{"title":"Transdisciplinarity, tempocoupling, and the role of culture in zoonosis research","authors":"D. Matias","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139778729","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}
Garry D. Hayman, Benjamin Poulter, S. Ghude, Eleanor Blyth, Vinayak Sinha, Sally Archibald, Kirsti Ashworth, Victoria Barlow, Silvano Fares, Gregor Feig, Tetsuya Hiyama, Jiming Jin, S. Juhola, Meehye Lee, Sebastian Leuzinger, Miguel D. Mahecha, Xianhong Meng, David Odee, Gemma Purser, Hisashi Sato, P. Saxena, V. S. Semeena, Allison L. Steiner, Xuemei Wang, Stefan Wolff
{"title":"Research into land atmosphere interactions supports the Sustainable Development agenda","authors":"Garry D. Hayman, Benjamin Poulter, S. Ghude, Eleanor Blyth, Vinayak Sinha, Sally Archibald, Kirsti Ashworth, Victoria Barlow, Silvano Fares, Gregor Feig, Tetsuya Hiyama, Jiming Jin, S. Juhola, Meehye Lee, Sebastian Leuzinger, Miguel D. Mahecha, Xianhong Meng, David Odee, Gemma Purser, Hisashi Sato, P. Saxena, V. S. Semeena, Allison L. Steiner, Xuemei Wang, Stefan Wolff","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139837454","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}
{"title":"Transdisciplinarity, tempocoupling, and the role of culture in zoonosis research","authors":"D. Matias","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139838686","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}
Jane Wardani, J. J. Bos, Diego Ramirez-Lovering, Anthony G. Capon
{"title":"Towards a practice framework for transdisciplinary collaboration in planetary health","authors":"Jane Wardani, J. J. Bos, Diego Ramirez-Lovering, Anthony G. Capon","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139780971","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}
Jane Wardani, J. J. Bos, Diego Ramirez-Lovering, Anthony G. Capon
{"title":"Towards a practice framework for transdisciplinary collaboration in planetary health","authors":"Jane Wardani, J. J. Bos, Diego Ramirez-Lovering, Anthony G. Capon","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139840691","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}
T. Hickmann, Frank Biermann, C. Sénit, Yixian Sun, Magdalena Bexell, Mitzi Bolton, Basil Bornemann, J. Censoro, Aurelie Charles, Rodrigo Correa Ramiro, D. Coy, Frederik Dahlmann, Mark Elder, Felicitas Fritzsche, Thiago Gehre Galvão, Jarrod Grainger-Brown, Cristina Inoue, Kristina Jönsson, Montserrat Koloffon Rosas, Kerstin Krellenberg, E. Moallemi, Ivonne Lobos Alva, S. Malekpour, D. Ningrum, Aneliya Paneva, Lena Partzsch, Rob Raven, Eszter Szedlacsek, John Thompson, M. van Driel, Jéssica Viani Damasceno, Robert Webb, Sabine Weiland
{"title":"Scoping article: Research frontiers on the governance of the Sustainable Development Goals","authors":"T. Hickmann, Frank Biermann, C. Sénit, Yixian Sun, Magdalena Bexell, Mitzi Bolton, Basil Bornemann, J. Censoro, Aurelie Charles, Rodrigo Correa Ramiro, D. Coy, Frederik Dahlmann, Mark Elder, Felicitas Fritzsche, Thiago Gehre Galvão, Jarrod Grainger-Brown, Cristina Inoue, Kristina Jönsson, Montserrat Koloffon Rosas, Kerstin Krellenberg, E. Moallemi, Ivonne Lobos Alva, S. Malekpour, D. Ningrum, Aneliya Paneva, Lena Partzsch, Rob Raven, Eszter Szedlacsek, John Thompson, M. van Driel, Jéssica Viani Damasceno, Robert Webb, Sabine Weiland","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139599704","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}
{"title":"Polycrisis in the Anthropocene: An Invitation to Contributions and Debates","authors":"Michael Lawrence","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139527516","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}
Michael Lawrence, Thomas Homer-Dixon, Scott Janzwood, Johan Rockstöm, Ortwin Renn, Jonathan F. Donges
{"title":"Global Polycrisis: The Causal Mechanisms of Crisis Entanglement","authors":"Michael Lawrence, Thomas Homer-Dixon, Scott Janzwood, Johan Rockstöm, Ortwin Renn, Jonathan F. Donges","doi":"10.1017/sus.2024.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2024.1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139527250","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}
L. Voget-Kleschin, Christian Baatz, Clare Heyward, D. V. van Vuuren, N. Mengis
