Suchergebnisse

The planetary boundaries (PBs) framework proposes global quantitative precautionary limits for human perturbation of nine critical Earth system processes. Together they define a global safe operating space for human development. Translating the global limits to the national level increases their policy relevance. Such translation essentially divides up the global safe operating space. What is considered fair distribution is a political decision and there is no globally agreed principle that can be applied. Here, we analyse the distributional consequences of alternative perspectives on distributive fairness. We scale the global limits of selected PBs to resource budgets for the EU, US, China and India, using three allocation approaches from the climate change literature. Furthermore, we compare the allocated budgets to 2010 environmental footprints of the four economies, to assess their performance with respect to the selected PBs. The allocation approaches are based on (1) current shares of global environmental pressure ('grandfathering'); (2) 'equal per capita' shares, and (3) 'ability to pay' to reduce environmental pressure. The results show that the four economies are not living within the global safe operating space. Their 2010 environmental footprints are larger than the allocated budgets for all approaches and parameterisations analysed for the PBs for climate change and biogeochemical flows, and, except for India, also for the PB for biosphere integrity. Grandfathering was found to be most favourable for the EU and US for all PBs, and ability to pay as least favourable. For climate change and biogeochemical flows, ability to pay even resulted in negative resource budgets for the two economies. In contrast, for China and India, equal per capita allocation and ability to pay were most favourable. Results were sensitive to the parameterisation. Accounting for future population growth in the equal per capita approach benefits India, with lower budgets for the EU, US and China, while accounting for future ...

The planetary boundaries framework proposes quantitative global limits to the anthropogenic perturbation of crucial Earth system processes, and thus marks out a planetary safe operating space for human activities. Yet, decisions regarding resource use and emissions are mostly made at less aggregated scales, by national and sub-national governments, businesses, and other local actors. To operationalize the planetary boundaries concept, the boundaries need to be translated into and aligned with targets that are relevant at these decision-making scales. In this paper, we develop a framework that addresses the biophysical, socio-economic, and ethical dimensions of bridging across scales, to provide a consistently applicable approach for translating the planetary boundaries into national-level fair shares of Earth's safe operating space. We discuss our findings in the context of previous studies and their implications for future analyses and policymaking. In this way, we link the planetary boundaries framework to widely-applied operational and policy concepts for more robust strong sustainability decision-making.

The planetary boundaries framework proposes quantitative global limits to the anthropogenic perturbation of crucial Earth system processes, and thus marks out a planetary safe operating space for human activities. Yet, decisions regarding resource use and emissions are mostly made at less aggregated scales, by national and sub-national governments, businesses, and other local actors. To operationalize the planetary boundaries concept, the boundaries need to be translated into and aligned with targets that are relevant at these decision-making scales. In this paper, we develop a framework that addresses the biophysical, socio-economic, and ethical dimensions of bridging across scales, to provide a consistently applicable approach for translating the planetary boundaries into national-level fair shares of Earth's safe operating space. We discuss our findings in the context of previous studies and their implications for future analyses and policymaking. In this way, we link the planetary boundaries framework to widely-applied operational and policy concepts for more robust strong sustainability decision-making.

Coastal areas are urbanizing at unprecedented rates, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Combinations of long-standing and emerging problems in these urban areas generate vulnerability for human well-being and ecosystems alike. This baseline study provides a spatially explicit global systematization of these problems into typical urban vulnerability profiles for the year 2000 using largely sub-national data. Using 11 indicator datasets for urban expansion, urban population growth, marginalization of poor populations, government effectiveness, exposures and damages to climate-related extreme events, low-lying settlement, and wetlands prevalence, a cluster analysis reveals a global typology of seven clearly distinguishable clusters, or urban profiles of vulnerability. Each profile is characterized by a specific data-value combination of indicators representing mechanisms that generate vulnerability. Using 21 studies for testing the plausibility, we identify seven key profile-based vulnerabilities for urban populations, which are relevant in the context of global urbanization, expansion, and climate change. We show which urban coasts are similar in this regard. Sensitivity and exposure to extreme climate-related events, and government effectiveness, are the most important factors for the huge asymmetries of vulnerability between profiles. Against the background of underlying global trends we propose entry points for profile-based vulnerability reduction. The study provides a baseline for further pattern analysis in the rapidly urbanizing coastal fringe as data availability increases. We propose to explore socio-ecologically similar coastal urban areas as a basis for sharing experience and vulnerability-reducing measures among them.

