| 1. |
- Biermann, Frank, et al.
(författare)
-
Earth system governance: a research framework
- 2010
-
Ingår i: International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1573-1553 .- 1567-9764. ; 10:4, s. 277-298
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Earth System Science Partnership, which unites all major global change research programmes, declared in 2001 an urgent need to develop "strategies for Earth System management". Yet what such strategies might be, how they could be developed, and how effective, efficient and equitable such strategies would be, remains unspecified. It is apparent that the institutions, organizations and mechanisms by which humans currently govern their relationship with the natural environment and global biochemical systems are not only insufficient-they are also poorly understood. This article presents the science programme of the Earth System Governance Project, a new 10-year global research effort endorsed by the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP). It outlines the concept of earth system governance as a challenge for the social sciences, and it elaborates on the interlinked analytical problems and research questions of earth system governance as an object of study. These analytical problems concern the overall architecture of earth system governance, agency beyond the state and of the state, the adaptiveness of governance mechanisms and processes as well as their accountability and legitimacy, and modes of allocation and access in earth system governance. The article also outlines four crosscutting research themes that are crucial for the study of each analytical problem as well as for the integrated understanding of earth system governance: the role of power, knowledge, norms and scale.
|
|
| 2. |
- Biermann, F., et al.
(författare)
-
The Earth System Governance Project as a network organization : a critical assessment after ten years
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. - : Elsevier BV. - 1877-3435 .- 1877-3443. ; 39, s. 17-23
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The social sciences have engaged since the late 1980s in international collaborative programmes to study questions of sustainability and global change. This article offers an in-depth analysis of the largest long-standing social-science network in this field: the Earth System Governance Project. Originating as a core project of the former International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, the Earth System Governance Project has matured into a global, self-sustaining research network, with annual conferences, numerous taskforces, research centers, regional research fellow meetings, three book series, an open access flagship journal, and a lively presence in social media. The article critically reviews the experiences of the Earth System Governance network and its integration and interactions with other programmes over the last decade.
|
|
| 3. |
- Biermann, Frank, et al.
(författare)
-
Transforming governance and institutions for global sustainability : key insights from the Earth System Governance Project
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. - : Elsevier BV. - 1877-3435 .- 1877-3443. ; 4:1, s. 51-60
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The current institutional framework for sustainable development is by far not strong enough to bring about the swift transformative progress that is needed. This article contends that incrementalism-the main approach since the 1972 Stockholm Conference-will not suffice to bring about societal change at the level and speed needed to mitigate and adapt to earth system transformation. Instead, the article argues that transformative structural change in global governance is needed, and that the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro must turn into a major stepping stone for a much stronger institutional framework for sustainable development. The article details core areas where urgent action is required. The article is based on an extensive social science assessment conducted by 32 members of the lead faculty, scientific steering committee, and other affiliates of the Earth System Governance Project. This Project is a ten-year research initiative under the auspices of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP), which is sponsored by the International Council for Science (ICSU), the International Social Science Council (ISSC), and the United Nations University (UNU).
|
|
| 4. |
- Griggs, David, et al.
(författare)
-
An integrated framework for sustainable development goals
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Ecology and Society. - 1708-3087. ; 19:4, s. 49-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The United Nations (UN) Rio+20 summit committed nations to develop a set of universal sustainable development goals (SDGs) to build on the millennium development goals (MDGs) set to expire in 2015. Research now indicates that humanity's impact on Earth's life support system is so great that further global environmental change risks undermining long-term prosperity and poverty eradication goals. Socioeconomic development and global sustainability are often posed as being in conflict because of tradeoffs between a growing world population, as well as higher standards of living, and managing the effects of production and consumption on the global environment. We have established a framework for an evidence-based architecture for new goals and targets. Building on six SDGs, which integrate development and environmental considerations, we developed a comprehensive framework of goals and associated targets, which demonstrate that it is possible, and necessary, to develop integrated targets relating to food, energy, water, and ecosystem services goals; thus providing a neutral evidence-based approach to support SDG target discussions. Global analyses, using an integrated global target equation, are close to providing indicators for these targets. Alongside development-only targets and environment-only targets, these integrated targets would ensure that synergies are maximized and trade-offs are managed in the implementation of SDGs.
|
|
| 5. |
- Gupta, Joyeeta, et al.
