Pub Date : 2021-12-15DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.2004742
A. Echendu
Abstract Disasters annually ravage numerous African countries. Flooding is the most severe and prevalent adverse event and has serious implications for sustainable development. As the world is currently facing the COVID-19 pandemic, disasters such as flooding are still occurring but limited attention is being paid. This research analyzes the cause of flooding in Nigeria and Ghana, two countries regularly affected by floods. Previous analysis of the causes of flooding has mainly been done on a national scale. This work adopts a transnational approach by studying the flooding phenomena in both countries. It highlights an opportunity for international partnership in disaster-risk reduction (DRR) as both Nigeria and Ghana are signatories to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction that advocates an understanding of disaster risk and aims to foster international cooperation. Appreciating the root causes of flooding is the first step in building awareness of the common problem that could be the foundation of seeking and adopting solutions. A systematic review of peer-reviewed papers was conducted. This study finds that the underlying drivers of flooding are similar in the two nations and advocates research and data-sharing as ways of partnering to tackle the common problem. This finding has the potential to promote and facilitate capacity building for DRR and flood-risk management (FRM). Potential solutions could also be scaled to other countries of comparable profiles facing related flooding challenges. This approach is likely to yield better and quicker results while presenting opportunities for partnership in achieving the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development that has already suffered COVID-19-related setbacks.
{"title":"Flooding in Nigeria and Ghana: opportunities for partnerships in disaster-risk reduction","authors":"A. Echendu","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.2004742","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.2004742","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Disasters annually ravage numerous African countries. Flooding is the most severe and prevalent adverse event and has serious implications for sustainable development. As the world is currently facing the COVID-19 pandemic, disasters such as flooding are still occurring but limited attention is being paid. This research analyzes the cause of flooding in Nigeria and Ghana, two countries regularly affected by floods. Previous analysis of the causes of flooding has mainly been done on a national scale. This work adopts a transnational approach by studying the flooding phenomena in both countries. It highlights an opportunity for international partnership in disaster-risk reduction (DRR) as both Nigeria and Ghana are signatories to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction that advocates an understanding of disaster risk and aims to foster international cooperation. Appreciating the root causes of flooding is the first step in building awareness of the common problem that could be the foundation of seeking and adopting solutions. A systematic review of peer-reviewed papers was conducted. This study finds that the underlying drivers of flooding are similar in the two nations and advocates research and data-sharing as ways of partnering to tackle the common problem. This finding has the potential to promote and facilitate capacity building for DRR and flood-risk management (FRM). Potential solutions could also be scaled to other countries of comparable profiles facing related flooding challenges. This approach is likely to yield better and quicker results while presenting opportunities for partnership in achieving the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development that has already suffered COVID-19-related setbacks.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"3 1","pages":"1 - 15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84271713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.2002025
Bishal Baniya, D. Giurco
Abstract The economic fallout from COVID-19 resulted in an economic slowdown and a contraction in economic output, changed economic structures, and reduced financial inflows in the five least developed countries (LDCs) of Asia – Bangladesh, Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic (PDR), Myanmar, and Nepal. This policy brief discusses these impacts in light of the LDC-graduation procedures of the United Nations together with the challenges that these countries face meeting their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and the environment-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs 7, 12, and 13). The economic slowdown in Bangladesh, Lao PDR, and Myanmar and a contraction in economic output in Cambodia and Nepal has increased poverty in the five LDCs and is putting pressure on biomass resources in the rural areas of these countries. The change in the structures of their economies, which threatens to reverse processes of economic modernization in these LDCs, is undermining two decades of progress regarding the efficient use of natural resources and the associated reduction in greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions per unit of gross domestic product (GDP). A decline in financial inflows such as remittances, foreign direct investment, and official development assistance (ODA) is also a risk to both short- and long-term prospects of further investment in renewable energy generation and low GHG-emissions technologies. This policy brief suggests policies that target technical interventions and incentivize small-scale renewable energy technologies that are less susceptible to microeconomic and macroeconomic impacts from external shocks such as COVID-19.
