Value Profiles as Tools to Understand and Guide Societal Decision Making: Applications for Circular Economy Transitions

Jouni Tuomisto; Bernhard Bliem; Juha Yrjölä; Tero Tikkanen; Sonja-Maria Ignatius; Maija Faehnle

doi:10.55845/joce-2025-3237

Authors

Jouni Tuomisto Kausal Ltd Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9988-1762
Bernhard Bliem Kausal Ltd Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2898-2830
Juha Yrjölä Kausal Ltd Author https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2032-6780
Tero Tikkanen Kausal Ltd Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4107-3834
Sonja-Maria Ignatius Kausal Ltd Author https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5387-8573
Maija Faehnle Finnish Environment Institute (Syke) Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4206-8543

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55845/joce-2025-3237

Keywords:

Decision Support, Circular Economy, Climate Change, Municipalities, Open Policy Practice, Insight Network, Value Judegment, Priorities

Abstract

Complex transitions toward circular economy face implementation challenges despite broad goal support, stemming from conflicting interests and difficulty making values explicit. We present a framework combining decision support methods with participatory approaches to systematically document stakeholders' factual beliefs and value judgments. The framework organizes policy-relevant information as interconnected objects: actions, scenarios, nodes, hypotheses, impacts, and value profiles. We tested this approach by analyzing 18 Finnish parliamentary candidates' responses to environmental policy questions in a voting advice application, documenting their reasoning within the framework structure. Analysis of 36 contributions produced an insight network of 23 nodes and 12 value profiles. The framework distinguished between factual disagreements and value differences, revealing that apparent conflicts often stemmed from different assumptions rather than different values. This distinction enables more focused debate and sense-making. The approach is relevant for circular economy transitions, where multiple stakeholders must coordinate across value chains and complex trade-offs exist between environmental, economic, and social impacts.

References

Baggini, J. (2019) How The World Thinks. A Global History of Philosophy. ISBN 978-1783782307

Baranzini, A., Carattini, S. & Tesauro, L., 2021. Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge. Environmental and Resource Economics 79, 417–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-021-00564-y

Bengtsson, Å. & Mattila, M. (2009). Direct Democracy and its Critics: Support for Direct Democracy and ‘Stealth’ Democracy in Finland. West European Politics, 32(5), 1031–1048. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380903065256

Bloom, I. (2009). Mencius. Columbia University Press. ISBN: 9780231122047

Borg, S. & Koljonen, K. (2020) Käyttöliittymä vaaleihin. Tutkimus vaalikoneista kansalaisten, ehdokkaiden ja journalism näkökulmasta. [In Finnish] Interface to elections. A study on voting advice applications from the point of view of citizens, candidates, and journalism. Tampere University Press, Tampere, Finland. ISBN 978-952-359-026-7

Helsingin Sanomat (2023). Voting advice application for the Finnish Parliament election. https://www.hs.fi/politiikka/art-2000009392020.html. Accessed 2025-12-12.

Hibbing, J.R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth Democracy: Americans' Beliefs About How Government Should Work. Cambridge University Press.

Kausal (2025a). The code for an online platform for helping cities turn climate goals into actions. https://github.com/kausaltech/ Accessed 2025-12-12.

Kausal (2025b). An online platform containing the data and results of the voting advice application data. https://greentransition.watch-test.kausal.tech/en-GB Accessed 2025-12-12.

Keeney, R.L. & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with Multiple Objectives. ISBN 0-521-44185-4.

Kirchherr, J., Piscicelli, L., Bour, R., Kostense-Smit, E., Muller, J., Huibrechtse-Truijens, A. & Hekkert, M. (2018) Barriers to the Circular Economy: Evidence From the European Union (EU). Ecological Economics 150: 264-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028.

K. Korhonen-Kurki, S. Bor, M. Faehnle, A.-K. Kosenius, S. Kuusela, J. Käyhkö, M. Pekkonen, H. Saarikoski & M. Keskinen. (2022) Empirical insights into knowledge-weaving processes in strategic environmental research. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 24: 6: 733-748 https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2022.2044296

Kurkela, L., Tuomisto, J. & Henttonen, K. (2026) A practical tool for sustainable value-focused decision-making: A case study on climate actions of municipalities from the global north. Journal of Circular Economy, in press.

