Search

While most of today’s global challenges are deeply interconnected, international organizations often operate in silos. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), adopted by the United Nations in 2015, have been advanced as a new agenda to break up these silos and to better integrate environmental, social and economic policies. Yet little is known about whether the SDGs had any effects in advancing policy integration. To investigate this, we conducted a quantitative content analysis on the website texts of 159 international organizations. Our study addresses two questions: (1) whether international organizations increasingly engage with the SDGs in their work; and (2) whether this engagement increased their attention for policy integration. Our results show that the SDGs are indeed increasingly used by most international organizations. However, this has not affected policy integration. We conclude with some possible explanations for this lack of effect and propose several research avenues.

The transnational climate change governance (TCCG) landscape, led by sub- and non-state actors including businesses, municipalities, and NGOs, holds legitimate potential for tackling persisting climate injustices, in part by virtue of its polycentric character. However, while in theory polycentric governance systems could serve to correct structural power imbalances, the geography of TCCG remains remarkably uneven. This article explores this puzzle in the context of polycentric governance theory and the allegedly paradoxical relationship between polycentricity and equity. Two interrelated empirical and analytical research questions are addressed: (1) How is TCCG organized geographically along the global North–South divide? And, based on the geography of TCCG, (2) Does its polycentric character contribute toward more equitable governance across the global North and South? Following a large-N analysis of a novel dataset containing 174 governance arrangements and 1196 stakeholders with decision-making powers, I argue that the geography of TCCG is remarkably resistant to change, gravitating unmistakably toward the global North and its existing diplomatic hotspots. I argue that the TCCG system currently in place resembles a system of concentrated polycentricity—a product of an overarching system of rules shared with the international regime that could, in turn, potentially explain the persisting North–South inequities in a still seemingly increasingly polycentric climate.

Simulation games are increasingly popular tools for opening up future imaginaries, especially in the arena of sustainability policy-making and decision support. However, there is a lack of understanding regarding the potential power of games in anticipatory governance. We argue that the utility of simulation games in support of anticipatory climate governance can be greatly increased when game processes are consciously designed to impact present day planning and action. At the same time, game designers with the intention to support or intervene in governance and policy-making inevitably enter political arenas and bear responsibility for under- standing and managing their influence at the science-policy interface. We present two case studies: a game simulating a sustainable food policy council with food system actors in Kyoto, Japan, and a game focused on the exploration and imagination of the global impacts of climate tipping points aimed at participants of the global climate negotiation community. Each case study represents a specific logic for translating game play into real- world impacts at different governance scales with distinct political implications. Based on these two case studies, we develop principles for the design and evaluation of simulation games that seek to impact anticipatory climate governance, based on five lenses: (1) purpose and positionality; (2) conceptions of the future and imaginaries; (3) beneficiaries, key stakeholders and participants; (4) the politics of game features and design; and (5) evaluation.

Carbon dioxide removal technologies are gaining prominence in academia, industry and policy, yet the need for substantial funding raises serious challenges. This comment outlines these issues and charts a path for the effective, systematic and fair mobilization of funds for removals.

This study examines how vendors, customers, and organizers socially construct agroecological farmers markets (FM) in Bogotá. Using a multi-method approach entailing structured and unstructured interviews, descriptive statistics, and ethnographic content analysis, the study shows how the actors situate FM in relation to debates on sustainability, rural development, and alternative agri-food systems in Colombia. The results demonstrate that vendors, customers, and organizers often hold largely similar perspectives on FM and their relations with the dominant food system. Specifically, they conceive of FM as an alternative to the dominant food system and experience them as spaces in which utilitarian relations are put aside in favour of alternative values and practices, which include care for other human and non-human beings and limited economic competition. Furthermore, FM simultaneously function as protective spaces for peasant knowledge and culture and connectors between rurality and urbanity. Finally, this study shows that FM cannot be fully understood within the sectoral scope of sustainable agriculture, or rural development; rather, they represent an attempt to lay the foundations of a more conscious society that vendors, customers, and organizers want to help come into being.