{"title":"Resource-efficient and renewable energy transition in the five least developed countries of Asia: a post-COVID-19 assessment","authors":"Bishal Baniya, D. Giurco","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.2002025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.2002025","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The economic fallout from COVID-19 resulted in an economic slowdown and a contraction in economic output, changed economic structures, and reduced financial inflows in the five least developed countries (LDCs) of Asia – Bangladesh, Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic (PDR), Myanmar, and Nepal. This policy brief discusses these impacts in light of the LDC-graduation procedures of the United Nations together with the challenges that these countries face meeting their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and the environment-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs 7, 12, and 13). The economic slowdown in Bangladesh, Lao PDR, and Myanmar and a contraction in economic output in Cambodia and Nepal has increased poverty in the five LDCs and is putting pressure on biomass resources in the rural areas of these countries. The change in the structures of their economies, which threatens to reverse processes of economic modernization in these LDCs, is undermining two decades of progress regarding the efficient use of natural resources and the associated reduction in greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions per unit of gross domestic product (GDP). A decline in financial inflows such as remittances, foreign direct investment, and official development assistance (ODA) is also a risk to both short- and long-term prospects of further investment in renewable energy generation and low GHG-emissions technologies. This policy brief suggests policies that target technical interventions and incentivize small-scale renewable energy technologies that are less susceptible to microeconomic and macroeconomic impacts from external shocks such as COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"2004 1","pages":"404 - 413"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78871424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.1902062
K. Matschoss, F. Fahy, Henrike Rau, J. Backhaus, Gary Goggins, Eoin Grealis, E. Heiskanen, Tuija Kajoskoski, S. Laakso, Eeva-Lotta Apajalahti, Audley Genus, L. Godin, M. Iskandarova, Annika-Kathrin Musch, M. Sahakian, C. Scholl, E. Vadovics, V. Vasseur
Abstract In this article, we examine a change initiative designed to involve households in testing ways to transform two everyday practices ‒ heating and doing laundry. The research design included an examination of the challenges of changing practices either in a setting that fosters collective engagement or with individual households. Two different types of living labs were carried out simultaneously in eight European countries in Autumn–Winter 2018. We reflect on differences in results in terms of both changes in practices and the experiences of participating households that we argue can be at least partially attributed to householders’ engagement in different types of living labs. We discuss the implications of an individual-focused vs. community-oriented approach for change initiatives seeking to challenge social norms for sustainability transitions, concentrating in particular on differences in the nature of participants’ engagement and their willingness and ability to challenge routine practices. This is complemented by analytical reflections on the differences in design, interaction, and performance between the two types of living labs. We show that an explicit focus on collaborative engagement in living labs can produce results that reflect shared experiences, community support, challenging established norms, and collective commitment toward change.
