Pub Date : 2025-07-12DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103040
Li-Jing Liu , Qiao-Mei Liang , Felix Creutzig , Hua Tong , Yu-Xuan Xiao , Xiang-Yan Qian , Hao Wang , Si-Yi Wei , Xiao-Chen Yuan , Biying Yu , Lan-Cui Liu , Yi-Ming Wei
Achieving the 1.5°C target will entail a temporary overshoot, with peak temperatures potentially exceeding 1.7°C before declining towards the end of the century. This study examines how different economic growth patterns, energy transitions, and non-CO2 mitigation strategies influence this trajectory. Our simulations reveal that achieving this target requires confining cumulative CO2 emissions to 220–370 GtCO2 by 2100, with a peak around 2060 of 530–650 GtCO2. Key to success is the transition to net-zero CO2 by 2060 and the implementation of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies. Effective reductions in CH4 and N2O are vital for minimizing additional warming. Significant co-benefits include improved air quality, with SO2 and NOx emissions decreasing by 60–80 %, enhancing public health. However, aggressive climate policies and resulting high fertilizer prices may reduce food crop yields by up to 16.8 %, highlighting the need to integrate climate and agricultural strategies to balance emission reductions with food security and achieve long-term climate and sustainability goals. The deployment of CDR technologies with low land footprint, such as direct air capture, could help alleviate land-based trade-offs.
{"title":"Overshoot, potential air pollution co-benefits and food shortages","authors":"Li-Jing Liu , Qiao-Mei Liang , Felix Creutzig , Hua Tong , Yu-Xuan Xiao , Xiang-Yan Qian , Hao Wang , Si-Yi Wei , Xiao-Chen Yuan , Biying Yu , Lan-Cui Liu , Yi-Ming Wei","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103040","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103040","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Achieving the 1.5°C target will entail a temporary overshoot, with peak temperatures potentially exceeding 1.7°C before declining towards the end of the century. This study examines how different economic growth patterns, energy transitions, and non-CO<sub>2</sub> mitigation strategies influence this trajectory. Our simulations reveal that achieving this target requires confining cumulative CO<sub>2</sub> emissions to 220–370 GtCO<sub>2</sub> by 2100, with a peak around 2060 of 530–650 GtCO<sub>2</sub>. Key to success is the transition to net-zero CO<sub>2</sub> by 2060 and the implementation of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies. Effective reductions in CH<sub>4</sub> and N<sub>2</sub>O are vital for minimizing additional warming. Significant co-benefits include improved air quality, with SO<sub>2</sub> and NOx emissions decreasing by 60–80 %, enhancing public health. However, aggressive climate policies and resulting high fertilizer prices may reduce food crop yields by up to 16.8 %, highlighting the need to integrate climate and agricultural strategies to balance emission reductions with food security and achieve long-term climate and sustainability goals. The deployment of CDR technologies with low land footprint, such as direct air capture, could help alleviate land-based trade-offs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"94 ","pages":"Article 103040"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144604243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-08DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103026
Shiv G. Yücel, Tim Schwanen
As heatwaves increase in intensity, frequency, and duration, there is an urgent need for adaptation to limit their adverse effects on health, well-being, and livelihoods. Heat exposure and adaptive responses during heatwaves are tightly linked to mobility behaviours – the subject of a rapidly growing body of literature. However, knowledge of the processes which shape and constrain opportunities to seek cooling remains limited, as academic research has yet to examine how people alter the various activities of everyday life in response to heatwaves. Addressing this gap, the current paper models these interdependent activity changes simultaneously, shedding light on behavioural adaptations during heatwaves and the underlying structures which condition them. Combining Google Community Mobility Reports, ERA5 climate re-analysis, and socio-economic data across the Pacific Northwest region of North America, the analysis uses a multi-variate multi-level model to examine how anchor (home, work, transit), essential (grocery/pharmacy), and discretionary (retail/recreation, parks) activity change together during summer heatwaves. Focusing on a climatically diverse region and modelling heatwaves as distinct multi-day events, these interdependent responses are explored with the climatic, temporal, and contextual features of heatwaves. Four main conclusions about behavioural adaptation to heatwaves are drawn: (1) A region’s typical climate impacts workplace rigidity and adaptations to non-work activities during heatwaves; (2) Absolute and relative intensities have distinct yet comparably large impacts on behavioural responses; (3) Adaptation evolves over time, both between and within heatwaves; (4) Urban form and socio-economic disparities influence activity trade-offs during heatwaves. By contextualizing heatwaves within people’s everyday lives, this study highlights the diverse, dynamic, and yet constrained processes by which adaptation occurs.
