Abstract The ‘climate crisis’ describes human-caused global warming and climate change and its consequences. It conveys the sense of urgency surrounding humanity's failure to take sufficient action to slow down, stop and reverse global warming. The leading direct cause of the climate crisis is carbon dioxide (CO2) released as a by-product of burning fossil fuels,i which supply ~87% of the world's energy. The second most important cause of the climate crisis is deforestation to create more land for crops and livestock. The solutions have been stated as simply ‘leave the fossil carbon in the ground’ and ‘end deforestation’. Rather than address fossil fuel supplies, climate policies focus almost exclusively on the demand side, blaming fossil fuel users for greenhouse gas emissions. The fundamental reason that we are not solving the climate crisis is not a lack of green energy solutions. It is that governments continue with energy strategies that prioritize fossil fuels. These entrenched energy policies subsidize the discovery, extraction, transport and sale of fossil fuels, with the aim of ensuring a cheap, plentiful, steady supply of fossil energy into the future. This paper compares the climate crisis to two other environmental crises: ozone depletion and the COVID-19 pandemic. Halting and reversing damage to the ozone layer is one of humanity's greatest environmental success stories. The world's response to COVID-19 demonstrates that it is possible for governments to take decisive action to avert an imminent crisis. The approach to solving both of these crises was the same: (1) identify the precise cause of the problem through expert scientific advice; (2) with support by the public, pass legislation focused on the cause of the problem; and (3) employ a robust feedback mechanism to assess progress and adjust the approach. This is not yet being done to solve the climate crisis, but working within the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement framework, it could be. Every nation can contribute to solving the climate crisis by: (1) changing their energy strategy to green energy sources instead of fossil fuels; and (2) critically reviewing every law, policy and trade agreement (including transport, food production, food sources and land use) that affects the climate crisis. Social media summary To solve the climate crisis, governments must end policies that support fossil fuels, not just support renewable energy.
{"title":"Solving the climate crisis: lessons from ozone depletion and COVID-19","authors":"M. Baldwin, T. Lenton","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.25","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.25","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The ‘climate crisis’ describes human-caused global warming and climate change and its consequences. It conveys the sense of urgency surrounding humanity's failure to take sufficient action to slow down, stop and reverse global warming. The leading direct cause of the climate crisis is carbon dioxide (CO2) released as a by-product of burning fossil fuels,i which supply ~87% of the world's energy. The second most important cause of the climate crisis is deforestation to create more land for crops and livestock. The solutions have been stated as simply ‘leave the fossil carbon in the ground’ and ‘end deforestation’. Rather than address fossil fuel supplies, climate policies focus almost exclusively on the demand side, blaming fossil fuel users for greenhouse gas emissions. The fundamental reason that we are not solving the climate crisis is not a lack of green energy solutions. It is that governments continue with energy strategies that prioritize fossil fuels. These entrenched energy policies subsidize the discovery, extraction, transport and sale of fossil fuels, with the aim of ensuring a cheap, plentiful, steady supply of fossil energy into the future. This paper compares the climate crisis to two other environmental crises: ozone depletion and the COVID-19 pandemic. Halting and reversing damage to the ozone layer is one of humanity's greatest environmental success stories. The world's response to COVID-19 demonstrates that it is possible for governments to take decisive action to avert an imminent crisis. The approach to solving both of these crises was the same: (1) identify the precise cause of the problem through expert scientific advice; (2) with support by the public, pass legislation focused on the cause of the problem; and (3) employ a robust feedback mechanism to assess progress and adjust the approach. This is not yet being done to solve the climate crisis, but working within the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement framework, it could be. Every nation can contribute to solving the climate crisis by: (1) changing their energy strategy to green energy sources instead of fossil fuels; and (2) critically reviewing every law, policy and trade agreement (including transport, food production, food sources and land use) that affects the climate crisis. Social media summary To solve the climate crisis, governments must end policies that support fossil fuels, not just support renewable energy.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.25","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44122310","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}