{"title":"Challenging practices: experiences from community and individual living lab approaches","authors":"K. Matschoss, F. Fahy, Henrike Rau, J. Backhaus, Gary Goggins, Eoin Grealis, E. Heiskanen, Tuija Kajoskoski, S. Laakso, Eeva-Lotta Apajalahti, Audley Genus, L. Godin, M. Iskandarova, Annika-Kathrin Musch, M. Sahakian, C. Scholl, E. Vadovics, V. Vasseur","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.1902062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.1902062","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, we examine a change initiative designed to involve households in testing ways to transform two everyday practices ‒ heating and doing laundry. The research design included an examination of the challenges of changing practices either in a setting that fosters collective engagement or with individual households. Two different types of living labs were carried out simultaneously in eight European countries in Autumn–Winter 2018. We reflect on differences in results in terms of both changes in practices and the experiences of participating households that we argue can be at least partially attributed to householders’ engagement in different types of living labs. We discuss the implications of an individual-focused vs. community-oriented approach for change initiatives seeking to challenge social norms for sustainability transitions, concentrating in particular on differences in the nature of participants’ engagement and their willingness and ability to challenge routine practices. This is complemented by analytical reflections on the differences in design, interaction, and performance between the two types of living labs. We show that an explicit focus on collaborative engagement in living labs can produce results that reflect shared experiences, community support, challenging established norms, and collective commitment toward change.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"33 1","pages":"135 - 151"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84869231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.1930715
Nawras Shatnawi, H. Abu-Qdais, Farah Abu Qdais
Abstract Renewable energy sources are environmentally friendly and sustainable resources. However, there is no unique renewable energy resource that suits all countries. As such, nations must select the right option ‒ or combination of options ‒ that aligns with their local economic, technical, and environmental circumstances. Such a selection process is usually performed using a decision-making tool based on multi-criteria analysis. This study aims to find the most effective renewable energy option for Jordan by soliciting experts’ opinions under several criteria and sub-criteria. The collected responses of experts from the energy field were analyzed using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The AHP model used in the study consisted of four criteria, eleven sub-criteria, and four renewable energy alternatives. The results indicate that the technical criterion had the highest weight of 53.6% as compared to the environmental criterion which came second with a weight of 29.0% followed by geographical and socioeconomic criteria which have the lowest weights of 11.3% and 6.0%, respectively. The results reveal that under the technical criterion a high rank has given to maturity of the technology followed by availability of know-how with a weight of 0.875 and 0.125, respectively. The sequence of the preferable options based on the study results was: wind energy with 51.9%, followed by the solar energy option with 31.3%, and finally biomass and hydropower with 10.5% and 7.1%, respectively. Sensitivity analysis was performed and showed that the renewable energy options are not sensitive to the technical or environmental criteria, while they were slightly sensitive to the geographical and socioeconomic criteria.
{"title":"Selecting renewable energy options: an application of multi-criteria decision making for Jordan","authors":"Nawras Shatnawi, H. Abu-Qdais, Farah Abu Qdais","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.1930715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.1930715","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Renewable energy sources are environmentally friendly and sustainable resources. However, there is no unique renewable energy resource that suits all countries. As such, nations must select the right option ‒ or combination of options ‒ that aligns with their local economic, technical, and environmental circumstances. Such a selection process is usually performed using a decision-making tool based on multi-criteria analysis. This study aims to find the most effective renewable energy option for Jordan by soliciting experts’ opinions under several criteria and sub-criteria. The collected responses of experts from the energy field were analyzed using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The AHP model used in the study consisted of four criteria, eleven sub-criteria, and four renewable energy alternatives. The results indicate that the technical criterion had the highest weight of 53.6% as compared to the environmental criterion which came second with a weight of 29.0% followed by geographical and socioeconomic criteria which have the lowest weights of 11.3% and 6.0%, respectively. The results reveal that under the technical criterion a high rank has given to maturity of the technology followed by availability of know-how with a weight of 0.875 and 0.125, respectively. The sequence of the preferable options based on the study results was: wind energy with 51.9%, followed by the solar energy option with 31.3%, and finally biomass and hydropower with 10.5% and 7.1%, respectively. Sensitivity analysis was performed and showed that the renewable energy options are not sensitive to the technical or environmental criteria, while they were slightly sensitive to the geographical and socioeconomic criteria.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"20 1","pages":"209 - 219"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72982753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.1878733
Tobias Gumbert, Carolin Bohn
Abstract The concept of consumption corridors proposes minimum and maximum limits to consumption on the normative premises of justice, human wellbeing, and guarantees of a good life for all. A central objection to the idea is that limits on resource use would interfere broadly with liberal freedoms, and consumption corridors would thus not be compatible with a liberal democratic setting. This claim rests on the assumption that protecting liberal freedom rights and enforcing limits constitute opposing forces. Here, liberal freedom is equated with the expansion of (unlimited) options of choice: the more options people have, and the fewer limits that are imposed on them, the greater the overall level of freedom. Therefore, discussions of limits are often reduced to negative restrictions and undemocratic demands. To problematize this rationale, we argue that in most liberal accounts, freedom and limits are mutually supportive of each other, and that the understanding of freedom as “the absence of limits” is in fact a particular understanding that has become dominant. Against this backdrop, we develop the notion of” green liberal freedom” that posits limits as a core concern of liberal understandings of freedom. We suggest that the recognition of the environment as “provider of basic needs,” democratic deliberation, and capability to reflect upon and judge conflicting values in light of individual and collective versions of the good life are important “building blocks” of an adjusted concept of freedom that is at once compatible with liberal thought and in support of the negotiation and implementation of consumption corridors.