{"title":"Heatwave adaptation conditioned by everyday life: Analysing interacting changes to daily activities during Pacific Northwest summers","authors":"Shiv G. Yücel, Tim Schwanen","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103026","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103026","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As heatwaves increase in intensity, frequency, and duration, there is an urgent need for adaptation to limit their adverse effects on health, well-being, and livelihoods. Heat exposure and adaptive responses during heatwaves are tightly linked to mobility behaviours – the subject of a rapidly growing body of literature. However, knowledge of the processes which shape and constrain opportunities to seek cooling remains limited, as academic research has yet to examine how people alter the various activities of everyday life in response to heatwaves. Addressing this gap, the current paper models these interdependent activity changes simultaneously, shedding light on behavioural adaptations during heatwaves and the underlying structures which condition them. Combining Google Community Mobility Reports, ERA5 climate re-analysis, and socio-economic data across the Pacific Northwest region of North America, the analysis uses a multi-variate multi-level model to examine how anchor (home, work, transit), essential (grocery/pharmacy), and discretionary (retail/recreation, parks) activity change <em>together</em> during summer heatwaves. Focusing on a climatically diverse region and modelling heatwaves as distinct multi-day events, these interdependent responses are explored with the climatic, temporal, and contextual features of heatwaves. Four main conclusions about behavioural adaptation to heatwaves are drawn: (1) A region’s typical climate impacts workplace rigidity and adaptations to non-work activities during heatwaves; (2) Absolute and relative intensities have distinct yet comparably large impacts on behavioural responses; (3) Adaptation evolves over time, both between and within heatwaves; (4) Urban form and socio-economic disparities influence activity trade-offs during heatwaves. By contextualizing heatwaves within people’s everyday lives, this study highlights the diverse, dynamic, and yet constrained processes by which adaptation occurs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"94 ","pages":"Article 103026"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144580280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-05DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103029
Lu Yu , Siyuan Qiu , Qi Chen , Lingling Hou
The impacts of property rights on the sustainable management of natural resources have long been debated, yet a consensus remains elusive. Empirical observations reveal puzzling inconsistency: as similar property regimes produce varying outcomes, whereas different property regimes can lead to similar results. A key reason for this inconsistency is that previous studies have often overlooked the complex causal relationships between property rights and other social, economic and natural factors affecting natural resource uses. This study focuses on pastoral areas in China and explores how grassland property rights, together with adaptive grassland management strategies, and wider socio-economic factors, jointly shape grassland ecosystems. Using data from 129 villages across four major pastoral provinces, we employed fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to explore the diverse pathways leading to grassland sustainability or degradation and to investigate the complex causal relationships among the factors. This study offers the first empirical, village-level evidence on how property rights affect grassland quality, drawing on data from a nationwide village survey. The results reveal that the relationship between property rights and grassland quality is shaped by the complex interaction between property rights and the broader socioecological context. Beyond the property rights solution, adaptive management strategies emerges as crucial alternatives for enhancing sustainability of grassland, particularly in the face of climate disaster or in communities with limited grassland resources.