Coastal areas are urbanizing at unprecedented rates, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Combinations of long-standing and emerging problems in these urban areas generate vulnerability for human well-being and ecosystems alike. This baseline study provides a spatially explicit global systematization of these problems into typical urban vulnerability profiles for the year 2000 using largely sub-national data. Using 11 indicator datasets for urban expansion, urban population growth, marginalization of poor populations, government effectiveness, exposures and damages to climate-related extreme events, low-lying settlement, and wetlands prevalence, a cluster analysis reveals a global typology of seven clearly distinguishable clusters, or urban profiles of vulnerability. Each profile is characterized by a specific data-value combination of indicators representing mechanisms that generate vulnerability. Using 21 studies for testing the plausibility, we identify seven key profile-based vulnerabilities for urban populations, which are relevant in the context of global urbanization, expansion, and climate change. We show which urban coasts are similar in this regard. Sensitivity and exposure to extreme climate-related events, and government effectiveness, are the most important factors for the huge asymmetries of vulnerability between profiles. Against the background of underlying global trends we propose entry points for profile-based vulnerability reduction. The study provides a baseline for further pattern analysis in the rapidly urbanizing coastal fringe as data availability increases. We propose to explore socio-ecologically similar coastal urban areas as a basis for sharing experience and vulnerability-reducing measures among them.

In recent years, an approach based on voluntary pledges by individual regions has attracted interest of policy-makers and consequently also climate policy research. In this paper, we analyze scenarios in which the EU and China act as early-movers in international climate policy. Such a situation risks leakage between regions with ambitious emission reduction targets and those with less ambitious targets via fossil-fuel markets, displacement of heavy industry and land-use consequences. We examine some of these factors using the IMAGE model. While IMAGE does not include all mechanisms, we find the leakage rate to be relatively small, about 5% of the emission reductions in the EU and China. The far majority occurs via the energy market channel and the remainder through land-use change. Reduced oil prices due to less depletion forms the key reason for this leakage impact.

Global environmental assessments are widely considered to play a prominent role in environmental governance. However, they are also criticised for a lack of effectiveness in informing policy and decision-making. In response, GEAs have adopted a number of strategies to bolster their effectiveness, including by orienting themselves towards solutions (solution-orientation), increasing the diversity of included experts (participation), and producing more targeted assessments (contextualisation). In this article, we analyse these strategies as attempts to be effective for multiple audiences while also identifying the limitations of these strategies. Based on this analysis, we propose to conceive of GEAs as processes that are able to empower diverse actors – ranging from diplomats in international negotiations to civil society activists, or indigenous and local knowledge holders – to act towards socio-environmental objectives. Seen in this light, the effectiveness of GEAs can be improved by reflecting on which actors can benefit from assessments and how assessments can contribute to their empowerment. This strategy goes beyond current proposals that aim to strengthen the authority of assessments by boosting the scientific quality and credibility of the reports. Indeed, it complements them with an explicitly political perspective. Using examples of empowerment in different phases of GEA production and use, we argue that this reconceptualisation of effectiveness requires assessments to reflect a diversity of problem and solution frames, thereby creating entry points for the empowerment of a broad range of actors. We conclude by providing three illustrative ideas to improve effectiveness for the design and execution of assessments.

In 2012, governments worldwide renewed their commitments to a more sustainable development that would eradicate poverty, halt climate change and conserve ecosystems, and initiated a process to create a long-term vision by formulating Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Although progress in achieving a more sustainable development has been made in some areas, overall, actions have not been able to bend the trend in critical areas (including those related to the so-called food-water-energy nexus). Here, we analyze how different combinations of technological measures and behavioral changes could contribute to achieving a set of sustainability objectives, taking into account the interlinkages between them. The objectives include eradicating hunger, providing universal access to modern energy, preventing dangerous climate change, conserving biodiversity and controlling air pollution. The analysis identifies different pathways that achieve these objectives simultaneously, but they all require substantial transformations in the energy and food systems, that go far beyond historic progress and currently formulated policies. The analysis also shows synergies and trade-offs between achieving the different objectives, concluding that achieving them requires a comprehensive approach. The scenario analysis does not point at a fundamental trade-off between the objectives related to poverty eradication and those related to environmental sustainability. The different pathways of achieving the set of long-term objectives and their implications for short-term action can contribute to building a comprehensive strategy to meet the SDGs by proposing near-term actions.