Earth System Governance最新文献

Universities are increasingly engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Appeal for the SDGs is partly based on their double transformation framing: they are seen as enablers of societal transformations and transformations within universities. This article aims to understand how the SDGs influence university transformations. We analyse how four universities have integrated the SDGs through a comparative case study. We propose a framework to determine the impact of the SDGs in universities by identifying their scope of change (i.e. discursive, institutional, relational, and resource effects) and depth of change (i.e. accommodative, reformative or transformative). This study shows that discursive effects are the most prominent hinting toward transformative change. To lesser extents, primarily accommodative, the SDGs have influenced institutional, relational, and resource changes. Overall, findings show that for the SDGs to fulfil their transformative potential in universities, they should be used as more than communications and legitimizing tools.

This paper presents the concept of climate commitment for measuring institutional effectiveness in global climate governance at the subnational level. The research scope is limited to a top-down perspective and the outcome dimension of institutional effectiveness. It considers the multi-level governance theoretical approach to assess subnational governments' behavior in global climate governance and defines subnational governments as the level between the national government and cities/municipalities. Climate commitment stands on two dimensions: governance processes and greenhouse gas emissions trajectory. The principal component analysis statistical method examines the climate commitment variables' behavior and the results for Brazilian subnational units (26 states and the federal district). The research's contribution offers an alternative approach to subnational actors' role in global climate governance architecture and an alternative model for policy design.

There is now widespread recognition that the dominant approaches to addressing the climate crisis to date have been insufficient. One reason for this is their failure to account for the influential role played by inner dimensions such as worldviews, values and beliefs in shaping how we understand and respond to this urgent issue. This paper explores how worldviews are both an insufficiently understood factor and an under-utilised tool that could enable more transformative governance responses to climate change. It introduces the concept of developmentally-based worldviews, focusing on the five worldviews most prevalent amongst leaders and managers today and how climate change is understood and approached by each. Applying a worldviews perspective to the global climate governance arena, the paper shows how operating from Conformist, Expert and Achiever worldviews can result in less capacity to respond to change and uncertainty, engage in reflective learning and be open to multiple perspectives - all aspects regarded as important for achieving transformative action - than operating from Pluralist and Strategist worldviews,. Tools such as mindfulness training and developmentally-informed leadership education are likely to be helpful in further developing the capacity of individuals and organisations to engage in truly transformative climate governance.

Native trees are central elements of sustainable agriculture, providing economic futures to rural populations while safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystem services. We present a diagnostic methodology for (i) identifying ‘incentive opportunities’ for farmers to plant and manage trees on farms; (ii) proposing targeted packages of incentive and finance instruments; and (iii) describing levers for policy integration to support their implementation. In two case studies from Uganda and Peru, the ‘incentive opportunities’ consist of providing technical and financial support to farmers for planting and managing trees, generating income sources from native trees and support from the beneficiaries of tree-based ecosystem services, and eliminating incentives for tree removal. Many instruments to promote trees on farms already exist, but implementation is hampered by weak and fragmented institutions, limited funding and low political priority. The proposed methodology can guide the development of incentive instruments as part of implementing policy strategies for integrated biodiversity conservation and sustainable development.

Drivers for biodiversity loss are largely regulated by policies in non-environmental sectors. The limited mainstreaming of biodiversity into respective policies remains yet to be analysed. During the process of updating the German National Biodiversity Strategy, we conducted 33 interviews and a stakeholder workshop to analyse barriers and levers for biodiversity integration in five policy sectors: agriculture, forests, marine & coastal areas, business & industries, rural & urban development. Based on Biodiversity Policy Integration literature, we distinguish four leverage points for transformation related to inclusive, integrated, accountable and adaptive governance. We found that biodiversity inclusive narratives and innovative approaches exist but are overshadowed by conflicting vested interests. Dominant sector policies are incoherent and continue to provide harmful subsidies. Institutional structures fail to reflexively respond to ambitious agendas and are locked into sector specific accountability hierarchies. Thus, transformative national planning needs to overcome institutional lock-ins and empower agents to develop innovative solutions.