Köhler, J., Geels, F.W., Kern, F., Markard, J., Onsongo, E. et al. (2019) An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 31: 1-32 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.01.004

MacCrimmon, K.R. (1968). Descriptive and normative implications of the decision-theory postulates. Risk and Uncertainty. London: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 3–32. OCLC 231114

McCreary, S. T., Gamman, J. K., & Brooks, B. (2001). Refining and testing joint fact-finding for environmental dispute resolution: Ten years of success. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 18(4), 329-348.

Mitchell, R.C. & Carson, R.T. (2013). Using Surveys to Value Public Goods. doi:10.4324/9781315060569. ISBN 9781315060569.

NetZeroCities (2025). An online platform for cities to collaborate and produce Climate City Contracts with future scenario modeling. https://netzerocities.app. Accessed 2025-12-12.

Noveck, B.S., 2009. Wiki Government: How Technology Can Make Government Better, Democracy Stronger, and Citizens More Powerful. ISBN 0815702752.

Oberlack, C., Breu, T., Giger, M., Harari, N., Herweg, K., et al. (2019) Theories of change in sustainability science: Understanding how change happens. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, Volume 28, Number 2, 2019, pp. 106-111(6). DOI: https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.28.2.8

Pearl, J. (2005). Influence Diagrams — Historical and Personal Perspectives. Decision Analysis. 2 (4): 232–4. doi:10.1287/deca.1050.0055.

Pearl, J. & MacKenzie, D. (2018). The book of why. The new science of cause and effect. Penguin Random House UK. ISBN 978-0-141-98241-0.

Petit-Boix, A. & Leipold, S. (2018) Circular economy in cities: Reviewing how environmental research aligns with local practices. Journal of Cleaner Production 195:1270-1281.

Reinholz, D.L. & Andrews, T.C. Change theory and theory of change: what’s the difference anyway?. IJ STEM Ed 7, 2 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-0202-3

Rydenfelt, H. & Nyfors, T. (2024). Climate change and transformations of justice - Views of just distribution in the Finnish policy debate. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 24:1, 1-14.

Salganik M.J. & Levy K.E.C. (2015) Wiki Surveys: Open and Quantifiable Social Data Collection. PLoS ONE 10(5): e0123483. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123483

Samuelson, P.A. (1948). Consumption theory in terms of revealed preference. Economica. New Series. 15 (60): 243–253. doi:10.2307/2549561

Schopenhauer, A. (1830) Eristische Dialektik. https://www.projekt-gutenberg.org/schopenh/eristik/eristik.html. Accessed 2025-12-12.

Schuman, S. (ed) (2005) The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation: Best Practices from the Leading Organization in Facilitation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 978-0787971601

Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1977). Behavioral Decision Theory. Annual Review of Psychology. 28 (1): 1–39. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.28.020177.000245.

Stein, D., & Valters, C. (2012). Understanding theory of change in international development. ISSN 2051-0926. JSRP Paper 1. London School of Economics and Political Science.

Suárez-Eiroa, B. (2025) The Social Importance of Researching Action-Oriented Circular Futures Journal of Circular Economy 3: 1 https://doi.org/10.55845/OYKZ1486

Taylor, R., Forrester, J., Pedoth, L. & Zeitlyn, P.D. (2022). Structured output methods and environmental issues: perspectives on co-created bottom-up and ‘sideways’ science. Humanities and Social Science Communications 9: 292. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01304-3

Tuomisto, J.T., Pohjola, M.V. & Rintala, T. (2020) From insight network to open policy practice: practical experiences. Health Res Policy Sys 18, 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00547-3.

Tuomisto, J.T. (2025). R code for running voting advice application data analyses. https://github.com/jtuomist/value-profile/ Accessed 2025-12-12.

UNDP. (2024) The peoples’ climate vote 2024. https://www.undp.org/publications/peoples-climate-vote-2024. Accessed 2025-12-12

Van Mechelen, M., Derboven, J., Laenen, A. Willems, B., Geerts, D. & Vanden Abeele, V. (2017) The GLID method: Moving from design features to underlying values in co-design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 97: 116-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.09.005.

Walco, D. K., & Risen, J. L. (2017). The Empirical Case for Acquiescing to Intuition. Psychological Science, 28(12), 1807–1820. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617723377