Non-technical summary We interviewed grassroots food innovators in South Africa to explore the diverse ways in which their narratives expressed different capacities for resilience, such as dealing with surprise and shaping desirable change. We drew on key resilience themes of rootedness, resourcefulness and resistance (the 3Rs) as lenses through which to view their personal stories and efforts to build resilience and reshape the future. We used narrative and interpretative methods to connect the personal and context-specific experiences of food innovators to the 3Rs, exploring a new approach to uncovering resilience capacities. We suggest that this approach could be usefully employed to understand potential resilience capacities that could help address diverse sustainability challenges around the world. Technical summary As direct accounts of human experience, narratives offer a way of exploring the subjective and contextual dimensions of different capacities that influence resilience – the capacity to deal with surprise and unexpected change. In this study, we analysed the stories of food innovators in South Africa through combined narrative and interpretative methods, and we developed a novel approach to tease out some of the unique and particular aspects of resilience expressed in their stories. Using a combination of narrative enquiry and interpretative phenomenological analysis, we drew on the key resilience themes of rootedness, resourcefulness and resistance (the 3Rs) as lenses through which to view the personal reflections of food innovators and to identify important capacities that may contribute towards their efforts to build resilience and reshape the future. Amongst the diverse set of narratives, we found that resilience capacities were strongly influenced by an ethos of connectedness and care; attunement to co-creative processes; and experimenting with novelty and diverse narratives. We suggest that this narrative-based methodology could be usefully employed to surface latent rich and multidimensional resilience capacities in relation to various sustainability challenges in diverse contexts around the world. Social media summary A narrative approach to explore resilience capacities that can help reshape the future of South African food innovators.
{"title":"Exploring resilience capacities with food innovators: a narrative approach","authors":"M. Lindow, Rika Preiser, R. Biggs","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.23","url":null,"abstract":"Non-technical summary We interviewed grassroots food innovators in South Africa to explore the diverse ways in which their narratives expressed different capacities for resilience, such as dealing with surprise and shaping desirable change. We drew on key resilience themes of rootedness, resourcefulness and resistance (the 3Rs) as lenses through which to view their personal stories and efforts to build resilience and reshape the future. We used narrative and interpretative methods to connect the personal and context-specific experiences of food innovators to the 3Rs, exploring a new approach to uncovering resilience capacities. We suggest that this approach could be usefully employed to understand potential resilience capacities that could help address diverse sustainability challenges around the world. Technical summary As direct accounts of human experience, narratives offer a way of exploring the subjective and contextual dimensions of different capacities that influence resilience – the capacity to deal with surprise and unexpected change. In this study, we analysed the stories of food innovators in South Africa through combined narrative and interpretative methods, and we developed a novel approach to tease out some of the unique and particular aspects of resilience expressed in their stories. Using a combination of narrative enquiry and interpretative phenomenological analysis, we drew on the key resilience themes of rootedness, resourcefulness and resistance (the 3Rs) as lenses through which to view the personal reflections of food innovators and to identify important capacities that may contribute towards their efforts to build resilience and reshape the future. Amongst the diverse set of narratives, we found that resilience capacities were strongly influenced by an ethos of connectedness and care; attunement to co-creative processes; and experimenting with novelty and diverse narratives. We suggest that this narrative-based methodology could be usefully employed to surface latent rich and multidimensional resilience capacities in relation to various sustainability challenges in diverse contexts around the world. Social media summary A narrative approach to explore resilience capacities that can help reshape the future of South African food innovators.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.23","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43961631","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}
Christoph D. D. Rupprecht, J. Vervoort, Chr. Berthelsen, A. Mangnus, N. Osborne, K. Thompson, A. F. Urushima, Maya Kóvskaya, M. Spiegelberg, S. Cristiano, Jay Springett, B. Marschuetz, E. Flies, Steven R. McGreevy, L. Droz, M. Breed, Jingchao Gan, Rika Shinkai, A. Kawai
