Search

A recent article in this journal (Jackson 2021) validly emphasized that debates about the Anthropocene need to recognize a diverse range of perspectives, worldviews, and forms of knowledge. In doing so, however, the author mischaracterized scholarship on earth system governance as being antithetical to a critical and pluralistic stance on the Anthropocene. In this commentary we address key concerns about the article: selective and misleading quotations regarding the earth system governance literature’s diversity; unwarranted insinuations that juxtapose the implications of this literature with those of slavery and holocausts; and neglect of the breadth and diversity of scholarship on earth system governance. We underscore the need for scholarly debates on the Anthropocene to be informed by a balanced and rigorous assessment of existing scholarship, and for a constructive dialogue between global and locally situated ways of understanding the earth.

Markets for plant-based protein products are experiencing unprecedented growth. However, the extent to which the wider diffusion of plant-based protein products is beneficial to human and planetary health is still a contested issue in public discourses. The study of media frames for plant-based protein products can serve as a basis for approaches of technology assessment, which aim to inform actors involved in innovation processes of important aspects of diffusion, including controversy and unexpected risks regarding societal reactions. In this paper, we conduct a frame analysis of three U.K. broadsheet newspapers (the Telegraph, the Guardian, and the Times) between 2010–2020 to explore how media frame plant-based protein products. The results show that overall media coverage for plant-based diets has adopted a positive stance. However, there is variation in how plant-based protein products and particularly meat and dairy substitutes are portrayed. The biggest stumbling block appears to be potentially adverse health implications associated with the consumption of meat and dairy substitutes. We therefore argue that the scope of strategic choices regarding product design should also focus on the development of products more analogous to whole plant-based foods. Moreover, we argue that the long-term resilience of the plant-based protein sector will require strategies that convincingly align with policy goals for food security and broader food system sustainability.

This chapter provides an overview of the multi-faceted landscape of methods used to study the steering effects of the Sustainable Development Goals. After a discussion of the political use of science and the complex relations between science and politics, the chapter showcases a selection of different methods that are employed to trace the steering effects of the Sustainable Development Goals. Selecting the most suitable method for a particular research question requires understanding their main characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. The chapter highlights that all methods and tools need to be combined to comprehensively assess the political impact of the goals, the progress towards their achievement, and their overall transformative potential. As data gaps and unequal geographical coverage still hamper a broader understanding of the political impact of the globalgoals, we need to build bridges across language communities, disciplines and methodological camps, which still work very much in isolation.