There is a form of power whereby the moral relationship governs those who are part of, or affected by, the relationship. Called “acceptance governance,” it develops “power-with" in a decolonial manner, reframing agency as guided by accountability. Power-with leads to minimal moral relations between worlds out of which processes of acceptance build justice and right relations from the bottom up. There are two senses of acceptance, however, the second being accepting the conditions of acceptance. Power-with then becomes grounded in “power from,” a new form of power uncommon in the literature. In addition to cohering with a number of indigenous traditions as well as with ecological versions of civic republicanism, acceptance governance provides one way to internalize ecological reflexivity within norms of planetary governance and contributes to our analysis of institutional and personal capacities for participation, knowing, and healing from injustice common to significant strands of ESG research today.

The concept of ecosystem services and their valuation have been used extensively across the last 20 years as a means of demonstrating the immense value of nature to policy-makers. Assessing ecosystem services and assigning an economic value to them has been thought of as the silver bullet. They were expected to bring the breakthrough for biodiversity prioritisation that is sorely needed amidst the current environmental crisis. The vast figures and values attributed to nature was thought to be capable of changing decision-makers’ rational minds to prioritise biodiversity in their agendas. However, to date, there has been limited research that explores how the focus on ecosystem services assessments (ESA) has impacted on policy. This understanding is profoundly needed as, despite much discussion of ecosystem services, biodiversity loss continues. To understand how policy impact is considered in ESA research and what factors enable it, this paper presents the findings from a systematic review of 137 research articles investigating ESA at the EU level (the EU is considered the trailblazer of environmental policy in the international policy arena). Of the studies captured in the systematic review, 48% of the assessments included monetary valuation methods, 62% involved experts or stakeholders and 72% specifically referred to EU, regional, national, or local policy documents. We found that 8% of the articles reported on policy impact, whilst only 8% assessed the potential enabling and 2% the hindering factors of their research to influence policy. It was evident that economic valuation, although widely used, does not necessarily lead to a higher reported policy impact. On the other hand, wide stakeholder involvement was highlighted as a key element to reach policy impact. In this paper we argue that limited coverage of impact is also partly because research on ecosystem services and their valuation, somewhat paradoxically, does not necessarily focus on the impact of these assessments. The findings thus demonstrate a need for further empirical research into the reasons for the insubstantial coverage of policy relevance in scientific reporting. The results also indicate the necessity for a review of ecosystem services valuations' actual effectiveness as a means of communicating scientific research to policy-makers. Furthermore, a wider discussion on complementary or alternative ways to upscale policy impacts is required, along with a better understanding of the target audience's needs.

Global biodiversity targets have not been met due to weak implementation at the national level. National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) are central for mainstreaming biodiversity by translating global ambition into national policies. This study analyzes the practical role of global and national biodiversity agendas. Interviews from France, Germany, Honduras, Indonesia, Mexico, Peru, Rwanda, and South Africa show that global targets and NBSAPs have raised awareness, mobilized initiatives, mobilized support for implementation, and fostered accountability. Nevertheless, conflicting interests, weak financial support, and poorly integrated institutional and regulatory structures remain challenges to implementation. Levers for harnessing the role of future NBSAPs to achieve the goals and targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework are: improving communication; defining concrete measures and clear responsibilities; fostering cross-sectoral commitment; enshrining targets into national laws; ensuring adequate public funding; reforming harmful subsidies; ensuring coordination among sectors and levels of governance; and strengthening accountability frameworks.

The recent surge of private enterprise-led space activities is driving what is dubbed the New Space revolution. SpaceX as a frontrunner is working towards colonizing Mars by 2050, with the goal of transforming humans into a multi-planetary species. These developments and the imaginaries they generate are reshaping the discourse on planetary sustainability, where celestial bodies like Mars are seen as a solution to the challenges facing our Earth. Yet, space and its sustainability remain a rather distant concern in earth system governance. In this Perspective, we argue that the New Space revolution necessitates a corresponding shift in the governance paradigm from planetary to multi-planetary for a more integrated approach that recognizes the interdependencies of Earth and space sustainability. We propose a new governance model, earth-space governance, aimed at promoting justice and integrity for all forms of life in a multi-planetary context.