Abstract Non-technical summary Scenarios compatible with the Paris agreement's temperature goal of 1.5 °C involve carbon dioxide removal measures – measures that actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere – on a massive scale. Such large-scale implementations raise significant ethical problems. Van Vuuren et al. (2018), as well as the current IPCC scenarios, show that reduction in energy and or food demand could reduce the need for such activities. There is some reluctance to discuss such societal changes. However, we argue that policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily ethically problematic. Therefore, they should be discussed alongside techno-optimistic approaches in any kind of discussions about how to respond to climate change. Technical summary The 1.5 °C goal has given impetus to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures, such as bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage, or afforestation. However, land-based CDR options compete with food production and biodiversity protection. Van Vuuren et al. (2018) looked at alternative pathways including lifestyle changes, low-population projections, or non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation, to reach the 1.5 °C temperature objective. Underlined by the recently published IPCC AR6 WGIII report, they show that demand-side management measures are likely to reduce the need for CDR. Yet, policy measures entailed in these scenarios could be associated with ethical problems themselves. In this paper, we therefore investigate ethical implications of four alternative pathways as proposed by Van Vuuren et al. (2018). We find that emission reduction options such as lifestyle changes and reducing population, which are typically perceived as ethically problematic, might be less so on further inspection. In contrast, options associated with less societal transformation and more techno-optimistic approaches turn out to be in need of further scrutiny. The vast majority of emission reduction options considered are not intrinsically ethically problematic; rather everything rests on the precise implementation. Explicitly addressing ethical considerations when developing, advancing, and using integrated assessment scenarios could reignite debates about previously overlooked topics and thereby support necessary societal discourse. Social media summary Policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily as ethically problematic as commonly presumed and reduce the need for large-scale CDR.
{"title":"Reassessing the need for carbon dioxide removal: moral implications of alternative climate target pathways","authors":"L. Voget-Kleschin, Christian Baatz, Clare Heyward, D. V. van Vuuren, N. Mengis","doi":"10.1017/sus.2023.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2023.21","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Non-technical summary Scenarios compatible with the Paris agreement's temperature goal of 1.5 °C involve carbon dioxide removal measures – measures that actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere – on a massive scale. Such large-scale implementations raise significant ethical problems. Van Vuuren et al. (2018), as well as the current IPCC scenarios, show that reduction in energy and or food demand could reduce the need for such activities. There is some reluctance to discuss such societal changes. However, we argue that policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily ethically problematic. Therefore, they should be discussed alongside techno-optimistic approaches in any kind of discussions about how to respond to climate change. Technical summary The 1.5 °C goal has given impetus to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures, such as bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage, or afforestation. However, land-based CDR options compete with food production and biodiversity protection. Van Vuuren et al. (2018) looked at alternative pathways including lifestyle changes, low-population projections, or non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation, to reach the 1.5 °C temperature objective. Underlined by the recently published IPCC AR6 WGIII report, they show that demand-side management measures are likely to reduce the need for CDR. Yet, policy measures entailed in these scenarios could be associated with ethical problems themselves. In this paper, we therefore investigate ethical implications of four alternative pathways as proposed by Van Vuuren et al. (2018). We find that emission reduction options such as lifestyle changes and reducing population, which are typically perceived as ethically problematic, might be less so on further inspection. In contrast, options associated with less societal transformation and more techno-optimistic approaches turn out to be in need of further scrutiny. The vast majority of emission reduction options considered are not intrinsically ethically problematic; rather everything rests on the precise implementation. Explicitly addressing ethical considerations when developing, advancing, and using integrated assessment scenarios could reignite debates about previously overlooked topics and thereby support necessary societal discourse. Social media summary Policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily as ethically problematic as commonly presumed and reduce the need for large-scale CDR.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139382660","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}