Private philanthropic foundations—nongovernmental, nonprofit organizations with assets provided by donors for socially useful purposes—have become key political actors in global sustainability governance. Their collective efforts amount to over USD 112 billion for the implementation of the United Nations (UNs)’s ambitious plan to deliver on seventeen interconnected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This corresponds to about a quarter of governmental contribution through official development assistance for the same purposes. Many of these foundations implicitly or explicitly aim to foster global justice, through, for example, empowering women, reducing inequalities, and promoting democracy. They thus act as justice agents shaping the substance and practice of justice in global sustainability governance. But what does this direction of private money into supporting global justice norms really mean? This question deserves scrutiny, especially against a context of diverse and contested meanings of justice and because philanthropy—beyond an act of giving—is often an exercise of power. Using critical discourse analysis of texts produced by selected foundations that are key funders of the UN Sustainable Development Agenda, this paper examines how private foundations frame global justice and with what implications for sustainability governance. Les fondations philanthropiques privées - organisations non gouvernementales à but non lucratif dont les actifs sont fournis par des donateurs à des fins d'utilité sociale - sont devenues des acteurs politiques clés de la gouvernance mondiale de la durabilité. Leurs efforts collectifs s’élèvent à plus de 112 milliards de dollars pour la mise en œuvre du plan ambitieux de l'ONU visant à atteindre dix-sept objectifs de développement durable (ODD) interconnectés. Cela correspond à environ un quart des contributions gouvernementales apportées par le biais de l'aide publique au développement aux mêmes fins. Nombre de ces fondations visent implicitement ou explicitement à favoriser la justice mondiale, par exemple en renforçant l'autonomie des femmes, en réduisant les inégalités et en promouvant la démocratie. Elles agissent ainsi en tant qu'agents de justice façonnant la substance et la pratique de la justice dans la gouvernance mondiale de la durabilité. Mais que signifie réellement cette orientation de l'argent privé vers le soutien des normes de justice mondiale? Cette question mérite un examen approfondi, en particulier dans le contexte de significations diverses et contestées de la justice et parce que la philanthropie - au-delà de l'acte de don - est souvent un exercice du pouvoir. Cet article s'appuie sur une analyse critique du discours des textes produits par une sélection de fondations qui sont des participantes clés au financement du Programme de développement durable de l'ONU et examine la manière dont les fondations privées définissent la justice mondiale et ce que cela implique pour la gouvernance de la durabilité. Las fundaciones filantrópicas privadas (organizaciones no gubernamentales y sin fines de lucro que utilizan los activos que les proporcionan sus contribuyentes con propósitos útiles para la sociedad) se han convertido en actores políticos claves en la gestión de la sostenibilidad global. Sus esfuerzos colectivos equivalen a USD 112 000 millones aproximadamente para la implementación del ambicioso plan de la ONU que plantea cumplir con 17 Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) interconectados. Esto equivale a alrededor de un cuarto de la contribución gubernamental a través de la Ayuda Oficial al Desarrollo para los mismos propósitos. Muchas de estas fundaciones tienen como objetivo implícito o explícito promover la justicia global a través de, por ejemplo, el empoderamiento de las mujeres, la reducción de las desigualdades y el fomento de la democracia. Por lo tanto, actúan como agentes de justicia que configuran el fundamento y la práctica de la justicia en la gestión de la sostenibilidad global. Sin embargo, ¿cuál es el significado real del uso del dinero privado en el apoyo de las normas de justicia global? Esta pregunta debe analizarse especialmente en un contexto de significados diversos y cuestionados sobre la justicia y teniendo en cuenta que la filantropía, más allá de ser un acto caritativo, suele representar un ejercicio del poder. Mediante el análisis crítico del discurso de textos producidos por fundaciones seleccionadas que financian la Agenda sobre el Desarrollo Sostenible de la ONU, este documento analizará cómo las fundaciones privadas construyen la justicia global y cuáles son las implicaciones para la gestión de la sostenibilidad.

In global sustainability governance, many actors have emphasised the need for policy integration across the economic, social, and environmental dimensions. In 2015, the United Nations agreed on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to advance such integration. But have international organisations responded to this call, and can we observe any integrative effect of the SDGs? We draw on International Relations theories that incorporate change in their analysis and develop an analytical framework to assess change through the lenses of ideas, norms, and institutions. We use this framework to assess sustainability-oriented change in the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The ILO is traditionally an organisation with a primarily socio-economic mandate and hence an ideal case to study whether the SDGs had any impact after 2015 in strengthening the environmental dimension of sustainability in the ILO’s institutional settings and policy development. We focus on the 2010–2019 period and conduct a systematic qualitative content analysis of primary documentary sources, complemented with expert interviews and data on operational developments. The paper concludes that there is a significant yet instrumental greening trend in the ILO’s approach to sustainable development, but also a bidirectional influence between the ILO and the SDGs.