Non-technical summary The sustainability concept seeks to balance how present and future generations of humans meet their needs. But because nature is viewed only as a resource, sustainability fails to recognize that humans and other living beings depend on each other for their well-being. We therefore argue that true sustainability can only be achieved if the interdependent needs of all species of current and future generations are met, and propose calling this ‘multispecies sustainability’. We explore the concept through visualizations and scenarios, then consider how it might be applied through case studies involving bees and healthy green spaces. Technical summary The sustainability concept in its current form suffers from reductionism. The common interpretation of ‘meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ fails to explicitly recognize their interdependence with needs of current and future non-human generations. Here, we argue that the focus of sustainability on human well-being – a purely utilitarian view of nature as a resource for humanity – limits its conceptual and analytical power, as well as real-world sustainability transformation efforts. We propose a broadened concept of ‘multispecies sustainability’ by acknowledging interdependent needs of multiple species’ current and future generations. We develop the concept in three steps: (1) discussing normative aspects, fundamental principles underlying the concept, and potential visual models, (2) showcasing radically diverging futures emerging from a scenario thought experiment based on the axes sustainable-unsustainable and multispecies-anthropocentric, and (3) exploring how multispecies sustainability can be applied to research and policy-making through two case studies (a multispecies stakeholder framework and the Healthy Urban Microbiome Initiative). Social media summary A new multispecies definition of sustainability recognizes that living beings and their wellbeing are interdependent.
{"title":"Multispecies sustainability","authors":"Christoph D. D. Rupprecht, J. Vervoort, Chr. Berthelsen, A. Mangnus, N. Osborne, K. Thompson, A. F. Urushima, Maya Kóvskaya, M. Spiegelberg, S. Cristiano, Jay Springett, B. Marschuetz, E. Flies, Steven R. McGreevy, L. Droz, M. Breed, Jingchao Gan, Rika Shinkai, A. Kawai","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.28","url":null,"abstract":"Non-technical summary The sustainability concept seeks to balance how present and future generations of humans meet their needs. But because nature is viewed only as a resource, sustainability fails to recognize that humans and other living beings depend on each other for their well-being. We therefore argue that true sustainability can only be achieved if the interdependent needs of all species of current and future generations are met, and propose calling this ‘multispecies sustainability’. We explore the concept through visualizations and scenarios, then consider how it might be applied through case studies involving bees and healthy green spaces. Technical summary The sustainability concept in its current form suffers from reductionism. The common interpretation of ‘meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ fails to explicitly recognize their interdependence with needs of current and future non-human generations. Here, we argue that the focus of sustainability on human well-being – a purely utilitarian view of nature as a resource for humanity – limits its conceptual and analytical power, as well as real-world sustainability transformation efforts. We propose a broadened concept of ‘multispecies sustainability’ by acknowledging interdependent needs of multiple species’ current and future generations. We develop the concept in three steps: (1) discussing normative aspects, fundamental principles underlying the concept, and potential visual models, (2) showcasing radically diverging futures emerging from a scenario thought experiment based on the axes sustainable-unsustainable and multispecies-anthropocentric, and (3) exploring how multispecies sustainability can be applied to research and policy-making through two case studies (a multispecies stakeholder framework and the Healthy Urban Microbiome Initiative). Social media summary A new multispecies definition of sustainability recognizes that living beings and their wellbeing are interdependent.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.28","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47445496","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 The various crises that have emerged since 2000 are driven by an increasing maladaptation of our societies’ information processing capabilities to the dynamics in which our societies find themselves. These capabilities have been built up path dependently over centuries, and to understand them we need to look closely at their history. Changes in technology, demography and resource use and environmental change are all part of a co-evolution in which societies’ information processing capacities play a central role. The information and communications technology revolution has accelerated developments in all of these domains and has weakened some fundamental institutions. This paper discusses how these processes might affect the long-term future of our societies. Social media summary How will what we learn from COVID-19 about our society's information processing affect our future?
