Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability最新文献

Choosing successful governance strategies for transformative change toward sustainability is critical. However, the multitude of approaches is overwhelming. This article identifies three underlying key dimensions of transformative change: in depth, system-wide, and quick. We content that these cannot be achieved simultaneously due to trade-offs. This provides the starting point for conceptualizing three more realistic archetypical governance pathways. They all start with strategies representing two of the three dimensions, while the third follows: (1) Big Plans start with deep and system-wide change (e.g. large-scale flood protection), (2) Small Wins with deep and quick change (e.g. community-based conservation), and (3) Rule Changes with system-wide and quick change (e.g. the EU Emissions Trading System). Choices depend on the societal context and governance capabilities.

Climate change’s severity has raised global attention and regulations. This in turn has increased the throughput of decarbonisation research in different sectors, and ports are no exception. Also, a question is raised as to whether current port decarbonisation (PD) research covers all important aspects and gaps. The main objective of this systemic review is to identify the current state of research and to bring order among the recent and earlier studies focused on PD. While the results have clustered research into four areas, it appears that many studies have explored similar problems, thus providing only limited progress. Consequently, critical gaps are discussed here, and future research areas are put forward to address the pressing challenges and develop PD research.

While various literatures have agreed that decarbonization is necessary for the planet’s long-term sustainability, there have been emerging debates on the need for a just and equitable transition to a low-carbon economy. This article reviews current literature on the debates surrounding ethical dimensions of decarbonization, including challenges of distributive justice, intergenerational equality, and environmental justice. Furthermore, we presented how recent literature has analyzed the ethical implications of renewable energy, nuclear power, and carbon capture and storage. Our review demonstrates an increasing consensus regarding the significance of incorporating ethical considerations into decarbonization policies. It underscores the ongoing debates regarding the best compromise between rapid climate action and social equity. This review emphasizes the opportunity for more equitable and sustainable approaches to energy transitions, calling for further interdisciplinary research in this evolving field.

The constraints to effective, efficient, equitable and fair climate change adaptation have been defined and discussed in the literature for over two decades now. In this review, we discuss the socioeconomic and cultural factors that underpin what climate change adaptation can and cannot achieve. We focus on insights into the constraints to adaptation that come from scholars writing from a political economy lens, showing that the interests of often distant powerful actors and institutions are as important as behaviours and attitudes in constraining adaptation.

Imaginaries of adaptation are currently dominated by technocratic, homogenous, top-down approaches that hinder sustainable, just, and effective adaptation worldwide. We have identified three practices that contribute to this problem: (1) an assumption of universality in adaptation; (2) a neglect of pluralistic knowledge systems and values; and (3) an oversimplification of adaptation processes. These three practices have been found to lead to reproductions of vulnerabilities, unsustainable outcomes, or ephemeral changes. New ways of conceptualising and doing adaptation are necessary to expand imaginaries and visions around what adaptation can and cannot be. Through two examples (everyday adaptations and nature-based solutions), our review indicates that expanding or adopting alternative imaginaries of adaptation can help localise adaptation practice, particularly by acknowledging the need for multiple forms of knowledge and the iterative nature of adaptation governance processes.

Social constraints and limits on adaptation are strongly influenced by the rates at which climate-influenced risks emerge and the speed of the coping response, including the pace at which adaptative changes can be made. This short review assesses how adaptation limits are shaped by extreme events, changing probabilities of extreme events under climate change, the future evolution of adaptation options and strategies, the emergence of cascading or systemic risks and historical patterns of social relations. While adaptation limits are expressed by tipping points in the behaviours of social actors, this behaviour is framed by intersecting temporalities (cultural, economic, technical and political) operating through social systems. Greater awareness of these temporalities will help improve our capacity to analyse and predict the social tipping points, which are evidence of adaptation limits, improving the capacity of international and public policy to target resources at the most vulnerable.