{"title":"Are liberal objections to consumption corridors justified? On the relation of freedom and limits in green liberal thought","authors":"Tobias Gumbert, Carolin Bohn","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.1878733","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.1878733","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The concept of consumption corridors proposes minimum and maximum limits to consumption on the normative premises of justice, human wellbeing, and guarantees of a good life for all. A central objection to the idea is that limits on resource use would interfere broadly with liberal freedoms, and consumption corridors would thus not be compatible with a liberal democratic setting. This claim rests on the assumption that protecting liberal freedom rights and enforcing limits constitute opposing forces. Here, liberal freedom is equated with the expansion of (unlimited) options of choice: the more options people have, and the fewer limits that are imposed on them, the greater the overall level of freedom. Therefore, discussions of limits are often reduced to negative restrictions and undemocratic demands. To problematize this rationale, we argue that in most liberal accounts, freedom and limits are mutually supportive of each other, and that the understanding of freedom as “the absence of limits” is in fact a particular understanding that has become dominant. Against this backdrop, we develop the notion of” green liberal freedom” that posits limits as a core concern of liberal understandings of freedom. We suggest that the recognition of the environment as “provider of basic needs,” democratic deliberation, and capability to reflect upon and judge conflicting values in light of individual and collective versions of the good life are important “building blocks” of an adjusted concept of freedom that is at once compatible with liberal thought and in support of the negotiation and implementation of consumption corridors.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":"90 - 101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89858139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.1891673
K. Vladimirova
Abstract Following food, mobility, and household-energy use, the consumption of textiles and fashion in Europe has been identified as the fourth highest environmental pressure category in terms of use of primary resources. Slow fashion advocates argue that it is necessary to reevaluate our relationship with clothes and to reduce overall fashion consumption in affluent countries. This article examines a relatively new practice of voluntary reduction of apparel consumption through the lens of three popular online minimalist fashion challenges that encourage participants to use a limited number of clothes, shoes, and accessories over a certain period. It explores how the initiators of the challenges frame the reasons that lead to downsizing, the benefits from undertaking the challenge and the idea of “good life” as the result of living with less. The findings indicate that rationales for voluntary reduction of apparel consumption are more focused on individual wellbeing than on altruistic concerns. The analysis also suggests that in defining an upper limit in apparel consumption (how many garments a wardrobe should contain), numerical indicators serve as a benchmark rather than a goal.