{"title":"COVID-19 and the role of information processing","authors":"S. van der Leeuw","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.22","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The various crises that have emerged since 2000 are driven by an increasing maladaptation of our societies’ information processing capabilities to the dynamics in which our societies find themselves. These capabilities have been built up path dependently over centuries, and to understand them we need to look closely at their history. Changes in technology, demography and resource use and environmental change are all part of a co-evolution in which societies’ information processing capacities play a central role. The information and communications technology revolution has accelerated developments in all of these domains and has weakened some fundamental institutions. This paper discusses how these processes might affect the long-term future of our societies. Social media summary How will what we learn from COVID-19 about our society's information processing affect our future?","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.22","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49665059","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}
M. Hensher, Katie Kish, J. Farley, S. Quilley, K. Zywert
Abstract COVID-19 has shone a bright light on a number of failings and weaknesses in how current economic models handle information and knowledge. Some of these are familiar issues that have long been understood but not acted upon effectively – for example, the danger that current systems of intellectual property and patent protection are actually inimical to delivering a cost-effective vaccine available to all, whereas treating knowledge as a commons and a public good is much more likely to deliver efficient outcomes for the entire global population. But COVID-19 has also demonstrated that traditional models of knowledge production and dissemination are failing us; scientific knowledge is becoming weaponized and hyper-partisan, and confidence in this knowledge is falling. We believe that the challenges that COVID-19 has exposed in the information economy and ecology will be of increasing applicability across the whole spectrum of sustainability; sustainability scholars and policymakers need to understand and grasp them now if we are to avoid contagion into other sectors due to the preventable errors that have marred the global response to COVID-19. Social media summary COVID-19 highlights both the failures of privatized knowledge and worrying fractures in the wider information ecology.
{"title":"Open knowledge commons versus privatized gain in a fractured information ecology: lessons from COVID-19 for the future of sustainability","authors":"M. Hensher, Katie Kish, J. Farley, S. Quilley, K. Zywert","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.21","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract COVID-19 has shone a bright light on a number of failings and weaknesses in how current economic models handle information and knowledge. Some of these are familiar issues that have long been understood but not acted upon effectively – for example, the danger that current systems of intellectual property and patent protection are actually inimical to delivering a cost-effective vaccine available to all, whereas treating knowledge as a commons and a public good is much more likely to deliver efficient outcomes for the entire global population. But COVID-19 has also demonstrated that traditional models of knowledge production and dissemination are failing us; scientific knowledge is becoming weaponized and hyper-partisan, and confidence in this knowledge is falling. We believe that the challenges that COVID-19 has exposed in the information economy and ecology will be of increasing applicability across the whole spectrum of sustainability; sustainability scholars and policymakers need to understand and grasp them now if we are to avoid contagion into other sectors due to the preventable errors that have marred the global response to COVID-19. Social media summary COVID-19 highlights both the failures of privatized knowledge and worrying fractures in the wider information ecology.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.21","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43729045","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 COVID-19 has stimulated calls for a ‘global reset’ to address major global challenges and ‘build back better’. This Intelligence Briefing makes the case that the experience of COVID-19 itself, particularly the way it reverberated across multiple systems, shines light on the vital steps needed to advance a global reset. It brings together the evidence that the causes, severity and effects of COVID-19 cut across multiple interconnected systems, notably environmental, health, political, social, economic and food systems, as did the responses to it. All of these systems affected each other: responses implemented to address problems in one system inevitably led to effects on others. This Intelligence Briefing uses this evidence to identify five practical steps needed to advance a global reset. First, train systems leaders. Second, employ a new cadre of ‘systems connectors’. Third, identify solutions across systems. Fourth, manage trade-offs for the long and short term. Fifth, kick-start system redesign for co-benefits. Implementing these steps will be extraordinarily challenging, especially given the short-term imperative to ‘bounce back’. But for any business, organization, government or United Nations agency serious about addressing long-term sustainability challenges, the opportunity is there to use these five practical actions to press the global reset button. Social media summary COVID-19 shows that the world needs a reset to address major global challenges. Here are five steps to get there.