Abstract Non-Technical Summary Climate stabilization requires scaling-up technologies to capture and store carbon. Carbon removal could be very profitable, and some of the agents best placed to benefit are ‘carbon majors’, i.e. fossil fuel companies. We argue that in ordinary circumstances only agents without significant historical climate responsibilities would be entitled to the full benefits from carbon removal. Under non-ideal conditions, carbon majors might be entitled to benefit, provided that no other agent could remove similar quantities of carbon at similar costs. This burden of proof is only likely to be met in countries with poor governance capacities. Technical Summary Climate stabilization requires scaling up technologies to capture and store carbon. Some of the agents best placed to profit from carbon removal are ‘carbon majors’, especially fossil fuel companies. Yet incentivizing carbon majors to undertake carbon removal poses an ethical dilemma: carbon majors have made significant historical contributions to climate change and have significantly benefitted from such contributions without being made to compensate for resulting climate harm. This is why it seems unfair to reward them with additional economic benefits. However, carbon majors possess the technological skills and infrastructure to upscale carbon removal efficiently. We argue that in ordinary circumstances, only agents without significant climate responsibilities would be morally entitled to fully benefit from carbon removal. Yet under non-ideal conditions, it might be permissible to reward carbon majors if no other agent were capable of removing as much carbon at similar costs and on similar timeframes. We believe this argument faces an imposing burden of proof that is only likely to be met in countries with poor governance capacities. In more favorable circumstances, including those of most OECD countries, rewarding carbon majors without having them pay for their historical climate responsibilities remains impermissible. Social Media Summary Rewarding carbon majors to undertake carbon dioxide removal is unjust due to their historical climate responsibilities. Where possible, governments should empower other agents to remove CO2.
{"title":"Justice in benefitting from carbon removal","authors":"Dominic Lenzi, H. Schübel, Ivo Wallimann-Helmer","doi":"10.1017/sus.2023.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2023.22","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Non-Technical Summary Climate stabilization requires scaling-up technologies to capture and store carbon. Carbon removal could be very profitable, and some of the agents best placed to benefit are ‘carbon majors’, i.e. fossil fuel companies. We argue that in ordinary circumstances only agents without significant historical climate responsibilities would be entitled to the full benefits from carbon removal. Under non-ideal conditions, carbon majors might be entitled to benefit, provided that no other agent could remove similar quantities of carbon at similar costs. This burden of proof is only likely to be met in countries with poor governance capacities. Technical Summary Climate stabilization requires scaling up technologies to capture and store carbon. Some of the agents best placed to profit from carbon removal are ‘carbon majors’, especially fossil fuel companies. Yet incentivizing carbon majors to undertake carbon removal poses an ethical dilemma: carbon majors have made significant historical contributions to climate change and have significantly benefitted from such contributions without being made to compensate for resulting climate harm. This is why it seems unfair to reward them with additional economic benefits. However, carbon majors possess the technological skills and infrastructure to upscale carbon removal efficiently. We argue that in ordinary circumstances, only agents without significant climate responsibilities would be morally entitled to fully benefit from carbon removal. Yet under non-ideal conditions, it might be permissible to reward carbon majors if no other agent were capable of removing as much carbon at similar costs and on similar timeframes. We believe this argument faces an imposing burden of proof that is only likely to be met in countries with poor governance capacities. In more favorable circumstances, including those of most OECD countries, rewarding carbon majors without having them pay for their historical climate responsibilities remains impermissible. Social Media Summary Rewarding carbon majors to undertake carbon dioxide removal is unjust due to their historical climate responsibilities. Where possible, governments should empower other agents to remove CO2.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138633061","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：