{"title":"Consumption corridors in fashion: deliberations on upper consumption limits in minimalist fashion challenges","authors":"K. Vladimirova","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.1891673","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.1891673","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Following food, mobility, and household-energy use, the consumption of textiles and fashion in Europe has been identified as the fourth highest environmental pressure category in terms of use of primary resources. Slow fashion advocates argue that it is necessary to reevaluate our relationship with clothes and to reduce overall fashion consumption in affluent countries. This article examines a relatively new practice of voluntary reduction of apparel consumption through the lens of three popular online minimalist fashion challenges that encourage participants to use a limited number of clothes, shoes, and accessories over a certain period. It explores how the initiators of the challenges frame the reasons that lead to downsizing, the benefits from undertaking the challenge and the idea of “good life” as the result of living with less. The findings indicate that rationales for voluntary reduction of apparel consumption are more focused on individual wellbeing than on altruistic concerns. The analysis also suggests that in defining an upper limit in apparel consumption (how many garments a wardrobe should contain), numerical indicators serve as a benchmark rather than a goal.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"9 1","pages":"102 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78708974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2020.1860345
Anthony Kwame Morgan, Beatrice Aberinpoka Awafo, Theophilus Quartey
Abstract The coronavirus pandemic has ravaged the world, and its impact has permeated virtually all facets of society. The next wave of the COVID-19 shock will trigger another or more protracted recession in many countries, with annual growth projected to fall below recessionary thresholds. The resulting hit to global income as compared with forecasts for 2020 and 2021 will be enormous. The situation will be more precarious for developing countries across different income categories that are struggling with unsustainable debt burdens. Firms should implement business-continuity plans and ensure readiness for business constraints by prioritizing critical business activities and creating contingency plans for disruption. Governments should implement support programs to avert these difficulties. The shock to labor supply in each country should be managed in a manner that does not leave a post-COVID-19 world more disastrous. Close cooperation among all relevant actors is key to containing COVID-19 and mitigating its economic repercussions on countries around the globe. In addition, better waste management and commitment to climate change must take center stage to reduce the environmental impacts of COVID-19 on countries and the world.
{"title":"The effects of COVID-19 on global economic output and sustainability: evidence from around the world and lessons for redress","authors":"Anthony Kwame Morgan, Beatrice Aberinpoka Awafo, Theophilus Quartey","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2020.1860345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2020.1860345","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The coronavirus pandemic has ravaged the world, and its impact has permeated virtually all facets of society. The next wave of the COVID-19 shock will trigger another or more protracted recession in many countries, with annual growth projected to fall below recessionary thresholds. The resulting hit to global income as compared with forecasts for 2020 and 2021 will be enormous. The situation will be more precarious for developing countries across different income categories that are struggling with unsustainable debt burdens. Firms should implement business-continuity plans and ensure readiness for business constraints by prioritizing critical business activities and creating contingency plans for disruption. Governments should implement support programs to avert these difficulties. The shock to labor supply in each country should be managed in a manner that does not leave a post-COVID-19 world more disastrous. Close cooperation among all relevant actors is key to containing COVID-19 and mitigating its economic repercussions on countries around the globe. In addition, better waste management and commitment to climate change must take center stage to reduce the environmental impacts of COVID-19 on countries and the world.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"28 1","pages":"76 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90171663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.1875682
E. Adams, Y. Adams, Christa Koki
Abstract The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is having a significant global impact on livelihoods, health, and general well-being. This policy brief argues that in low-income countries (LICs) where water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) insecurity is widespread and closely entangled with poverty and other vulnerabilities, COVID-19 will have a particularly devastating impact on women and girls because they bear the disproportionate burden of water collection, sanitation, hygiene, and family welfare ‒ responsibilities embedded in longstanding sociocultural norms. WASH insecurity refers to the physical and relational inequities in WASH access. Using three pathways ‒ reproductive and perinatal health, cultural norms and the risk of COVID-19 infections, and physical and mental health ‒ we discuss how WASH insecurity will worsen the impact of COVID-19 on women and girls in LICs.
{"title":"Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) insecurity will exacerbate the toll of COVID-19 on women and girls in low-income countries","authors":"E. Adams, Y. Adams, Christa Koki","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.1875682","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.1875682","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is having a significant global impact on livelihoods, health, and general well-being. This policy brief argues that in low-income countries (LICs) where water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) insecurity is widespread and closely entangled with poverty and other vulnerabilities, COVID-19 will have a particularly devastating impact on women and girls because they bear the disproportionate burden of water collection, sanitation, hygiene, and family welfare ‒ responsibilities embedded in longstanding sociocultural norms. WASH insecurity refers to the physical and relational inequities in WASH access. Using three pathways ‒ reproductive and perinatal health, cultural norms and the risk of COVID-19 infections, and physical and mental health ‒ we discuss how WASH insecurity will worsen the impact of COVID-19 on women and girls in LICs.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"25 1","pages":"85 - 89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88416295","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.1969820
H. Westskog, T. Julsrud, Steffen Kallbekken, K. Frenken, J. Schor, Karina Standal
Abstract Based on three case studies of community sharing in different sectors of society, we address how and under what conditions community sharing can contribute to sustainability transformation. Considering modes of exchange an leverage points, we analyze how community sharing can add to transformation when sharing systems are designed to intervene at both shallow and deep leverage points. Our case studies indicate that sustainability transformations are dynamic processes in which even shallow levels of leverage can affect change. We show that community sharing can be upscaled through restructuring institutions via redistributive exchange systems, while initiatives supported by strong and lasting institutions are in the best position to contribute to change. Furthermore, our results suggest that sharing practices may strengthen ties and trust in an enterprise or local community. Finally, community-sharing systems that build on existing values in line with sustainability transformation may be in the best position to contribute to deeper levers of change.