{"title":"Five steps towards a global reset: lessons from COVID-19","authors":"C. Hawkes","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.24","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract COVID-19 has stimulated calls for a ‘global reset’ to address major global challenges and ‘build back better’. This Intelligence Briefing makes the case that the experience of COVID-19 itself, particularly the way it reverberated across multiple systems, shines light on the vital steps needed to advance a global reset. It brings together the evidence that the causes, severity and effects of COVID-19 cut across multiple interconnected systems, notably environmental, health, political, social, economic and food systems, as did the responses to it. All of these systems affected each other: responses implemented to address problems in one system inevitably led to effects on others. This Intelligence Briefing uses this evidence to identify five practical steps needed to advance a global reset. First, train systems leaders. Second, employ a new cadre of ‘systems connectors’. Third, identify solutions across systems. Fourth, manage trade-offs for the long and short term. Fifth, kick-start system redesign for co-benefits. Implementing these steps will be extraordinarily challenging, especially given the short-term imperative to ‘bounce back’. But for any business, organization, government or United Nations agency serious about addressing long-term sustainability challenges, the opportunity is there to use these five practical actions to press the global reset button. Social media summary COVID-19 shows that the world needs a reset to address major global challenges. Here are five steps to get there.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.24","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46000866","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}
Kira Vinke, S. Gabrysch, E. Paoletti, J. Rockström, H. Schellnhuber
Social media summary Lessons from the corona crisis can help manage the even more daunting challenge of anthropogenic global warming.
冠状病毒危机的教训可以帮助应对人为全球变暖这一更艰巨的挑战。
{"title":"Corona and the climate: a comparison of two emergencies","authors":"Kira Vinke, S. Gabrysch, E. Paoletti, J. Rockström, H. Schellnhuber","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.20","url":null,"abstract":"Social media summary Lessons from the corona crisis can help manage the even more daunting challenge of anthropogenic global warming.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.20","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57570438","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}
Non-technical summary There is a call to change societies to become more sustainable. We examine how the concept of sustainability transformation has been used and find that it has been defined in many ways. The concept is still used without many real-world examples – we found only four studies that had assessed whether a multi-sectoral sustainability transformation had taken place. There is a need to further clarify what sustainability transformation means and how it can be assessed. Technical summary A transformation towards sustainability is increasingly called for as a future vision for society, and simultaneously this has grown in importance as a research topic. We undertook a systematic literature review of multi-sectoral sustainability transformation studies to see whether researchers assess sustainability transformations empirically and how they do so. Unsurprisingly, there are many definitions of sustainability transformation, as well as many scales on which it has been studied. The concept was often used only as a metaphor without empirical grounding, and the process of the transformation towards the intended end result – sustainability – was seldom defined. These findings are also supported by previous research. We found only four empirical cases that assessed whether a sustainability transformation had taken place, and an additional 12 articles that had partially assessed for a fundamental transformation. Multiple methods to assess transformation were used, as well as various approaches to account for temporal dynamics of change and spatial focuses. It appears that, despite the increasing rhetoric for multi-sectoral sustainability transformations, this concept has not yet sparked wide efforts by academics to assess them empirically. These findings demonstrate the need to advance the debate regarding the methods for capturing these complex social phenomena. Social media summary A review of sustainability transformations shows the challenges of assessing change and the need to focus on methods.
