Global Environmental Change最新文献

Anthropogenic climate change is already causing dangerous and widespread disruptions in global ecological and social systems and affects the lives of billions of people around the world. Even with scaled-up risk management and adaptation, the limits of adaptation will often be reached. Currently, very little is known about the degree to which societies can adapt to climate change, and where and when limits to adaptation will be reached. In this paper, we conceptualize adaptation limits through a novel methodological framework, assess adaptation limits along adaptation pathways, and propose a research strategy for empirical and model-based limits assessments based on biophysical and socio-economic data. Assessing limits is central to national and international adaptation policymaking. More efficient adaptation can also help climate mitigation efforts.

As emerging methods for carbon removal and controversial proposals around solar radiation modification are gaining traction in climate assessments and policy debates, a better understanding of how the public perceives these approaches is needed. Relying on qualitative data from 44 focus groups (n = 323 respondents), triangulated with a survey conducted in 22 countries (n = over 22 000 participants), we examine the role that climate change beliefs and attitudes towards climate action play in the formation of public perceptions of methods for carbon removal and solar radiation modification. We find that nationally varying degrees of perceived personal harm from climate change and climate worry predict support for these technologies. In addition to different perceptions of the problem, varying perceptions of the solution – i.e. the scope of climate action needed − shape publics’ assessment. Various tensions manifest themselves in publics’ reflections on the potential contribution of these climate technologies to climate action, including “buying time vs. delaying action”, “treating the symptoms vs. tackling the root causes”, and “urgency to act vs. effects only in the distant future”. We find that public perceptions are embedded in three broader narratives about transformation pathways, each reflecting varying notions of responsibility: (i) behavior change-centred pathways, (ii) top-down and industry-centred pathways, and (iii) technology-centred pathways. These results suggest that support for the deployment of the climate technologies studied hinges on them being tied to credible system-wide decarbonization efforts as well as their ability to effectively respond to a variety of perceived climate impacts.

Activists, scholars, and policymakers worldwide have increasingly recognised the intrinsic linkages between energy transitions and justice issues. However, little research exists on how groups affected by renewable energy siting interpret and mobilise justice narratives to legitimise their actions and question development plans. Building on the notion of 'framing' in social movement theory, this study addresses this gap by examininig the discourses adopted by people resisting wind energy developments in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Mexico. The study relies on 64 interviews and participant observation. The findings indicate that anti-wind activists used health and environmental concerns instrumentally: as a framing device to avoid social rejection and legitimise other, subtler distributive concerns about the uneven allocation of economic benefits such as tenancy payments. Although this framing was counterproductive and left their concerns unaddressed, activists adopted this strategy because of community norms and practises that stigmatise the explicit discussion of economic inequalities and their fear of challenging existing power structures. This paper therefore highlights the social mechanisms through which energy transitions reproduce economic inequalities. As a policy recommendation, it is critical to consider how inequalities are framed and the underlying reasons for these interpretive schemes to advance socially just net-zero scenarios.

Rapid expansion and upgrading of wastewater treatment facilities globally, driven by stricter wastewater policies, significantly contribute to carbon emissions. China has contributed 30 % of carbon emissions in the world, 1 % of which comes from wastewater treatment, necessitating more understanding of the impact of policies, especially the stringent “10-Point Water Plan” policy. From a micro perspective, this study uses the difference-in-differences method to analyze the impact of wastewater treatment policies on water and carbon issues in China’s 2894 wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), and delves into the heterogeneity, and mechanisms across various dimensions. The results show that stricter sewage treatment policy decrease effluent concentration of the chemical oxygen demand (COD) by 2.35 %, and also cause a 1.74 % rise in carbon emissions per 10,000 m³ of wastewater treated, intensifying the short-term contradiction, while the contradictions may fall in the long term. It is more significant in southern regions and the cities with lower environmental regulation intensity. Also, there are significant differences in different wastewater treatment technology and scale. Significant improvements in effluent water quality are observed in WWTPs with 100,000 to 200,000 m³/day capacity and those using biofilm treatment technology. Through mechanism analysis, reasonable expansion of urban pipelines and WWTPs, promotion of biofilm treatment technology, reduction of energy consumption, and improvement of pollutant reduction efficiency are feasible paths to improve water quality and reduce carbon emissions. This research provides a perspective on solving water-carbon contradictions in WWTPs, holding critical significance for urban wastewater treatment and carbon emission management.