{"title":"The role of community sharing in sustainability transformation: case studies from Norway","authors":"H. Westskog, T. Julsrud, Steffen Kallbekken, K. Frenken, J. Schor, Karina Standal","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.1969820","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.1969820","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Based on three case studies of community sharing in different sectors of society, we address how and under what conditions community sharing can contribute to sustainability transformation. Considering modes of exchange an leverage points, we analyze how community sharing can add to transformation when sharing systems are designed to intervene at both shallow and deep leverage points. Our case studies indicate that sustainability transformations are dynamic processes in which even shallow levels of leverage can affect change. We show that community sharing can be upscaled through restructuring institutions via redistributive exchange systems, while initiatives supported by strong and lasting institutions are in the best position to contribute to change. Furthermore, our results suggest that sharing practices may strengthen ties and trust in an enterprise or local community. Finally, community-sharing systems that build on existing values in line with sustainability transformation may be in the best position to contribute to deeper levers of change.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"66 1","pages":"334 - 348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84518564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2021.1946297
Tullia Jack, Andrew Glover
Abstract Academia, as many other sectors, has faced wide-ranging disruptions due to COVID-19, with teaching and research activity conducted entirely online in many countries. Before the pandemic grounded travel, academics were often hypermobile, some traveling more than 150,000 kilometers per year for conferences, board meetings, collaborations, fieldwork,seminars, and lectures. It is no surprise then that academic flying is among the leading causes of universities’ greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. Despite growing awareness surrounding GHG emissions from flying and calls for reducing aeromobility, academics have continued to travel. The COVID-19 pandemic, in equitably stopping all flying, offers a unique opportunity to study emerging low-GHG modes of academic internationalization. In this article, we look at academic internationalization, inspired by digital ethnography, to explore how the academic landscape has adapted to meet internationalization goals within the context of a sudden grounding of travel. By investigating flight-free academic internationalization, we illuminate some of the implications and discuss potential opportunities and challenges of achieving less GHG intensive academic internationalization.
{"title":"Online conferencing in the midst of COVID-19: an “already existing experiment” in academic internationalization without air travel","authors":"Tullia Jack, Andrew Glover","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2021.1946297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.1946297","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Academia, as many other sectors, has faced wide-ranging disruptions due to COVID-19, with teaching and research activity conducted entirely online in many countries. Before the pandemic grounded travel, academics were often hypermobile, some traveling more than 150,000 kilometers per year for conferences, board meetings, collaborations, fieldwork,seminars, and lectures. It is no surprise then that academic flying is among the leading causes of universities’ greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. Despite growing awareness surrounding GHG emissions from flying and calls for reducing aeromobility, academics have continued to travel. The COVID-19 pandemic, in equitably stopping all flying, offers a unique opportunity to study emerging low-GHG modes of academic internationalization. In this article, we look at academic internationalization, inspired by digital ethnography, to explore how the academic landscape has adapted to meet internationalization goals within the context of a sudden grounding of travel. By investigating flight-free academic internationalization, we illuminate some of the implications and discuss potential opportunities and challenges of achieving less GHG intensive academic internationalization.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":"134 1","pages":"292 - 304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77813413","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：