Action-oriented summits like the 2018 Global Climate Action Summit and 2019 UN Climate Action Summit, have become a major feature of global climate governance. Their emphasis on cooperative initiatives by a host of non-state and local actors creates high expectations, especially when, according to the IPCC, governments’ policies still set the world on course for a disastrous 2.7 °C warming. While earlier studies have cautioned against undue optimism, empirical evidence on summits and their ability to leverage transnational capacities has been scarce. Here using a dataset of 276 climate initiatives we show important differences in output performance, with no improvement among initiatives associated with more recent summits. A summit’s focus on certain themes and an emphasis on minimal requirements for institutional robustness, however, can positively influence the effectiveness of transnational engagement. These results make an empirical contribution towards understanding the increasingly transnational nature of climate governance.

Urban nature increases the liveability of cities and can improve their resilience to climate change. However, the value of urban nature often remains unknown, which results in its omission from urban planning decisions. Particularly the valuation of small-sized urban nature remains understudied. This study therefore employs a stated preference methodology to estimate the economic value of seven types of small urban nature and four associated ecosystem services. We perform two choice experiments: one with urban parks, urban forest and green corridors and another one with even smaller urban nature types (green roofs, green walls, street trees and green beds). The results of the choice analysis show that urban residents are willing to pay more for the former types of urban nature but not for the latter types. Urban parks are valued the most, followed by urban forests and green corridors. Within the category of the smallest urban nature types, street trees are valued most followed by green beds green walls, whereas green walls and green roofs are least valued. We discuss opportunities and barriers to implementing economic valuation results in urban planning practices. Several policy and future research recommendations are proposed.

The restoration and preservation of freshwater ecosystems is one of the prerequisites for a sustainable and fair future for all and therefore part of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 6). However, countries worldwide are facing a challenge to achieve this ambition by 2030. This paper focuses on the legal and governance challenges faced in the European context with regard to achieving water quality ambitions, using experiences from the Netherlands as a case study. Although many EU Member States (MS) are facing a challenge to meet the ambitions set by the Water Framework Directive (WFD) in 2027, literature on effectiveness of governance approaches in terms of actual water quality improvement, seems to be scarce. Based on interviews, a survey, expert panel discussions and literature we show that in the Netherlands, an important problem is that stakeholders, also within organisations, have different views on ambitions, achievements and necessary follow-up actions. This is problematic because for realising the water quality ambitions, cross-sectoral cooperation (e.g. from agriculture and spatial development) as well as strengthened interlinkages between these related policy fields is crucial. Moreover, there is a tendency to stick to the status quo. In order to increase effectiveness, a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms for this lock-in will be necessary. This will enable the development of practical tools and instruments to support cross-sectoral and multi-level collaboration. The sectoral implementation of the WFD in the Netherlands was chosen by many other MS, resulting in similar cross-sectoral challenges as we found in the Netherlands. Insight into how other MS deal with lock-in situations is needed to develop pathways to achieving WFD ambitions.

The recent surge of private enterprise-led space activities is driving what is dubbed the New Space revolution. SpaceX as a frontrunner is working towards colonizing Mars by 2050, with the goal of transforming humans into a multi-planetary species. These developments and the imaginaries they generate are reshaping the discourse on planetary sustainability, where celestial bodies like Mars are seen as a solution to the challenges facing our Earth. Yet, space and its sustainability remain a rather distant concern in earth system governance. In this Perspective, we argue that the New Space revolution necessitates a corresponding shift in the governance paradigm from planetary to multi-planetary for a more integrated approach that recognizes the interdependencies of Earth and space sustainability. We propose a new governance model, earth-space governance, aimed at promoting justice and integrity for all forms of life in a multi-planetary context.

Deliberations are underway to utilize increasingly radical technological options to help address climate change and stabilize the climatic system. Collectively, these options are often referred to as “climate geoengineering.” Deployment of such options, however, can create wicked tradeoffs in governance and require adaptive forms of risk management. In this study, we utilize a large and novel set of qualitative expert interview data to more deeply and systematically explore the types of risk–risk tradeoffs that may emerge from the use of 20 different climate geoengineering options, 10 that focus on carbon dioxide or greenhouse gas removal, and 10 that focus on solar radiation management and reflecting sunlight. We specifically consider: What risks does the deployment of these options entail? What types of tradeoffs may emerge through their deployment? We apply a framework that clusters risk–risk tradeoffs into institutional and governance, technological and environmental, and behavioral and temporal dimensions. In doing so, we offer a more complete inventory of risk–risk tradeoffs than those currently available within the respective risk-assessment, energy-systems, and climate-change literatures, and we also point the way toward future research gaps concerning policy, deployment, and risk management.

