Suchergebnisse

Inwiefern können die Sozial-, Geistes- und Naturwissenschaften in transdisziplinärer Hinsicht einen Beitrag zum Konnex von Klimawandel, Demokratie und Bildung leisten? Welche Schlüsselqualifikationen benötigen Forschende in der universitären institutionalisierten wissenschaftlichen Bildung, um Prozesse der nachhaltigen Entwicklung zu begleiten und dabei bspw. Veränderungsoffenheiten zu identifizieren, nicht gesellschaftliche Macht- und Ungleichheitsverhältnisse fortlaufend zu reproduzieren? Ausgehend von der Annahme, dass sich die Klimabewegung (auch) als Appell an die Forschung/Wissenschaft lesen lässt, einen Beitrag zu sozialem Wandel zu leisten, wird im Aufsatz die partizipative Forschung diskutiert, der wir die Möglichkeit zuschreiben, eine Neupositionierung des Menschen im Prozess der nachhaltigen Entwicklung zu begünstigen. Denn als treibende Kräfte partizipativer Forschung gelten Forderungen wie Umweltgerechtigkeit. Entlang von zwei Fallstudien wird exemplarisch skizziert, wie in angewandten partizipativen Forschungsprojekten zum Klimawandel Fragen der Umweltgerechtigkeit und damit zusammenhängend der Einkommenssicherung im Kontext der Globalisierung angegangen werden können und welche Herausforderungen sich dabei für Forschende stellen. Anschließend wird argumentiert, dass es gilt, spezifisches Wissen im Curriculum der Hochschulen zu verankern, damit (angehende) Forschende einen Beitrag zum ethischen gemeinwohlorientierten Ziel der (globalen) Klimagerechtigkeit leisten können.

Bioenergy deployment offers significant potential for climate change mitigation, but also carries considerable risks. In this review, we bring together perspectives of various communities involved in the research and regulation of bioenergy deployment in the context of climate change mitigation: Land-use and energy experts, landuse and integrated assessment modelers, human geographers, ecosystem researchers, climate scientists and two different strands of life-cycle assessment experts. We summarize technological options, outline the state-of-theart knowledge on various climate effects, provide an update on estimates of technical resource potential and comprehensively identify sustainability effects. Cellulosic feedstocks, increased end-use efficiency, improved land carbon-stock management and residue use, and, when fully developed, BECCS appear as the most promising options, depending on development costs, implementation, learning, and risk management. Combined heat and power, efficient biomass cookstoves and small-scale power generation for rural areas can help to promote energy access and sustainable development, along with reduced emissions. We estimate the sustainable technical potential as up to 100 EJ: high agreement; 100–300 EJ: medium agreement; above 300 EJ: low agreement. Stabilization scenarios indicate that bioenergy may supply from 10 to 245 EJ yr 1 to global primary energy supply by 2050. Models indicate that, if technological and governance preconditions are met, large-scale deployment (>200 EJ), together with BECCS, could help to keep global warming below 2° degrees of preindustrial levels; but such high deployment of land-intensive bioenergy feedstocks could also lead to detrimental climate effects, negatively impact ecosystems, biodiversity and livelihoods. The integration of bioenergy systems into agriculture and forest landscapes can improve land and water use efficiency and help address concerns about environmental impacts. We conclude that the high variability in pathways, uncertainties in technological development and ambiguity in political decision render forecasts on deployment levels and climate effects very difficult. However, uncertainty about projections should not preclude pursuing beneficial bioenergy options. ; publishedVersion ; © 2015. This is the authors' accepted and refereed manuscript to the article. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ DOI:10.1111/gcbb.12205

Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the participation Omar Masera, Richard Plevin, Roberto Schaeffer, Rainer Zah and Jacob Mulugetta during the literature appraisal. Carmenza Robledo-Abad acknowledges support from the Swiss State Secretary of Economic Affairs. Helmut Haberl gratefully acknowledges funding from the Austrian Provision Programme, the Austrian Academy of Sciences (Global Change Programme) and the EU-FP7 project VOLANTE. Esteve Corbera acknowledges the support of the Spanish Research, Development and Innovation Secretariat through a 'Ramón y Cajal' research fellowship (RYC-2010-07183) and of a Marie Curie Career Integration Grant (PCIG09-GA-2011-294234). Simon Bolwig acknowledges the support of the Innovation Fond Denmark. Alexander Popp acknowledges the support from the European Union's Seventh Framework Program project LUC4C (grant agreement no. 603542). Bart Muys acknowledges support from the KLIMOS Acropolis research network on sustainable development funded by VLIR/ARES/DGD (Belgian Development Aid). Rasmus Kløcker Larsen acknowledges funding from the Swedish research council Formas. Carol Hunsberger acknowledges the support of a postdoctoral fellowship from Canada's Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. John Garcia-Ulloa is supported by the Mercator Foundation Switzerland and the Zurich-Basel Plant Science Center. Johan Lilliestam, Anna Geddes and Susan Hanger acknowledge the support from the European Research Council (ERC) consolidator grant, contract number 313533. Joana Portugal-Pereira acknowledges the support of National Centre of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq), under the Science Without Borders Programme (no 401164/2012-8). Richard Harper acknowledges funding from the Australian Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF