452
  • Cubitt, S. (2016). Finite media: Environmental implications of digital technologies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
  • Dietz, R., & O’Neill, D. (2013). Enough is enough: Building a sustainable economy in a world of finite resources. London: Routledge.
  • Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The politics of the earth: Environmental discourses (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Escobar, A., Hess, D., Licha, I., Sibley, W., Strathern, M., & Sutz, J. (1994). Welcome to Cyberia: Notes on the anthropology of cyberculture [and comments and reply]. Current Anthropology, 35(3), 211–231. doi: 10.1086/204266
  • Fernback, J. (1999). There is a there there: Notes toward a definition of cybercommunity. In S. Jones (Ed.), Doing internet research critical issues and methods for examining the net (pp. 203–220). London; New Delhi: Sage.
  • Fuchs, C. (2008). The implications of new information and communication technologies for sustainability. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10(3), 291–309. doi: 10.1007/s10668-006-9065-0
  • Fuchs, C. (2015). Dallas Smythe and digital labor. In R. Maxwell (Ed.), The Routledge companion to labor and media (pp. 51–62). New York: Routledge.
  • Gajjala, R., & Gajjala, V. (2008). South Asian technospaces. New York: Peter Lang.
  • Gates, K. (2013). Key questions for communication and critical-cultural studies: Posthumanism, network infrastructures, and sustainability. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 10(2-3), 242–247. doi: 10.1080/14791420.2013.812596
  • Good, J. E. (2016). Creating iPhone dreams: Annihilating e-waste nightmares. Canadian Journal of Communication, 41(4), 589–610. doi: 10.22230/cjc.2016v41n4a3058
  • Gould, A. S. (2016). Restor(y)ing the ground: Digital environmental media studies. Networking Knowledge: Journal of the MeCCSA Postgraduate Network, 9(5), 1–19.
  • Grunwald, A. (2016). Diverging pathways to overcoming the environmental crisis: A critique of eco-modernism from a technology assessment perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197(2), 1854–1862.
  • He, G., Boas, I., Mol, A. J. P., & Lu, Y. (2017). E-participation for environmental sustainability in transitional urban China. Sustainability Science, 12(2), 187–202. doi: 10.1007/s11625-016-0403-3
  • Hesselberth, P. (2018). Discourses on disconnectivity and the right to disconnect. New Media and Society, 20(5), 1994–2010. doi: 10.1177/1461444817711449
  • Keegan, B. J., Rowley, J., & Tonge, J. (2017). Marketing agency–client relationships: Towards a research agenda. European Journal of Marketing, 51(7/8), 1197–1223. doi: 10.1108/EJM-10-2015-0712
  • Kuntsman, A., & Miyake, M. (forthcoming). The paradox and continuum of digital disengagement: Denaturalising digital sociality and technological connectivity. Media, Culture and Society.
  • Lock, I., & Seele, P. (2017). Theorizing stakeholders of sustainability in the digital age. Sustainability Science, 12(2), 235–245. doi: 10.1007/s11625-016-0404-2
  • Maffey, G., Homans, H., Banks, K., & Arts, K. (2015). Digital technology and human development: A charter for nature conservation. Ambio, 44(4), 527–537. doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0703-3
  • Marx, K. (1867/1990). Capital: A critique of political economy, Vol. 1. (Ben Fowkes, Trans.). New York: Penguin.
  • Mol, A. P. J., & Spaargaren, G. (2000). Ecological modernisation theory in debate: A review. Environmental Politics, 9(1), 17–49. doi: 10.1080/09644010008414511
  • Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: Technology, solutionism, and the urge to fix problems that don’t exist. London: Penguin UK.
  • Næss, P., & Høyer, K. G. (2009). The emperor’s green clothes: Growth, decoupling, and capitalism. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 20(3), 74–95. doi: 10.1080/10455750903215753
  • Nakamura, L. (2000). Race in/for cyberspace: Identity tourism and racial passing on the internet. In D. B. B. M. Kennedy (Ed.), The cybercultures reader (pp. 181–193). London; New York: Routledge.
  • OECD. (2009, June 25). Declaration on green growth adopted at the meeting of the council at ministerial level. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/env/44077822.pdf
  • Oguibe, O. (1996). Forsaken geographies: Cyberspace and the new world ‘other’. Paper presented at the 5th International Cyberspace Conference, Madrid, Spain.
  • Oguibe, O., & Hoeller, C. (1996/2001). On digital ‘Third Worlds’: Olu Oguibe - an interview with Christian Hoeller, Springer Magazine. Originally published in German in Springer: Hefte für Gegenwartskunst, Vienna, Austria, September 1996. Communication Front. Retrieved from http://www.cfront.org/cf01/newspaper/html/np16-digital-third-worlds.html
  • Okinawa Charter on Global Information Society. (2000). Retrieved from http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/summit/2000/pdfs/charter.pdf
  • Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2008). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Qiu, J. L. (2017). Goodbye iSlave: A manifesto for digital abolition. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
  • Sandoval, C. (2000). NEW SCIENCES Cyborg feminism and the methodology of the oppressed. In D. B. B. M. Kennedy (Ed.), The cybercultures reader (pp. 374). London; New York: Routledge.
  • Sbaffi, L., & Rowley, J. (2017). Trust and credibility in web-based health information: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(6), e218. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7579
  • Seele, P., & Lock, I. (2017). The game-changing potential of digitalization for sustainability: Possibilities, perils, and pathways. Sustainability Science, 12(2), 183–185. doi: 10.1007/s11625-017-0426-4
  • Stuermer, M., Abu-Tayeh, G., & Myrach, T. (2017). Digital sustainability: Basic conditions for sustainable digital artifacts and their ecosystems. Sustainability Science, 12(2), 247–262. doi: 10.1007/s11625-016-0412-2
  • Tabira, Y., & Otieno, F. X. (2017). Integration and implementation of sustainable ICT-based education in developing countries: Low-cost, en-masse methodology in Kenya. Sustainability Science, 12(2), 221–234. doi: 10.1007/s11625-017-0422-8
  • Turkle, S. (1995). Live on the screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  • United Nations. (2012, September 11). Rio+20 the future we want: Outcome document adopted at Rio+20. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1298
  • WCED. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Widener, J. M., Gliedt, T. J., & Hartman, P. (2017). Visualizing dynamic capabilities as adaptive capacity for municipal water governance. Sustainability Science, 12(2), 203–219. doi: 10.1007/s11625-016-0408-y
  • York, R., Rosa, E. A., & Dietz, T. (2003). Footprints on the earth: The environmental consequences of modernity. American Sociological Review, 68(2), 279–300. doi: 10.2307/1519769