Research methods and their applications

Preserving society's options for development and action, addressing immaterial needs such as integration in cultural and social contexts in addition to material needs.

Validity, Reliability of Measure and Generalizability of the Study

Validity is delineated as the magnitude that a measuring procedure mirrors, seizes or examines the particular concept that a study is attempting to measure. More often than not, validity is applicable to the methodology as well as design of the study. There are two kinds of validity and these are internal and external validity. For starters, internal validity is usually influenced by shortcomings in the study, for instance, lack of control of key variables and also problems with research implements (Robson and McCartan, 2016). On the other hand, external validity takes into account the magnitude to which an individual can generalize the outcomes to a greater study group or in different contexts (Bailey, 2006). The research study is not comprehensively valid. Despite the fact that it does take into account social constructs, it has not completely taken into account the impact of the energy transition on biodiversity and the distribution of costs and benefits among social groups.

Reliability is delineated as the consistency and uniformity of the outcomes when the study or experiment is replicated in the similar situations. The extent of error sets the basis the amount of reliability. This implies that great level of error leads to low reliability and minimal level of error leads to high reliability (Robson and McCartan, 2016). A study's reliability is imperative because if a study lacks reliability, then it implies that a determination cannot be made as to whether the study that is undertaken is proof to recommend that the hypothesis of the study is significant (Leung, 2015). The research study is considered to be reliable because if other researchers performed the similar study, under similar conditions, they would generate similar results. This is because the same rules applied in the integrative concept of sustainable development would be applied. As pointed out by Rosch et al. (2017), the set of significant and instrumental rules are a priori, universally valid, and equally weighted.

Generalizability takes into account the examination of reliable outcomes. It is deemed as a structure for undertaking and recording research of extensive quality. In particular, generalizability delineates the magnitude to which the outcomes of the study are applicable in a research setting aside from the one of the initial and original study (Bailey, 2006). Generalizability takes into account being able to apply the results to the population from which the sample was driven. In particular, this research study undertaken by Rosch et al. (2017) is generalizable because the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are all similar nationally and globally. As pointed out, the SDG's take into account the aspects of poverty and universal necessity for an impartial and sustainable development for all individuals. Therefore, the sub-goals for target 17 that encompass energy are applicable not only to Germany, but also other international countries as they are defined by the United Nations (Rosch et al., 2017).

The methodology in the study encompasses the development of the sustainability indicator system. This takes into account four different aspects in the framework. These include stakeholder knowledge, literature review, expert knowledge, and the integrative sustainability concept. There are different ways in which this research study may have been carried out. In particular, this would encompass the suitable amalgamation of a science-based top-down approach together with a stakeholder-based bottom-up approach. In addition, other methods and approaches could have been useful in examining this particular research question. One is the use of top-down and bottom-up approach. With respect to the top-down measurement approach, the indicators will be amassed into one index. On the other hand, the bottom-up approach will make it possible to undertake the analysis of the sustainability of a particular aspect (Schlor and Hake, 2015).