{"title":"How to assess sustainability transformations: a review","authors":"A. Salomaa, S. Juhola","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.17","url":null,"abstract":"Non-technical summary There is a call to change societies to become more sustainable. We examine how the concept of sustainability transformation has been used and find that it has been defined in many ways. The concept is still used without many real-world examples – we found only four studies that had assessed whether a multi-sectoral sustainability transformation had taken place. There is a need to further clarify what sustainability transformation means and how it can be assessed. Technical summary A transformation towards sustainability is increasingly called for as a future vision for society, and simultaneously this has grown in importance as a research topic. We undertook a systematic literature review of multi-sectoral sustainability transformation studies to see whether researchers assess sustainability transformations empirically and how they do so. Unsurprisingly, there are many definitions of sustainability transformation, as well as many scales on which it has been studied. The concept was often used only as a metaphor without empirical grounding, and the process of the transformation towards the intended end result – sustainability – was seldom defined. These findings are also supported by previous research. We found only four empirical cases that assessed whether a sustainability transformation had taken place, and an additional 12 articles that had partially assessed for a fundamental transformation. Multiple methods to assess transformation were used, as well as various approaches to account for temporal dynamics of change and spatial focuses. It appears that, despite the increasing rhetoric for multi-sectoral sustainability transformations, this concept has not yet sparked wide efforts by academics to assess them empirically. These findings demonstrate the need to advance the debate regarding the methods for capturing these complex social phenomena. Social media summary A review of sustainability transformations shows the challenges of assessing change and the need to focus on methods.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.17","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42389323","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}
J. Pretty, S. Attwood, R. Bawden, Henk van den Berg, Z. Bharucha, J. Dixon, Cornelia Butler Flora, K. Gallagher, K. Genskow, Sue E. Hartley, J. Ketelaar, J. Kiara, Vijay Kumar, Yuelai Lu, T. Macmillan, A. Maréchal, Alma Linda Morales-Abubakar, A. Noble, P. V. Vara Prasad, E. Rametsteiner, J. Reganold, Jacob I. Ricks, J. Rockström, O. Saito, P. Thorne, Songliang Wang, Hannah Wittman, M. Winter, Puyun Yang
Non-technical summary Until the past half-century, all agriculture and land management was framed by local institutions strong in social capital. But neoliberal forms of development came to undermine existing structures, thus reducing sustainability and equity. The past 20 years, though, have seen the deliberate establishment of more than 8 million new social groups across the world. This restructuring and growth of rural social capital within specific territories is leading to increased productivity of agricultural and land management systems, with particular benefits for those previously excluded. Further growth would occur with more national and regional policy support. Technical summary For agriculture and land management to improve natural capital over whole landscapes, social cooperation has long been required. The political economy of the later twentieth and early twenty-first centuries prioritized unfettered individual action over the collective, and many rural institutions were harmed or destroyed. Since then, a wide range of social movements, networks and federations have emerged to support transitions towards sustainability and equity. Here, we focus on social capital manifested as intentionally formed collaborative groups within specific geographic territories. These groups focus on: (1) integrated pest management; (2) forests; (3) land; (4) water; (5) pastures; (6) support services; (7) innovation platforms; and (8) small-scale systems. We show across 122 initiatives in 55 countries that the number of groups has grown from 0.50 million (in 2000) to 8.54 million (in 2020). The area of land transformed by the 170–255 million group members is 300 Mha, mostly in less-developed countries (98% groups; 94% area). Farmers and land managers working with scientists and extensionists in these groups have improved both environmental outcomes and agricultural productivity. In some cases, changes to national or regional policy supported this growth in groups. Together with other movements, these social groups could now support further transitions towards policies and behaviours for global sustainability. Social media summary Millions of geographically based new social groups are leading to more sustainable agriculture and forestry worldwide.
