Search

Current soil‐ and land degradation seriously challenge our societies; it contributes to climate change, loss of biodiversity and loss of agricultural productions. Yet, soils are also seen as a major part of the solution, if maintained or restored to provide ecosystem services. Climate‐smart sustainable management of soils can provide options for soil health maintenance and restoration. In the European Union, the resource management and sustainability challenge are addressed in the Green Deal that, among other goals, aspires towards a healthy climate‐resilient agricultural sector that will produce sufficient products without damaging ecosystems and contribute to better biodiversity and mitigate climate change. The European Joint Programme (EJP) SOIL was set up to contribute to these goals by developing knowledge, tools and an integrated research community to foster climate‐smart sustainable agricultural soil management that provides a diversity of ecosystem service, such as adapting to and mitigating climate change, allowing sustainable food production, and sustaining soil biodiversity. This paper provides an overview of the potential of climate‐smart sustainable soil management research to the targets of the Green Deal that are related to soils most directly. The EJP SOIL EU‐wide consultation (interviews and questionnaires) and literature analysis (national and international reports and papers) done in the first year (2020–2021) generated a wealth of data. This data showed that there are specific manners to do research that are essential for it to be effective and efficient and that can actively contribute to the Green Deal targets. We concluded that research needs to be: (i) interdisciplinary, (ii) long‐term, (iii) multi‐scaled, from plot to landscape, (iv) evaluating trade‐offs of selected management options for ecosystem services and (v) co‐constructed with key stakeholders. Research on climate‐smart sustainable soil management should be developed (1) on plot scale when mobilizing soil processes and on landscape scale when addressing sediment and water connectivity and biodiversity management; and (2) address the enabling conditions through good governance, social acceptance and viable economic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Education needs to be at the forefront of the efforts to mitigate and adapt to Climate Change (CC) effects. We have introduced the Climate Change Competence (C3) to provide a comprehensive route to include the topics of sustainability and CC into the curriculum. This paper analyses how different primary and secondary teachers can improve this competence using a Massive Online Open Course (MOOC) on the basic science of CC. While the improvement in knowledge is expected, we have observed important advances on abilities, and attitudes on CC which are also essential to teach about CC mitigation and adaptation. The present study used a pre-experimental design, with pre-and post-test measurements with a sample of 530 students. While the MOOC focuses on the Science of CC, the participants also advance in attitudes and abilities, revealing an important correlation between these three dimensions of competence. Also, the study reveals that the MOOC improves the C3 in all the participants, but it does in diverse ways for diverse groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document provides a summary of a hackathon event organized by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and Aon, a reinsurance company, to explore the social impacts of climate change. The hackathon focused on developing consistent scenarios for future climate risk, understanding uncertainties in European windstorm modeling, and providing real-time context for extreme weather events. The teams developed tools and methodologies to assess the severity and potential impact of extreme events on insured losses. The collaboration between the MoJ, Aon, and participants from various institutions aims to further research and develop papers and grant proposals in these areas. [Extracted from the article]

Promoting climate change discourses may potentially create a useful space for addressing the effects of climate change in Tanzania. During disasters such as floods, everyone obfuscates their agency and blames the other for causing climate change effects. This paper examines the discourse of climate change among scientists, government officials, and the non-scientific Tanzanian stakeholders on climate change and adaptation strategies after the 2019-2020 effects. These actors obfuscate responsibilities and attribute blame on the other for accelerating climate change effects. This paper examines how these attributions contribute to enhancing resilience and adaptation strategies. The paper was theoretically guided by the divided subject and positioning theories. Data for this paper were gathered from YouTube covering the subject. The results suggest that while none of the actors accepts responsibility for accelerating climate change; "what is happening and what should be done" gradually turn into "who is responsible for the mess". Divisive discourse like this is likely to keep Tanzania wobbling to create a resilient society to confront the challenges of climate change. The paper raises the need for the facilitation of a better communication between climate change science and the non-scientific audience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper sets out to explore to what extent integrating employment effects, equity, and risk aversion within cost–benefit analysis (CBA) affect the economic appraisal of a climate change adaptation project designed to protect against flood risk in a region of Bilbao (Basque Country, Spain). Four CBAs are conducted: (i) a standard CBA; (ii) a standard CBA considering equity; (iii) a standard CBA considering equity and employment; and (iv) a standard CBA considering equity, employment and risk aversion. All CBAs are conducted using a time frame of 2014–2080 and considering a 100-year return period under a middle of the road emission scenario (RCP4.5). A sensitivity analysis is also undertaken. Results suggest that the economic efficiency of the adaptation investment is contingent on what types of considerations are included within CBA. Integrating elements of employment, equity and risk aversion can strengthen or weaken the case for action (leading to higher or lower net-present values) and (depending on the discount rate chosen) may even be the deciding factor for determining whether a particular action should be carried out or not (whether the net-present value is positive or negative). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]