The piece outlines the contributions of key works in the field of the political ecology of desalination over the past decade. We note that the field is diverse in terms of contributions from geographers, sociologists, anthropologists, and public policy scholars. The research to date has been concerned with the ways in which the deployment of desalting techniques can reflect and reinforce social processes of inequality, political power and economic flows. In this way, desalination has been opened up for intellectual debate beyond technical considerations of the desalting industry and engineers. A critical perspective that complements the recent discussions of environmental harm caused by the desalination industry has emerged as well across a number of global and transboundary contexts. A number of themes emerged that will continue to be of interest to scholars and that need to be addressed in the years ahead. First, desalination intersects transboundary water governance and geopolitics between different water uses and emerges from complex assemblages of local and global actors, including financial actors, water companies, governments, technologies, and natural forces. Second, critical scholarship on desalination needs to continue to pay attention to the interests in and overarching patterns of, the Green New Deal and Blue Economy, each of which intersect with the worlds of academia and policymaking, and involve issues of climate adaptation and mitigation. Third, questions about equity remain with desalination as it is a solution deeply imbricated in the unequal distribution of resources, and questions about representation in decision-making remain. Fourth, research on finance and infrastructure have been at the core of critical desalting research and should remain so. Fifth, there is a growing heterogeneity in terms of research in types of desalting, from reverse osmosis to inland desalting to nuclear and more. This variety will make for rich research for the years ahead. Our hope is that the epistemological, theoretical, and methodological flexibility of this area of research will remain a strong point continuing its rigor, as well as the already robust collegiality among scholars in this interesting, and still nascent field.

Objective

To explore the health effect of anomalous precipitation on deaths among children younger than 5 years (under-5 deaths) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods

Based on a sample of 1.6 million children from 56 LMICs, we conducted a sibling-matched Cox regression model to examine the association between under-5 deaths and anomalous precipitation in annual average. We established a nonlinear exposure–response function to characterize heterogeneity in the association, and checked its robustness by conducting a few sensitivity analyses. To illustrate absolute risks embedded in the complex climate-health linkage, across 100 LMICs, we calculated burden of under-5 deaths attributable to anomalous precipitation, and showed how the burden varied with the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO), a well-known predictable climate pattern affecting the rainfall cycle. We focused on the intertemporal inequality in the attributable burden.

Results

The epidemiological analyses showed a robust negative association between anomalous precipitation and under-5 deaths for arid areas, and a potentially positive association for humid areas. The anomalous precipitation was significantly associated to an intertemporal inequality in under-5 mortality. Across the 100 LMICs, 26.7% or 134 million under-5 children lived in ENSO-sensitive areas. Among them, anomalous rainfall decreased under-5 deaths by 46,246 (CI: 24,599–68,703) during an El Niño year (October 2015 to September 2016), and increased under-5 deaths by 77,505 (CI: 55,890–99,815) during a La Niña year (March 2008 to February 2009) across the 100 LMICs.

Conclusion

Anomalous precipitation can lead to intertemporal inequality in child health. Healthcare resources should be allocated according to predicted variability in precipitation, such as ENSO-mediated extreme rainfall.

Urgent action to tackle the climate crisis will only be possible with significant public support for radical lifestyle change. Arguments that seek to delay climate action and justify inadequate mitigation efforts, often termed ‘discourses of delay’, are widespread within political and media debate on climate change. Here we report the results of novel public deliberation and visioning workshops, conducted across the UK in 2020/2021 to explore visions of a 1.5 °C future. We found that despite very strong public support for many low-carbon lifestyle strategies in principle, entrenched discourses of delay are limiting beliefs that a fair, low-carbon future is possible. Consisting of four overarching narratives of climate inaction (Resisting personal responsibility; Rejecting the need for urgency; Believing change is impossible; and Defending the social contract), this public discourse of delay is characterised by three distinct repertoires (each with its own emotional resonance), that act to weaken support for climate action by producing defensive responses to discussions of low-carbon lifestyle change and undermining public sense of agency. We argue that countering these narratives, and the defensive responses they invoke, is essential for achieving meaningful public action on climate change.