Food is essential to human life, yet the current food system is threatening the environment by significantly contributing to climate change and a range of other impacts, including biodiversity loss, terrestrial ecosystem destruction, freshwater consumption, and water pollution. The sustainability of meat and dairy production has become an important concern because of the negative environmental impact of livestock agriculture. Moreover, while meat is an important component of the human diet, scientific studies show adverse health impacts for individuals with high intakes of red processed meat. Taking the environmental and health implications of livestock agriculture and meat consumption into consideration, the importance of diets in determining food system sustainability is paramount. The shaping of dietary consumption patterns has been intertwined with the evolution of the food-processing sector. At the same time, food choices are shaped by societal aspirations, responses to new identities and preferences, and the expression of cultural meaning. Therefore, a change of dietary consumption patterns towards sustainability requires a sustainability transition, radical interlinked shifts in technologies, infrastructures, organizations, markets, regulations, and behavior. This thesis builds on sustainability transitions literature to advance the conceptualization of transition dynamics in the food system by developing insights into the protein transition case, i.e. the recent reorientation of the food industry towards plant-based meat substitute products. While there are many empirical studies on sustainability transitions in electricity and mobility systems, research on meso-level sustainability transition dynamics in the food-processing industry is limited. This gap is significant when seeking to understand shifts in food production and consumption, because the conceptualization of innovation dynamics derived from previous transitions literature does not necessarily hold for transitions in the food industry. This thesis specifically focuses on institutional change processes regarding the emergence and diffusion of plant-based meat substitutes and the behaviour of firms. The chapters in this thesis draw insights from different sustainability transitions frameworks, as well as other streams of social science literature, including organizational science and communication literature. Overall, this thesis illustrates that while empirical sustainability transition studies have over-emphasized the bottom-up dynamics of radical innovation processes in the energy and mobility system, the protein transition case highlights the importance of endogenous change enacted by users and incremental improvements in existing products. It makes a number of important theoretical contributions including illustrating how political change processes can be a lever for accelerating sustainable innovation.

International environmental institutions are key for addressing global environmental problems, such as overfishing, climate change and biodiversity loss. Yet, as the overexploitation of natural resources as well as unsustainable practices of governance, settlement, and economic activities have been established over long periods of time, international environmental institutions are challenged to provide global environmental protection. These difficulties are amplified by the often-lacking cooperation and coordination of international environmental institutions in a fragmented global governance structure. Thus, integration is an indispensable part for achieving global environmental protection. Although both academics and practitioners are increasingly calling for more global environmental protection, there is no simple one-size-fits-all solution available that could ensure such an endeavor. What is needed is a thorough understanding of individual institutional specifications, interactions and interconnections and even systemic dynamics that emerge from institutional linkages over time. Institutional change analysis allows to study these aspects in a comprehensive way and to examine integration efforts of international environmental institutions over time. Rather than taking snapshots of international environmental institutions, this dissertation looks at longitudinal developments towards global environmental protection. Therefore, to discern high expectations and policy objectives from what is really happening, this dissertation addresses the following research question: How do international environmental institutions change and integrate in global governance? This dissertation draws a distinction between how international environmental institutions drive a process of integration in a larger institutional context which is external to them and how they integrate rules which are internal to them. The answer to the question emerged from four studies. Study 1 synoptically reviewed institutional change and integration in the global food governance system. It showed that actors are important for altering global governance processes. Especially, the role of private actors and governments needs to be taken into consideration for understanding the rules of the game. Study 2 provided findings that policy integration is a key institutional change process for global governance. Yet, most international environmental institutions do not integrate their institutional activities but remain in silos, which is a barrier to the achievement of global environmental protection. Study 3 shows in detail that an international environmental institution has the potential to be a driver of global environmental protection through policy integration while being challenged by multiple barriers at the same time. Thus, for international environmental institutions to alter global governance processes, they must actively take efforts in enabling and fostering policy integration as well as international cooperation and collaboration. Study 4 provided support for the idea that institutional change is a gradual transformational process in which there can be multiple variations of rule dynamics over time. Study 4 showed that bridging historical institutionalism and organizational science can bring new insights into institutional change at the sub-institutional level, i.e., internal developments of an organization. This dissertation postulates that international environmental institutions are central for altering global governance processes. Yet, the studies have shown that international environmental institutions are struggling at various fronts when it comes to a successful integration of policies, but also cooperation and coordination efforts.