{"title":"Beyond property rights: all roads lead to sustainable grassland management","authors":"Lu Yu , Siyuan Qiu , Qi Chen , Lingling Hou","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103029","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103029","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The impacts of property rights on the sustainable management of natural resources have long been debated, yet a consensus remains elusive. Empirical observations reveal puzzling inconsistency: as similar property regimes produce varying outcomes, whereas different property regimes can lead to similar results. A key reason for this inconsistency is that previous studies have often overlooked the complex causal relationships between property rights and other social, economic and natural factors affecting natural resource uses. This study focuses on pastoral areas in China and explores how grassland property rights, together with adaptive grassland management strategies, and wider socio-economic factors, jointly shape grassland ecosystems. Using data from 129 villages across four major pastoral provinces, we employed fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to explore the diverse pathways leading to grassland sustainability or degradation and to investigate the complex causal relationships among the factors. This study offers the first empirical, village-level evidence on how property rights affect grassland quality, drawing on data from a nationwide village survey. The results reveal that the relationship between property rights and grassland quality is shaped by the complex interaction between property rights and the broader socioecological context. Beyond the property rights solution, adaptive management strategies emerges as crucial alternatives for enhancing sustainability of grassland, particularly in the face of climate disaster or in communities with limited grassland resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"94 ","pages":"Article 103029"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144563392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Conservation policies intended to address biodiversity loss and climate change are increasingly linked to land dispossession, human rights violations, and the criminalization of environmental defenders. While prior research has highlighted the risks defenders face, less is known about the strategies and conditions that enable them to succeed. This study uses crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (csQCA) of 25 conservation conflict cases from the Environmental Justice Atlas to identify the pathways through which defenders effectively resist unjust conservation practices. We identify four causal pathways to successful mobilization: two epistemic strategies, where defenders use alternative knowledge mobilization to either strengthen legal claims or build broad coalitions; one preventive strategy focused on early mobilization; and a comprehensive strategy drawing on nearly all conditions, except direct action. Across all pathways, alternative knowledge mobilization, such as defender-led health studies and ecological assessments, plays a central role in successful mobilization, while direct action tactics were notably absent in all successful pathways. These findings challenge assumptions about confrontation as a necessary ingredient for effective resistance and advance new insights into how knowledge politics shape just outcomes in conservation conflicts. As the global conservation community intensifies efforts to safeguard biodiversity and uphold the rights of affected communities, centering the strategies and experiences of environmental defenders is essential to ensuring equitable and effective conservation.
{"title":"Pathways to just conservation: A crisp-set qualitative comparative analysis of environmental defender mobilization in conservation conflicts","authors":"Raphael Anammasiya Ayambire , Jeremy Pittman , Gideon Abagna Azunre , Cynthia Itbo Musah , Romeo Agominab , Abdul-Salam Jahanfo Abdulai , Owusu Amponsah , Stephen Appiah Takyi","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103030","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103030","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Conservation policies intended to address biodiversity loss and climate change are increasingly linked to land dispossession, human rights violations, and the criminalization of environmental defenders. While prior research has highlighted the risks defenders face, less is known about the strategies and conditions that enable them to succeed. This study uses crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (csQCA) of 25 conservation conflict cases from the Environmental Justice Atlas to identify the pathways through which defenders effectively resist unjust conservation practices. We identify four causal pathways to successful mobilization: two epistemic strategies, where defenders use alternative knowledge mobilization to either strengthen legal claims or build broad coalitions; one preventive strategy focused on early mobilization; and a comprehensive strategy drawing on nearly all conditions, except direct action. Across all pathways, alternative knowledge mobilization, such as defender-led health studies and ecological assessments, plays a central role in successful mobilization, while direct action tactics were notably absent in all successful pathways. These findings challenge assumptions about confrontation as a necessary ingredient for effective resistance and advance new insights into how knowledge politics shape just outcomes in conservation conflicts. As the global conservation community intensifies efforts to safeguard biodiversity and uphold the rights of affected communities, centering the strategies and experiences of environmental defenders is essential to ensuring equitable and effective conservation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 103030"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144338250","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-21DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103015
Clara Kühner , Corinna Gemmecke , Joachim Hüffmeier , Hannes Zacher
Climate change anxiety is increasingly prevalent, attracting both scientific and societal interest. However, the potential antecedents and consequences of this phenomenon are not comprehensively understood. This meta-analysis synthesizes 94 studies including 170,747 adult participants from 27 countries, examining 33 correlates of climate change anxiety. We find that: (1) certain groups are more likely to experience climate change anxiety, including younger individuals, women, and individuals with higher levels of neuroticism, as well as people with left-leaning political views, individuals highly concerned about the future or the environment, and those exposed to perceived climate change consequences or frequent climate change information; (2) belief in climate change, climate change risk perceptions, and perceived consensus among climate scientists are positively associated with climate change anxiety; (3) climate change anxiety is negatively related to well-being, but positively related to climate action, with associations surpassing those of generalized anxiety. Implications for supporting vulnerable groups, channeling climate change anxiety into action, and recommendations for future research are discussed.
