Suchergebnisse

The 2015 Paris Agreement is falling short of its aspirations, as signatory countries are struggling to implement the policies required to meet the targets. The global scenario framework formed by the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) places little emphasis on the dynamics of climate policy implementation. Social science approaches to understanding these dynamics are not well-integrated into climate scenario research. We apply an implementation research approach to analyse the transition to clean energy in the US and China, as well as two examples from Europe – Germany and Spain – which have shown markedly diverging implementation trajectories. We propose four implementation scenarios (ISs) for clean energy worldwide which relate to different configurations of actors in the policy system. These are: (1) Civil Society Takes Control (IS1) – where ideologically opposed governments are marginalised by citizens and forward-thinking investors; (2) Strong-arm Transition (IS2) – where a single party state drives the transition without the involvement of civil society; (3) Systemic Limits (IS3) – which highlights the need to focus on the whole energy system, not just renewables; and (4) Renewable Austerity (IS4) – where an economic downturn offers powerful anti-transition actors the opportunity to advocate removal of support for climate mitigation, as they did after the 2007–2008 financial crisis. This scenario could be repeated as countries seek to recover from the Covid-19 pandemic. Our study offers a framework for structured analysis of real-world constraints faced by implementing actors, which we argue is urgently needed to help national and international policy makers achieve climate goals.

Citizen-driven Renewable Energy (RE) projects of various kinds, known collectively as community energy (CE), have an important part to play in the worldwide transition to cleaner energy systems. On the basis of evidence from 8 European countries, we investigate CE, over approximately the last 50 years (c.1970–2018), through the lens of Social Innovation (SI). We carry out a detailed review of literature around the social dimension of renewable energy; we collect, describe and map CE initiatives from Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and the UK; and we unpack the SI concept into 4 operational criteria which we suggest are essential to recognizing SI in CE. These are: (1) Crises and opportunities; (2) the agency of civil society; (3) reconfiguration of social practices, institutions and networks; (4) new ways of working. We identify three main phases of SI in CE. The environmental movements of the 1960s and the "oil shocks" of the 1970s provided the catalyst for a series of innovative societal responses around energy and self-sufficiency. A second wave of SI relates to the mainstreaming of RE and associated government support mechanisms. In this phase, with some important exceptions, successful CE initiatives were mainly confined to those countries where they were already embedded as innovators in the previous phase. The third phase of CE innovation relates to the societal response to the Great Recession that began in 2008 and lasted most of the subsequent decade. CE initiatives formed around this time were also strongly focused around democratization of energy and citizen empowerment in the context of rising energy prices, a weak economy, and a production and supply system dominated by excessively powerful multinational energy firms. CE initiatives today are more diverse than at any time previously, and are likely to continue to act as incubators for pioneering initiatives addressing virtually all aspects of energy. However, large multinational energy firms remain the dominant vehicle for delivery of the energy transition, and the apparent excitement in European policy circles for "community energy" does not extend to democratization of energy or genuine empowerment of citizens.

Biobanks can have a pivotal role in elucidating disease etiology, translation, and advancing public health. However, meeting these challenges hinges on a critical shift in the way science is conducted and requires biobank harmonization. There is growing recognition that a common strategy is imperative to develop biobanking globally and effectively. To help guide this strategy, we articulate key principles, goals, and priorities underpinning a roadmap for global biobanking to accelerate health science, patient care, and public health. The need to manage and share very large amounts of data has driven innovations on many fronts. Although technological solutions are allowing biobanks to reach new levels of integration, increasingly powerful data-collection tools, analytical techniques, and the results they generate raise new ethical and legal issues and challenges, necessitating a reconsideration of previous policies, practices, and ethical norms. These manifold advances and the investments that support them are also fueling opportunities for biobanks to ultimately become integral parts of health-care systems in many countries. International harmonization to increase interoperability and sustainability are two strategic priorities for biobanking. Tackling these issues requires an environment favorably inclined toward scientific funding and equipped to address socio-ethical challenges. Cooperation and collaboration must extend beyond systems to enable the exchange of data and samples to strategic alliances between many organizations, including governmental bodies, funding agencies, public and private science enterprises, and other stakeholders, including patients. A common vision is required and we articulate the essential basis of such a vision herein. ; Jennifer R Harris . Lyle J Palmer . et al.