A spatially explicit (0.5 degree resolution) analysis is presented of the impact of human lifestyle, diet and nutrient use efficiency in food production and wastewater treatment on exceedance of threshold concentrations for nitrate in groundwater, and total N and total P concentrations in surface water, as well as criteria for their ratio. This analysis starts from the middle-of-the-road (SSP2) and the sustainability (SSP1) Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSP), focusing on the year 2050. The scenarios with changed lifestyle assume a reduction of food wastage and a low-meat diet for all world inhabitants, implying large reductions of meat and milk consumption and production in industrialized countries. Scenarios with improved nutrient use efficiencies assume maximum achievable efficiencies under practical conditions. The SSP2 scenario combined with assumptions on lifestyle and human diet leads to improvement in industrialized countries only, and increased levels in many other regions. A strong improvement is achieved in SSP1, but not in many developing countries, and SSP1 combined with changed lifestyle leads to improvement of groundwater and surface water quality in industrialized countries only. Therefore, changed lifestyle needs to be combined with efforts to improve the efficiency in food production systems and wastewater treatment to achieve reductions of the area affected by groundwater contamination and eutrophication of surface waters. Reduction strategies need to find a balance between N and P, since it is easier to reduce N in rivers to levels below the threshold than P.

Although it is widely recognized that migration is socially transformative, the potential contributions of migrants to transformations towards sustainability in their destination areas are often overlooked in mainstream discourse on environmentalism and sustainability. Here we seek to identify current narratives of migrants and sustainability across individual, urban, and national scales. Migrants are commonly framed in public policy as having no or even negative impacts on sustainability. The study hypotheses that the lived experience of sustainability by migrants within urban destinations differ from dominant discourses and perceptions of migrant populations within societies. We test and document such divergence using data from 21 interviews with key stakeholders from the city and Swedish national level, an attitudinal survey of 895 migrants and non-migrants in Malmö, Sweden; and a media analysis of local and national Swedish newspapers. Survey results show that migrants engage more extensively with a number of sustainability actions compared to non-migrants culminating in new insights on ‘migrants as sustainability actors’. By contrasting individual scale practices against urban to national sustainability narratives, the study illuminates current barriers to and the potential of migrants to play a transformative role in progress towards sustainability that is unrecognized in dominant policy discourses. To tap into this potential, the study emphasizes that sustainability policy across scales should embrace plurality and migration as fundamental parts of progress towards sustainability.

Many human-introduced alien species economically impact industries worldwide. Management prioritisation and coordination efforts towards biological invasions are hampered by a lack of comprehensive quantification of costs to key economic sectors. Here, we quantify and estimate global invasion costs to seven major sectors and unravel the introduction pathways of species causing these costs — focusing mainly on primary economic sectors: agriculture, fisheries and forestry. From 1970 to 2020, costs reported in the InvaCost database as pertaining to Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry totaled $509 bn, $1.3 bn, and $134 bn, respectively (in 2017 United States dollars). Pathways of costly species were diverse, arising predominantly from cultural and agricultural activities, through unintentional contaminants with trade, and often impacted different sectors than those for which species were initially introduced. Costs to Agriculture were pervasive and greatest in at least 37 % (n = 46/123) of the countries assessed, with the United States accumulating the greatest costs for primary sectors ($365 bn), followed by China ($101 bn), and Australia ($36 bn). We further identified 19 countries highly economically reliant on Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry that are experiencing massive economic impacts from biological invasions, especially in the Global South. Based on an extrapolation to fill cost data gaps, we estimated total global costs ranging from at least $517–1,400 bn for Agriculture, $5.7–6.5 bn for Fisheries, and $142–768 bn for Forestry, evidencing substantial underreporting in the Forestry sector in particular. Burgeoning global invasion costs challenge sustainable development and highlight the need for improved management action to reduce future impacts on industry.

Significance

With rapidly rising biological invasion rates, efficient management is critical for economic and environmental impact mitigation. Specifically, improved quantification of the economic cost of biological invasions to the world’s primary economic sectors could provide crucial information for policymakers who must prioritise actions to limit ongoing and future impacts. We show that since 1970, over $600 bn in impacts has been incurred across Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, with the largest share reported in Agriculture. We further identify 19 countries, which rely heavily on primary sectors, facing comparatively high impacts from invasions, requiring urgent action. However, gaps in cost reporting across invasive taxa and countries suggest that these impacts are grossly underestimated. Proactive prioritisation by policymakers is needed to mitigate future impacts to primary sectors.