{"title":"Climate change anxiety: A meta-analysis","authors":"Clara Kühner , Corinna Gemmecke , Joachim Hüffmeier , Hannes Zacher","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103015","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103015","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Climate change anxiety is increasingly prevalent, attracting both scientific and societal interest. However, the potential antecedents and consequences of this phenomenon are not comprehensively understood. This meta-analysis synthesizes 94 studies including 170,747 adult participants from 27 countries, examining 33 correlates of climate change anxiety. We find that: (1) certain groups are more likely to experience climate change anxiety, including younger individuals, women, and individuals with higher levels of neuroticism, as well as people with left-leaning political views, individuals highly concerned about the future or the environment, and those exposed to perceived climate change consequences or frequent climate change information; (2) belief in climate change, climate change risk perceptions, and perceived consensus among climate scientists are positively associated with climate change anxiety; (3) climate change anxiety is negatively related to well-being, but positively related to climate action, with associations surpassing those of generalized anxiety. Implications for supporting vulnerable groups, channeling climate change anxiety into action, and recommendations for future research are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 103015"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144330100","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Low-carbon transitions are particularly acute in coal and carbon-intensive regions (CCIRs), which face not only technological and economic barriers but also deep socio-political and cultural obstacles in moving away from carbon lock-in. Transforming these regions requires destabilizing and reconfiguring high-carbon regimes, often demanding structural changes across technological, socio-economic, political, and cultural domains. Despite increased attention to the decline of unsustainable energy systems, much research and policy remain short-sighted, often overlooking paradoxes, trade-offs, and spill-over effects during transitions. This Special Issue addresses the complexity of sustainability transitions in CCIRs from an interdisciplinary social science perspective, drawing on nine original contributions from the TIPPING+ project. The collection introduces advanced concepts, methods, and empirical evidence to better understand and navigate transitions in CCIRs, focusing on Social-Ecological Tipping Points. Through diverse case studies across Europe, Asia, and North America, the articles examine the interplay of forces shaping transition trajectories and highlight their non-linear, multi-scalar, and justice-sensitive nature. The Special Issue introduces frameworks for diagnosing transition states and identifying tipping dynamics, with attention to timing, territoriality, and equity. It further analyzes how political, economic, and governance conditions, as well as place-based narratives and cultural framings, influence the destabilization of carbon lock-ins and the legitimacy and direction of change. Collectively, the articles reframe transitions in CCIRs as embedded, justice-centred, and culturally contested processes, providing actionable insights for research, policy, and planning in sustainability transformations.
{"title":"Enabling sustainable transitions in coal and carbon-intensive regions","authors":"Diana Mangalagiu, Jenny Lieu, Fulvio Biddau, Amanda Martinez Reyes, Baiba Witajewska-Baltvilka","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103022","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103022","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Low-carbon transitions are particularly acute in coal and carbon-intensive regions (CCIRs), which face not only technological and economic barriers but also deep socio-political and cultural obstacles in moving away from carbon lock-in. Transforming these regions requires destabilizing and reconfiguring high-carbon regimes, often demanding structural changes across technological, socio-economic, political, and cultural domains. Despite increased attention to the decline of unsustainable energy systems, much research and policy remain short-sighted, often overlooking paradoxes, trade-offs, and spill-over effects during transitions. This Special Issue addresses the complexity of sustainability transitions in CCIRs from an interdisciplinary social science perspective, drawing on nine original contributions from the TIPPING+ project. The collection introduces advanced concepts, methods, and empirical evidence to better understand and navigate transitions in CCIRs, focusing on Social-Ecological Tipping Points. Through diverse case studies across Europe, Asia, and North America, the articles examine the interplay of forces shaping transition trajectories and highlight their non-linear, multi-scalar, and justice-sensitive nature. The Special Issue introduces frameworks for diagnosing transition states and identifying tipping dynamics, with attention to timing, territoriality, and equity. It further analyzes how political, economic, and governance conditions, as well as place-based narratives and cultural framings, influence the destabilization of carbon lock-ins and the legitimacy and direction of change. Collectively, the articles reframe transitions in CCIRs as embedded, justice-centred, and culturally contested processes, providing actionable insights for research, policy, and planning in sustainability transformations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 103022"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144572468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-17DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103014
Robert Görsch, Goda Perlaviciute, Linda Steg
Public acceptability of energy sources and mitigation technologies is critical for a successful energy transition worldwide, which is related to their perceived impacts. This review extends previous work by synthesising peer-reviewed literature on public evaluations of eleven key energy sources and mitigation technologies central to the energy transition: biomass, carbon capture and storage (CCS), coal, energy storage technologies, geothermal energy, hydroelectric energy, natural gas, nuclear power, oil, solar, and wind power. We analysed 141 qualitative and quantitative articles published between January 2000 and May 2021. Acceptability was highest for solar, hydroelectric, and wind power, moderate for biomass, natural gas, nuclear energy, and CCS, and lowest for oil and coal. Insufficient evidence was available of acceptability of geothermal energy and energy storage. Acceptability was typically lower for local project implementation than for general-level evaluations of biomass, CCS, natural gas, and wind energy, while the opposite was true for nuclear energy. We identified six categories of perceived impacts: aesthetic, economic, environmental, community and health, temporal, and usability. Economic, environmental, and community and health impacts of energy sources and mitigation technologies were most frequently studied. Renewable energy sources—wind, solar, and hydroelectric power—were perceived more positively than fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and CCS, particularly regarding environmental and community and health impacts. Our findings suggest broad public support for transitioning from fossil fuels to low-carbon technologies, though local projects may face greater opposition.
