Suchergebnisse

Arnim Scheidel ; Zsfassug in engl. Sprache ; Klagenfurt, Alpen-Adria-Univ., Master-Arb., 2009 ; KB2009 28 ; (VLID)2413976

Forest recovery is central for addressing major sustainability challenges such as climate change and biodiversity loss. While positive assessments prevail over the global ecological forest restoration potential, critical research highlights limited potentials and even detrimental local impacts, particularly in the Global South. Here we argue that knowledge integration across land system science (LSS) and political ecology (PE) can contribute to addressing this contradiction and advance knowledge about ecologically sustainable and socially just forest recovery. We identify five key areas where knowledge integration is promising: (1) developing multi-dimensional forest definitions, (2) linking forest land to users and interests, (3) identifying reforestation failures and successes, (4) associating drivers and impacts across places and scales, and (5) including justice dimensions in assessments of socio-ecological forest recovery potentials. For each knowledge area, we review key contributions by LSS and PE, and outline future research directions to address ecologically sustainable and socially just forest recovery.

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu CEX2019-000940-M ; Forest recovery is central for addressing major sustainability challenges, such as climate change and biodiversity loss. While positive assessments prevail over the global ecological forest restoration potential, critical research highlights limited potentials and even detrimental local impacts, particularly in the Global South. Here, we argue that knowledge integration across land system science (LSS) and political ecology (PE) can contribute to addressing this contradiction and advance knowledge about ecologically sustainable and socially just forest recovery. We identify five key areas where knowledge integration is promising: (1) developing multidimensional forest definitions, (2) linking forest land to users and interests, (3) identifying reforestation failures and successes, (4) associating drivers and impacts across places and scales, and (5) including justice dimensions in assessments of socio-ecological forest recovery potentials. For each knowledge area, we review key contributions by LSS and PE, and outline future research directions to address ecologically sustainable and socially just forest recovery.

Cambodia is currently experiencing profound processes of rural change, driven by an emerging trend of large-scale land deals. This article discusses potential future pathways by analyzing two contrasting visions and realities of land use: the aim of the governmental elites to foster surplus-producing rural areas for overall economic growth, employment creation and ultimately poverty reduction, and the attempts of smallholders to maintain and create livelihoods based on largely self-sufficient rural systems. Based on the MuSIASEM approach, the rural economy of Cambodia and different rural system types are analyzed by looking at their metabolic pattern in terms of land use, human activity, and produced and consumed flows. The analysis shows that the pathways of self-sufficiency and surplus production are largely not compatible in the long term. Cambodia's rural labor force is expected to increase enormously over the next decades, while available land for the smallholder sector has become scarce due to the granting of Economic Land Concessions (ELC). Consequently, acceleration in rural-urban migration may be expected, accompanied by a transition from self-employed smallholders to employment-dependent laborers. If the ELC system achieves to turn the reserved land into viable agribusinesses, it might enable added value creation; however, it does not bring substantial amounts of employment opportunities to rural areas. On the contrary, ELC have high opportunity costs in terms of rural livelihoods based on smallholder land uses and thus drive the marginalization of Cambodian smallholders.

Based on research into multiple types of climate change mitigation and adaptation (CCMA) projects and policies in Cambodia, this paper documents intersecting social and environmental conflicts that bear striking resemblance to well-documented issues in the history of development projects. Using data from three case studies, we highlight the ways that industrial development and CCMA initiatives are intertwined in both policy and project creation, and how this confluence is creating potentials for maladaptive outcomes. Each case study involves partnerships between international institutions and the national government, each deploys CCMA as either a primary or supporting legitimation, and each failed to adhere to institutional and/or internationally recognized standards of justice. In Cambodia, mismanaged projects are typically blamed on the kleptocratic and patrimonial governance system. We show how such blame obscures the collusion of international partners, who also sidestep their own safeguards, and ignores the potential for maladaptation at the project level and the adverse social and environmental impacts of the policies themselves. Key policy insights Initiatives to mitigate or adapt to climate change look very much like the development projects that caused climate change: Extreme caution must be exercised to ensure policies and projects do not exacerbate the conditions driving climate change. Safeguards 'on paper' are insufficient to avoid negative impacts and strict accountability mechanisms must be put in place. Academic researchers can be part of that accountability mechanism through case study reports, policy briefs, technical facilitation to help ensure community needs are met and safeguards are executed as written. Impacts beyond the project scale must be assessed to avoid negative consequences for social and ecological systems at the landscape level.

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552 ; Centre: ICTA Digital object identifier for the 'European Research Council' (http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000781) Digital object identifier for 'Horizon 2020' (http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007601). ; Can ecological distribution conflicts turn into forces for sustainability? This overview paper addresses in a systematic conceptual manner the question of why, through whom, how, and when conflicts over the use of the environment may take an active role in shaping transitions toward sustainability. It presents a conceptual framework that schematically maps out the linkages between (a) patterns of (unsustainable) social metabolism, (b) the emergence of ecological distribution conflicts, (c) the rise of environmental justice movements, and (d) their potential contributions for sustainability transitions. The ways how these four processes can influence each other are multi-faceted and often not a foretold story. Yet, ecological distribution conflicts can have an important role for sustainability, because they relentlessly bring to light conflicting values over the environment as well as unsustainable resource uses affecting people and the planet. Environmental justice movements, born out of such conflicts, become key actors in politicizing such unsustainable resource uses, but moreover, they take sometimes also radical actions to stop them. By drawing on creative forms of mobilizations and diverse repertoires of action to effectively reduce unsustainabilities, they can turn from 'victims' of environmental injustices into 'warriors' for sustainability. But when will improvements in sustainability be lasting? By looking at the overall dynamics between the four processes, we aim to foster a more systematic understanding of the dynamics and roles of ecological distribution conflicts within sustainability processes.

