Sustainable Practices in Environmental Science: A Mixed Methods Approach to Ecological Research
- Home
- Academy
- PhD Research Methodology
- A Mixed Methods Approach to Ecological Research
Sustainable Practices in Environmental Science
Recent Post
Introduction
Environmental science research is inherently complex because it usually addresses multiple ecological challenges occurring in both natural and human systems. Achieving sustainability is reliant, in part, on understanding not only the science behind environmental change but also the sociocultural and economic factors contributing to that change. This is where the environmental sustainability practices are crucial, since they guide science and community action in the pursuit of long-term ecological equilibrium.
A mixed methods research (MMR) approach, which combines quantitative information and qualitative data, provides a more holistic way to combat the challenges of sustainability through scientific results and human engagement. This manuscript discusses the use of MMR in environmental sustainability practices research, by considering its use for improving ecological research, its contribution to sustainability studies and its implications for developing solutions in conservation, climate change, public health, and other environmental issues.
The Role of Mixed Methods in Environmental Science
The use of mixed methods in environmental science research is beneficial. Quantitative research, by way of environmental monitoring, statistical analyses, and modelling, provides quantitative measures of environmental parameters, for example, pollution, biodiversity, and climate change. Qualitative research, namely interviews, focus groups, and ethnographic research, captures the depth and detail of the lived experience, values, and perceptions about those same environmental issues.
Enwin and Ikiriko (2023) propose that mixed methods are especially suited for environmental scientists because they provide a more holistic understanding of ecosystems, not only by examining measures from environmental sensors or surveys, but also by integrating community perspectives on environmental conservation and climate change. Integration of numbers and narratives generates richer and fuller understandings of environmental issues.
Case Examples
1. Mixed Methods in Land-Change Science and Environmental Management
Land-change science and environmental governance is one area where mixed methods are particularly useful, as land-change science considers ecological processes and human geographies on and off the land. Kinnebrew et al. (2021) provide an example of mixed methods in land-change science in relation to deforestation or land-use change in tropical forests.
For mixed methods in tropical forests, the quantitative data might be a satellite image or forest cover data over time to show the trends in deforestation. However, if you want to understand the logic behind deforestation (for example, if that forest policy, economics or landowner attitudes) then qualitative methods like interviews and focus groups with local farmers, policymakers or conservationists will give you valuable input here. Doing so will create a model for you to understand land-use change that incorporates both the ecological data as well as the social circumstances influencing environmental deterioration
Example: Researchers in the Brazilian Amazon used mixed methods of inquiry to gain insight into the drivers of deforestation. Satellite data indicated which areas experienced the most forest loss. However, data provided by interviews with the local community and stakeholders indicated that the forest loss stemmed from economic incentives for logging and farming but also included cultural attitudes toward conservation of the forest. In this case, mixed methods provided a depth of understanding on deforestation to inform policies aimed at creating a balance between environmental sustainability and the socio-economic needs of the local community.
2. Mixed Methods in Public Health and Environmental Health Research
Another significant role of mixed methods is in environmental health research, that is, researching how environmental changes impact human health. Ramírez et al. (2025) will show the use of mixed methods as exposure science is heavily reliant on quantitative indicators, such as air or water pollution, and qualitative research, such as interviews with community members on health issues.
Example: With urban air pollution, for instance, researchers may quantify air pollution monitoring in different neighbourhoods to measure different levels of urban air pollution. Quantitative measures alone, however, do not explain the full health effects of urban air pollution. Quantitative interviews with community members, health providers, and urban planners can elicit how different communities understand the health risks of pollution and what practices have been adapted over time. The combination of qualitative and quantitative data can provide recommendations that are scientifically sound and feasible to the community.
3. Mixed Methods in the Energy Sector
Iqbal et al. (2022) take a mixed-methods approach by studying sustainability in energy. The authors explore a transition to renewable energy sources, including fossil fuels. They ended up utilising quantitative metrics on energy use and carbon emissions alongside qualitative engagement through interviews with stakeholders across the energy sector, including energy providers, policy-makers, and local citizens.
Example: While studying wind energy adoption in rural contexts, quantitative data might depict energy generation and impact on local energy grids. However, qualitative data in the form of interviews with residents could provide attitudes towards this renewable energy source, along with barriers to wind energy adoption (including aesthetic concerns or distrust), and socio-cultural factors. By amalgamating these up- and downstream experiences, it results in a form of intervention and policy direction that encourages renewable energy adoption while engaging residents around salient issues. These insights contribute to research about environmental sustainability and help shape future environmental sustainability practice
The Importance of Integrating Social and Ecological Data
One of the major advantages of mixed methods environmental science research is the combination of social and ecological data. For example, qualitative research can help place the issue in context to explain why sustainability practices are successful or unsuccessful in different areas or communities, and may show the scientific interventions to be environmentally effective, socially acceptable, and economically feasible.
Zhang et al. (2023) provide an example of integration in their study of the economy-environment-health nexus in the metropolitan capital region of China. Their study integrates quantitative data describing air quality, health outcomes, and economic performance with qualitative data gathered through interviews with residents and public health experts, to consider the impact of public policies on environmental science and sustainability. Such integration is essential for advancing environmental sustainability practices research and ensuring that the solutions generated are both scientifically credible and socially responsive.
Example: Researchers in the capital of China found that economic growth was linked to increased air pollution, but through qualitative data collected through interviews, they also found that the residents did not know the long-term health effects of pollution. This knowledge affected their social cost to purchase and invest in cleaner technologies. Thus, the combined findings led researchers to recommend tailored public education campaigns to address both the environmental and social aspects of pollution.
Challenges and Future Directions for Mixed Methods in Environmental Science
Though mixed methods research has a lot of promise, it is not without problems. One of the major issues arises when integrating qualitative and quantitative data. Researchers must be equally comfortable and skilled in both methodologies and able to synthesise these different data types into a unified story. Additionally, conducting both qualitative and quantitative research often requires considerable time and labour.
As Kaplan et al. (2022) clarify in their review of mixed methods, future researchers may benefit from technological advancements in data use and integration (e.g., AI, machine learning, and geospatial analysis) that would assist researchers in integrating qualitative and quantitative research. These technologies could make it easier for researchers to collect, analyse, and integrate large amounts of data from different sources, especially in the context of an environmental sustainability research paper where diverse data types are often essential.
Table:1 Applications of Mixed Methods in Environmental Sustainability Research
Domain | Quantitative Methods | Qualitative Methods | Purpose in Environmental Sustainability Research Paper |
Land-Change Science | Satellite imagery, forest cover data | Interviews with farmers, policymakers | Understand ecological and social drivers of deforestation |
Public & Environmental Health | Air/water pollution metrics | Community interviews, health provider insights | Assess health impacts and community responses to pollution |
Energy Sector | Energy usage statistics, carbon emission data | Stakeholder interviews (citizens, providers, policymakers) | Explore adoption barriers and attitudes toward renewable energy |
Economy-Environment-Health Nexus | Air quality, economic performance, health outcome data | Resident and expert interviews | Evaluate policy impacts on sustainability and public well-being |
General Environmental Science | Environmental monitoring, statistical modeling | Ethnographic studies, focus groups | Integrate ecological data with human perspectives for holistic sustainability |
Conclusion
Mixed methods research is a robust tool for articulating and addressing the challenges of sustainability in the field of environmental science. By integrating quantitative and qualitative methods, researchers can engage more deeply with both the ecological and social facets of environmental dilemmas. Mixed methods research offers sufficient nuance to investigate the complex, hybrid nature of human society as it interacts with the physical world, from land-change science and energy sustainability to public health and environmental economics.
By recognising and adopting an interdisciplinary approach to mixed methods research, PhD scholars in environmental science can then formulate more holistic, contextual solutions that promote sustainability and efforts to protect the environment. The combination of hard data with human understanding ensures our research is scientifically relevant as well as socially and culturally significant, with the ultimate outcome being research that results in more effective and sustainable environmental practices.
References
- Enwin, A. D., & Ikiriko, T. D. (2023). Exploring the use of mixed methods in environmental sciences research: A literature review and analysis. Journal homepage: www.ijrpr.com, ISSN 2582-7421.
- Kinnebrew, E., Shoffner, E., Farah‐Pérez, A., Mills‐Novoa, M., & Siegel, K. (2021). Approaches to interdisciplinary mixed methods research in land‐change science and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 35(1), 130-141.
- Ramírez, D. M., Sachs, A. L., & Ekenga, C. C. (2025). Qualitative and mixed methods: informing and enhancing exposure science. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, 35(4), 535-538.
- Iqbal, K. M. J., Akhtar, N., Khan, M. O., & Khan, M. I. (2022). Mix-method modelling of actors’ capacity for environmental sustainability and climate compatible development in energy sector. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(33), 50632-50646.
- Zhang, W., Zhao, J., Zhang, Z., Liu, M., Li, R., Xue, W., … & Bi, J. (2023). The economy–employment–environmental health transfer and embedded inequities of China’s capital metropolitan area: a mixed-methods study. The Lancet Planetary Health, 7(11), e912-e924.
- Kaplan, H., Prahalad, V., & Kendal, D. (2022). Native for whom: A mixed‐methods literature review and synthesis to conceptualise biotic nativeness for social research in the urban context. People and Nature, 4(1), 15-31.