{"title":"A systematic review of public acceptability and perceived impacts of eleven energy sources and mitigation technologies","authors":"Robert Görsch, Goda Perlaviciute, Linda Steg","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103014","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103014","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Public acceptability of energy sources and mitigation technologies is critical for a successful energy transition worldwide, which is related to their perceived impacts. This review extends previous work by synthesising peer-reviewed literature on public evaluations of eleven key energy sources and mitigation technologies central to the energy transition: biomass, carbon capture and storage (CCS), coal, energy storage technologies, geothermal energy, hydroelectric energy, natural gas, nuclear power, oil, solar, and wind power. We analysed 141 qualitative and quantitative articles published between January 2000 and May 2021. Acceptability was highest for solar, hydroelectric, and wind power, moderate for biomass, natural gas, nuclear energy, and CCS, and lowest for oil and coal. Insufficient evidence was available of acceptability of geothermal energy and energy storage. Acceptability was typically lower for local project implementation than for general-level evaluations of biomass, CCS, natural gas, and wind energy, while the opposite was true for nuclear energy. We identified six categories of perceived impacts: aesthetic, economic, environmental, community and health, temporal, and usability. Economic, environmental, and community and health impacts of energy sources and mitigation technologies were most frequently studied. Renewable energy sources—wind, solar, and hydroelectric power—were perceived more positively than fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and CCS, particularly regarding environmental and community and health impacts. Our findings suggest broad public support for transitioning from fossil fuels to low-carbon technologies, though local projects may face greater opposition.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 103014"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144307610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-15DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103028
Truly Santika, Valerie Nelson, Jeremy Haggar, Indika Thushari
Regional trade agreements (RTAs) have proliferated in recent decades, with increasingly stringent environmental clauses aimed at mitigating trade impacts. However, studies on the environmental effects of RTAs typically focus on a few agreements and indicators, hindering a comprehensive understanding of their effects across various resources. Additionally, the long-term effectiveness of environmental provisions within RTAs remains unclear. To address this gap, we applied a rigorous counterfactual analysis to evaluate changes in multiple resource footprints associated with RTAs and environmental provisions across 195 countries annually from 1990 to 2018. We examined four key resources: primary energy, raw materials, blue water, and land use. Findings revealed that RTAs were linked to the outsourcing of environmental footprints across all resource types while reducing footprint insourcing, a phenomenon known as environmental impact shifting. This effect was particularly evident in wealthier countries, where outsourcing of primary energy, primarily from lower-income nations, rose by 11.6%, raw materials by 13.6%, and land use by 33.5%, compared to similar non-RTA countries. Furthermore, these countries’ insourcing of primary energy was reduced by 48.3% and blue water by 15.4% relative to non-RTA counterparts. Environmental provisions within RTAs had limited long-term effectiveness in reducing environmental footprints outsourcing. Global trends show a growing disparity in resource use between wealthy and poor countries, exacerbated by RTAs. Rigorous footprint accounting and a resource-equity mechanism, including ecological premiums for resource-intensive imports, are essential within RTAs. Wealthier nations must adopt more accountable consumption-based governance, prioritising reductions in material consumption to alleviate the socio-ecological impacts on poorer countries.