(författare)
-
Earth system justice needed to identify and live within Earth system boundaries
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Nature Sustainability. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2398-9629. ; 6:6, s. 630-638
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Living within planetary limits requires attention to justice as biophysical boundaries are not inherently just. Through collaboration between natural and social scientists, the Earth Commission defines and operationalizes Earth system justice to ensure that boundaries reduce harm, increase well-being, and reflect substantive and procedural justice. Such stringent boundaries may also affect ‘just access’ to food, water, energy and infrastructure. We show how boundaries may need to be adjusted to reduce harm and increase access, and challenge inequality to ensure a safe and just future for people, other species and the planet. Earth system justice may enable living justly within boundaries.
|
|
| 6. |
- Kanie, Norichika, et al.
(författare)
-
A Charter Moment: Restructuring Governance for Sustainability
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Public Administration and Development. - : Wiley. - 1099-162X .- 0271-2075. ; 32:3, s. 292-304
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We are living in a highly dynamic, human-dominated Earth System in which non-linear, abrupt and irreversible changes are not only possible but also probable. These changes require institutional structures capable of steering human society away from critical tipping points and irreversible change and ensuring sustainable livelihoods for all. We see 2012 as a charter moment, a historic opportunity to transform the institutional framework for sustainable development (IFSD) to better address the critical issues and political dynamics in the 21st century. In this paper, we present The Hakone Vision on Governance for Sustainability in the 21st Century, which calls for a fundamental restructuring of the IFSD that (i) clearly articulates the aspirations of governance for sustainability including objectives and underlying values and norms, (ii) allows for meaningful and accountable participation by a wide range of actors to develop solutions from people for people and (iii) creates an architecture to include better configuration of actors, actor groups and their networks, as well as improved institutions and decision-making mechanisms. We situate the Hakone Vision in the context of discussions of the IFSD and discuss our process for developing the Hakone Vision through a series of world cafe discussions involving academic experts on global environmental governance and policy practitioners working at the local, national and global level. With our assessment of the IFSD and the challenges we face, we suggest that proposals for a Sustainable Development Council in the United Nations warrant further consideration, among others. Copyright (C) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Rockström, Johan, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying a Safe and Just Corridor for People and the Planet
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Earth's Future. - 2328-4277. ; 9:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Keeping the Earth system in a stable and resilient state, to safeguard Earth's life support systems while ensuring that Earth's benefits, risks, and related responsibilities are equitably shared, constitutes the grand challenge for human development in the Anthropocene. Here, we describe a framework that the recently formed Earth Commission will use to define and quantify target ranges for a safe and just corridor that meets these goals. Although safe and just Earth system targets are interrelated, we see safe as primarily referring to a stable Earth system and just targets as being associated with meeting human needs and reducing exposure to risks. To align safe and just dimensions, we propose to address the equity dimensions of each safe target for Earth system regulating systems and processes. The more stringent of the safe or just target ranges then defines the corridor. Identifying levers of social transformation aimed at meeting the safe and just targets and challenges associated with translating the corridor to actors at multiple scales present scope for future work.
|
|
| 9. |
- Stafford-Smith, Mark, et al.
(författare)
-
Integration : the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Sustainability Science. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1862-4065 .- 1862-4057. ; 12:6, s. 911-919
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- On 25 September, 2015, world leaders met at the United Nations in New York, where they adopted the Sustainable Development Goals. These 17 goals and 169 targets set out an agenda for sustainable development for all nations that embraces economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental protection. Now, the agenda moves from agreeing the goals to implementing and ultimately achieving them. Across the goals, 42 targets focus on means of implementation, and the final goal, Goal 17, is entirely devoted to means of implementation. However, these implementation targets are largely silent about interlinkages and interdependencies among goals. This leaves open the possibility of perverse outcomes and unrealised synergies. We demonstrate that there must be greater attention on interlinkages in three areas: across sectors (e.g., finance, agriculture, energy, and transport), across societal actors (local authorities, government agencies, private sector, and civil society), and between and among low, medium and high income countries. Drawing on a global sustainability science and practice perspective, we provide seven recommendations to improve these interlinkages at both global and national levels, in relation to the UN's categories of means of implementation: finance, technology, capacity building, trade, policy coherence, partnerships, and, finally, data, monitoring and accountability.
|
|