Can ecological distribution conflicts turn into forces for sustainability? This overview paper addresses in a systematic conceptual manner the question of why, through whom, how, and when conflicts over the use of the environment may take an active role in shaping transitions toward sustainability. It presents a conceptual framework that schematically maps out the linkages between (a) patterns of (unsustainable) social metabolism, (b) the emergence of ecological distribution conflicts, (c) the rise of environmental justice movements, and (d) their potential contributions for sustainability transitions. The ways how these four processes can influence each other are multi-faceted and often not a foretold story. Yet, ecological distribution conflicts can have an important role for sustainability, because they relentlessly bring to light conflicting values over the environment as well as unsustainable resource uses affecting people and the planet. Environmental justice movements, born out of such conflicts, become key actors in politicizing such unsustainable resource uses, but moreover, they take sometimes also radical actions to stop them. By drawing on creative forms of mobilizations and diverse repertoires of action to effectively reduce unsustainabilities, they can turn from 'victims' of environmental injustices into 'warriors' for sustainability. But when will improvements in sustainability be lasting? By looking at the overall dynamics between the four processes, we aim to foster a more systematic understanding of the dynamics and roles of ecological distribution conflicts within sustainability processes.

Altres ajuts: Acord transformatiu CRUE-CSIC ; The project that gave rise to these results received the support of a fellowship from the 'La Caixa' Foundation (ID 100010434). ; Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu CEX2019-000940-M ; Despite renewed efforts to combat climate change, it remains uncertain how economies will achieve emission reduction by 2050. Among different decarbonisation strategies, knowledge about the potential role and contributions of social movements to curbing carbon emissions has been limited. This study aims to shed light on the diverse contributions of social movements to staying within the global carbon budget, as well as on the specific outcomes and strategies employed in protests against hydrocarbon activities. For this purpose, we conduct a systematic literature review of 57 empirical cases of social movements contesting fossil fuel projects in 29 countries. Based on an exploratory approach, we identify a series of different movement strategies and a range of qualitative contributions that support staying within the carbon budget. These include raising awareness of risks and strategies, enhancing corporate responsibility, being informed about policy changes, laws and regulations, fostering just energy transitions, energy democracy, divestment, alternative market solutions, and forcing the postponement or cancellation of targeted hydrocarbon activities. While the institutional means are widely used and seem to support policy change and regulation, these strategies are not used to deliver awareness or postponement outcomes. Similarly, while movements tend to rely on civil disobedience to stop hydrocarbon projects in the short term, they rely on multiple strategies to cancel them in the longer term. Our study also indicates significant knowledge gaps in the literature, particularly, cases in Africa and Central Asia, women's participation in these movements, in addition to more quantitative assessments of the actual emissions reduced by social movements.

Despite renewed efforts to combat climate change, it remains uncertain how economies will achieve emission reduction by 2050. Among different decarbonisation strategies, knowledge about the potential role and contributions of social movements to curbing carbon emissions has been limited. This study aims to shed light on the diverse contributions of social movements to staying within the global carbon budget, as well as on the specific outcomes and strategies employed in protests against hydrocarbon activities. For this purpose, we conduct a systematic literature review of 57 empirical cases of social movements contesting fossil fuel projects in 29 countries. Based on an exploratory approach, we identify a series of different movement strategies and a range of qualitative contributions that support staying within the carbon budget. These include raising awareness of risks and strategies, enhancing corporate responsibility, being informed about policy changes, laws and regulations, fostering just energy transitions, energy democracy, divestment, alternative market solutions, and forcing the postponement or cancellation of targeted hydrocarbon activities. While the institutional means are widely used and seem to support policy change and regulation, these strategies are not used to deliver awareness or postponement outcomes. Similarly, while movements tend to rely on civil disobedience to stop hydrocarbon projects in the short term, they rely on multiple strategies to cancel them in the longer term. Our study also indicates significant knowledge gaps in the literature, particularly, cases in Africa and Central Asia, women's participation in these movements, in addition to more quantitative assessments of the actual emissions reduced by social movements.

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552 ; Chinese investments in large hydropower dams have rapidly increased all over the world in the last 20 years. Some of these projects have been contested both from a technological and political point of view due to the ways in which decisions have been made, as well as in relation to the resulting social-ecological change and ecological distributional aspects. From an Environmental Justice perspective, this paper analyses the main drivers and contested aspects of Chinese hydropower investments in the global South. The paper builds on Chinese projects located in different regions of the world, by combining information from the literature and the Global Atlas of Environmental Justice - EJAtlas dataset. Based on the analysis of Chinese hydropower projects and environmental justice concerns, this paper sheds light on the current literature on drivers and multidimensional conflictive outcomes of these large hydropower dam investments.