{"title":"Assessment of the growth in social groups for sustainable agriculture and land management","authors":"J. Pretty, S. Attwood, R. Bawden, Henk van den Berg, Z. Bharucha, J. Dixon, Cornelia Butler Flora, K. Gallagher, K. Genskow, Sue E. Hartley, J. Ketelaar, J. Kiara, Vijay Kumar, Yuelai Lu, T. Macmillan, A. Maréchal, Alma Linda Morales-Abubakar, A. Noble, P. V. Vara Prasad, E. Rametsteiner, J. Reganold, Jacob I. Ricks, J. Rockström, O. Saito, P. Thorne, Songliang Wang, Hannah Wittman, M. Winter, Puyun Yang","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.19","url":null,"abstract":"Non-technical summary Until the past half-century, all agriculture and land management was framed by local institutions strong in social capital. But neoliberal forms of development came to undermine existing structures, thus reducing sustainability and equity. The past 20 years, though, have seen the deliberate establishment of more than 8 million new social groups across the world. This restructuring and growth of rural social capital within specific territories is leading to increased productivity of agricultural and land management systems, with particular benefits for those previously excluded. Further growth would occur with more national and regional policy support. Technical summary For agriculture and land management to improve natural capital over whole landscapes, social cooperation has long been required. The political economy of the later twentieth and early twenty-first centuries prioritized unfettered individual action over the collective, and many rural institutions were harmed or destroyed. Since then, a wide range of social movements, networks and federations have emerged to support transitions towards sustainability and equity. Here, we focus on social capital manifested as intentionally formed collaborative groups within specific geographic territories. These groups focus on: (1) integrated pest management; (2) forests; (3) land; (4) water; (5) pastures; (6) support services; (7) innovation platforms; and (8) small-scale systems. We show across 122 initiatives in 55 countries that the number of groups has grown from 0.50 million (in 2000) to 8.54 million (in 2020). The area of land transformed by the 170–255 million group members is 300 Mha, mostly in less-developed countries (98% groups; 94% area). Farmers and land managers working with scientists and extensionists in these groups have improved both environmental outcomes and agricultural productivity. In some cases, changes to national or regional policy supported this growth in groups. Together with other movements, these social groups could now support further transitions towards policies and behaviours for global sustainability. Social media summary Millions of geographically based new social groups are leading to more sustainable agriculture and forestry worldwide.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.19","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44052732","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}
A. Ortiz, Alaya M. de Leon, J. Torres, C. Guiao, Antonio G. M. La Viña
2020 was to be a landmark year for setting targets to stop biodiversity loss and prevent dangerous climate change. However, COVID-19 has caused delays to the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and the 26th COP of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Negotiations on the Global Biodiversity Framework and the second submission of Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement were due to take place at these COPs. There is uncertainty as to how the COVID-19 disruption will affect the negotiations, whether parties will pursue more ambitious actions or take a weaker stance on issues. Our policy analysis shows there are broad opportunities for climate and biodiversity frameworks to better respond to COVID-19, by viewing future pandemics, biodiversity loss, and climate change as interconnected problems. Importantly, there needs to be greater focus on agriculture and food systems in discussions, establishing safeguards for carbon markets, and implementing nature-based solutions in meeting the Paris Agreement goals. We can no longer delay action to address the biodiversity and climate emergencies, and accelerating sustainable recovery plans through virtual spaces may help keep discussions and momentum before the resumption of in-person negotiations. Non-technical summary: High ambition needed at UN biodiversity and climate conferences to address pandemics, biodiversity, climate change, and health.
{"title":"Implications of COVID-19 on progress in the UN Conventions on biodiversity and climate change","authors":"A. Ortiz, Alaya M. de Leon, J. Torres, C. Guiao, Antonio G. M. La Viña","doi":"10.1017/sus.2021.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2021.8","url":null,"abstract":"2020 was to be a landmark year for setting targets to stop biodiversity loss and prevent dangerous climate change. However, COVID-19 has caused delays to the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and the 26th COP of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Negotiations on the Global Biodiversity Framework and the second submission of Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement were due to take place at these COPs. There is uncertainty as to how the COVID-19 disruption will affect the negotiations, whether parties will pursue more ambitious actions or take a weaker stance on issues. Our policy analysis shows there are broad opportunities for climate and biodiversity frameworks to better respond to COVID-19, by viewing future pandemics, biodiversity loss, and climate change as interconnected problems. Importantly, there needs to be greater focus on agriculture and food systems in discussions, establishing safeguards for carbon markets, and implementing nature-based solutions in meeting the Paris Agreement goals. We can no longer delay action to address the biodiversity and climate emergencies, and accelerating sustainable recovery plans through virtual spaces may help keep discussions and momentum before the resumption of in-person negotiations. Non-technical summary: High ambition needed at UN biodiversity and climate conferences to address pandemics, biodiversity, climate change, and health.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":"155 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2021.8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41274634","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：