{"title":"Trade agreements and environmental provisions: a counterfactual analysis of environmental impact shifting under global economic inequality","authors":"Truly Santika, Valerie Nelson, Jeremy Haggar, Indika Thushari","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103028","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103028","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Regional trade agreements (RTAs) have proliferated in recent decades, with increasingly stringent environmental clauses aimed at mitigating trade impacts. However, studies on the environmental effects of RTAs typically focus on a few agreements and indicators, hindering a comprehensive understanding of their effects across various resources. Additionally, the long-term effectiveness of environmental provisions within RTAs remains unclear. To address this gap, we applied a rigorous counterfactual analysis to evaluate changes in multiple resource footprints associated with RTAs and environmental provisions across 195 countries annually from 1990 to 2018. We examined four key resources: primary energy, raw materials, blue water, and land use. Findings revealed that RTAs were linked to the outsourcing of environmental footprints across all resource types while reducing footprint insourcing, a phenomenon known as environmental impact shifting. This effect was particularly evident in wealthier countries, where outsourcing of primary energy, primarily from lower-income nations, rose by 11.6%, raw materials by 13.6%, and land use by 33.5%, compared to similar non-RTA countries. Furthermore, these countries’ insourcing of primary energy was reduced by 48.3% and blue water by 15.4% relative to non-RTA counterparts. Environmental provisions within RTAs had limited long-term effectiveness in reducing environmental footprints outsourcing. Global trends show a growing disparity in resource use between wealthy and poor countries, exacerbated by RTAs. Rigorous footprint accounting and a resource-equity mechanism, including ecological premiums for resource-intensive imports, are essential within RTAs. Wealthier nations must adopt more accountable consumption-based governance, prioritising reductions in material consumption to alleviate the socio-ecological impacts on poorer countries.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 103028"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144291653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The TAPESTRY project explores how deliberate transformation may arise from 'below’ in marginal environments with high levels of uncertainty. TAPESTRY is short for ‘Transformation as Praxis: Exploring Socially Just and Transdisciplinary Pathways to Sustainability in Marginal Environments’. TAPESTRY focuses on three ‘patches of transformation’ in India and Bangladesh – vulnerable coastal areas of Mumbai, the Sundarbans and Kutch which are experiencing diverse uncertainties emanating from climate change as well as anthropogenic factors including neoliberal urban development, economic growth and aggressive infrastructure development. The project focused on existing and emergent transformative alliances and asked how we can seek and support socially just and ecologically sound alternatives based on local people’s plural understandings of what transformation entails. What kind of hybrid alliances are emerging to facilitate these transformative processes in these locations? And what are the possibilities for scaling up and out of the positive learnings from these patches?
A key conceptual innovation across all three patches was to think of transformation as praxis, by putting bottom-up change and the agency of marginalised people at the centre highlighting the practices and pathways of emergent changes and their barriers. In doing so, we address commonalities and differences across the three patches. A fragile coastline, shrinking and increasingly exploited mangrove forests, increasing exposure to climate hazards (such as cyclones, coastal erosion, flooding, sea level rise and extreme precipitation events), and diverse threats to marginal people’s livelihoods are the commonly observed factors. In terms of difference, we specifically focus on islanders in the transboundary Sundarbans forests (across the Bengal Delta in eastern India and Bangladesh), coastal fishing communities in the metropolitan region of Mumbai, and dryland pastoralists in Kutch in western India.
Using a transdisciplinary approach, a central focus is on exploring pathways to transformation through a bottom-up approach using participatory methods including stakeholder roundtables, photovoice, and mixed methods. Through local and regional collaborations, we attempted to co-produce hybrid knowledge combining Indigenous understandings of ecosystem changes and climate impacts with science-based scenarios. The aim was to restore resource-based livelihoods by showcasing local community perspectives in local-level environmental governance.
{"title":"Transformation in the context of uncertainty and compounding effects: Insights from marginal environments in India and Bangladesh","authors":"Devanathan Parthasarathy , Shilpi Srivastava , Lyla Mehta , Shibaji Bose , Synne Movik","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103025","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103025","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The TAPESTRY project explores how deliberate transformation may arise from 'below’ in marginal environments with high levels of uncertainty. TAPESTRY is short for<!--> <!-->‘Transformation as Praxis: Exploring Socially Just and Transdisciplinary Pathways to Sustainability in Marginal Environments’. TAPESTRY focuses on three ‘patches of transformation’ in India and Bangladesh – vulnerable coastal areas of<!--> <!-->Mumbai, the<!--> <!-->Sundarbans<!--> <!-->and<!--> <!-->Kutch which are experiencing diverse uncertainties emanating from climate change as well as anthropogenic factors including neoliberal urban development, economic growth and aggressive infrastructure development. The project focused on existing and emergent transformative alliances and asked how we can seek and support socially just and ecologically sound alternatives based on local people’s plural understandings of what transformation entails. What kind of hybrid alliances are emerging to facilitate these transformative processes in these locations? And what are the possibilities for scaling up and out of the positive learnings from these patches?</div><div>A key conceptual innovation across all three patches was to think of<!--> <em>transformation as praxis</em>, by putting bottom-up change and the agency of marginalised people at the centre highlighting the practices and pathways of emergent changes and their barriers. In doing so, we address commonalities and differences across the three patches. A fragile coastline, shrinking and increasingly exploited mangrove forests, increasing exposure to climate hazards (such as cyclones, coastal erosion, flooding, sea level rise and extreme precipitation events), and diverse threats to marginal people’s livelihoods are the commonly observed factors. In terms of difference, we specifically focus on islanders in the transboundary Sundarbans forests (across the Bengal Delta in eastern India and Bangladesh), coastal fishing communities in the metropolitan region of Mumbai, and dryland pastoralists in Kutch in western India.</div><div>Using a transdisciplinary approach, a central focus is on exploring pathways to transformation through a bottom-up approach using participatory methods including stakeholder roundtables, photovoice, and mixed methods. Through local and regional collaborations, we attempted to co-produce hybrid knowledge combining Indigenous understandings of ecosystem changes and climate impacts with science-based scenarios. The aim was to restore resource-based livelihoods by showcasing local community perspectives in local-level environmental governance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 103025"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144280085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-11DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103027
Ana Terra Amorim-Maia , Marta Olazabal
Climate change adaptation is central to political and scientific agendas that aim to reduce the impacts of a warming world. However, despite three decades of research and practice, adaptation remains conceptually ambiguous, lacking a clear and comprehensive definition that enables effective on-the-ground action. The foundational idea that adaptation is the process of adjusting to climate and its effects remains central to scientific advancements in the field. Yet, emerging paradigms like adaptation as justice, resilience, or development are gaining traction, reflecting a much larger variety of local needs, knowledge systems, and lived experiences. To examine the notion of adaptation through these evolving lenses, we conducted 50 in-depth interviews with key internationally recognised experts in climate adaptation, including scientists and practitioners from around the globe, with 950 years of combined experience. Over 36 h of interview time, we explored their career trajectories and evolving views to identify key narratives, realisations and catalysts that shifted their conceptualisation and practice of adaptation. Our findings support an updated heuristic framework for adaptation as a process of responding to climate change and its impacts by integrating risk reduction into broader development strategies, ensuring that all individuals can maintain dignified lives in the face of climate challenges. The framework acknowledges the inherent complexity and limitations of adaptation, blending systemic governance with psychosocial insights to address power dynamics and uphold the fundamental right to survival. Findings call for a reconceptualisation of adaptation beyond mere adjustment to risks, in response to shifting paradigms in contemporary adaptation thought and practice.
{"title":"Beyond adjustment: A new paradigm for climate change adaptation in a complex world","authors":"Ana Terra Amorim-Maia , Marta Olazabal","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103027","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103027","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Climate change adaptation is central to political and scientific agendas that aim to reduce the impacts of a warming world. However, despite three decades of research and practice, adaptation remains conceptually ambiguous, lacking a clear and comprehensive definition that enables effective on-the-ground action. The foundational idea that adaptation is the process of adjusting to climate and its effects remains central to scientific advancements in the field. Yet, emerging paradigms like adaptation as justice, resilience, or development are gaining traction, reflecting a much larger variety of local needs, knowledge systems, and lived experiences. To examine the notion of adaptation through these evolving lenses, we conducted 50 in-depth interviews with key internationally recognised experts in climate adaptation, including scientists and practitioners from around the globe, with 950 years of combined experience. Over 36 h of interview time, we explored their career trajectories and evolving views to identify key narratives, realisations and catalysts that shifted their conceptualisation and practice of adaptation. Our findings support an updated heuristic framework for adaptation as a process of responding to climate change and its impacts by integrating risk reduction into broader development strategies, ensuring that all individuals can maintain dignified lives in the face of climate challenges. The framework acknowledges the inherent complexity and limitations of adaptation, blending systemic governance with psychosocial insights to address power dynamics and uphold the fundamental right to survival. Findings call for a reconceptualisation of adaptation beyond mere adjustment to risks, in response to shifting paradigms in contemporary adaptation thought and practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 103027"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144254050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号