Since net-zero greenhouse gas emissions targets have become a keystone of European and German climate policy, a debate about the need to actively remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in addition to drastically reducing emissions has emerged. Although still relatively scarce, empirical studies on the emergence of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) on the political agenda have shown that variations in the constellations and positions of policy-relevant actors play a key role in shaping patterns of CDR policymaking. The German and wider European Union (EU) CDR policy space is emergent, and political actors are just beginning to position themselves. Building on our previous work which established a typology of CDR policy integration patterns and developed a discourse analytical framework for mapping CDR-policy-relevant speaker positions, we present the first fine-grained empirical reconstruction of CDR-policy-relevant actors and their positions in the German context. Our analytical approach aims to improve understanding of patterns in CDR policymaking by showing that on the EU, national, and subnational levels, a multitude of institutional actors may adopt differing positions as the CDR policy space evolves. In addition to identifying fine-grained ‘ideal types’ of positions that policy actors may adopt in the formative phase of German CDR policy, our analysis provides an empirical ‘map’ of CDR policy-relevant actors and explores hypotheses about emerging discourse coalitions and potential conflict cleavages.

Recognizing two decades of failure to achieve global goals and targets, parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity are in the final phase of negotiating a Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework for the conservation, sustainable use and benefit sharing of biodiversity. The framework attempts to set out pathways, goals and targets for the next decade to achieve positive biodiversity change. This perspective intends to help that framework set people firmly as part of nature, not apart from it. Despite work done so far through four meetings, new thinking and focus is still needed on ‘what’ changes must be conceptualized and implemented, and ‘how’ those changes are to be delivered. To help achieve that new thinking, as a broad range of people, many with a focus on aquatic systems, we highlight six key foci that offer potential to strengthen delivery of the framework and break the ‘business as usual’ logjam. These foci are as follows: (i) a reframing of the narrative of ‘people's relationship with the rest of nature’ and emphasize the crucial role of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in delivering positive biodiversity change; (ii) moving beyond a focus on species and places by prioritizing ecosystem function and resilience; (iii) supporting a diversity of top-down and bottom-up governance processes; (iv) embracing new technologies to make and measure progress; (v) linking business more effectively with biodiversity and (vi) leveraging the power of international agencies and programmes. Given they are linked to a greater or lesser degree, implementing these six foci together will lead to a much-needed broadening of the framework, especially those of business and broader urban civil society, as well as those of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

The crises that cities face—such as climate change, pandemics, economic downturn, and racism—are tightly interlinked and cannot be addressed in isolation. This paper addresses compound urban crises as a unique type of problem, in which discrete solutions that tackle each crisis independently are insufficient. Few scholarly debates address compound urban crises and there is, to date, a lack of interdisciplinary insights to inform urban governance responses. Combining ideas from complex adaptive systems and critical urban studies, we develop a set of boundary concepts (unsettlement, unevenness, and unbounding) to understand the complexities of compound urban crises from an interdisciplinary perspective. We employ these concepts to set a research agenda on compound urban crises, highlighting multiple interconnections between urban politics and global dynamics. We conclude by suggesting how these entry points provide a theoretical anchor to develop practical insights to inform and reform urban governance.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), agreed in 2015, chart an integrated and universal policy agenda to be realised by 2030. To this end, policy coherence for sustainable development is embedded in the SDGs as both an end in itself and a means through which to ensure that the fulfilment of some goals does not come at the expense of others. Yet, as a transformative process and outcome, policy coherence, as articulated in the SDGs, is narrowly predicated on technical means to address incoherencies that are inherently political. Using the case study of the Netherlands, where the concept of policy coherence has animated the development policy discourse for decades, we question whether such means necessarily improve policies for sustainability, asking what institutional arrangements established for the SDGs do through their (re)configuration and operation, and to what ends. Drawing on an extensive document analysis and a series of semi-structured interviews, we show that the means established to resolve policy incoherence in the Dutch context cast an apolitical façade that limits, if not prevents, possibilities for transformation. In particular, the focus on ‘neutral’ institutional arrangements and ‘win-win’ constructions in coherence building privileges the appearance of coherence over the more fundamental issue of its sustainability, decentring the key political question of what is, or is supposed to be, sustained.

The food system has become globalized and industrial. As a consequence, food travels long distances to reach consumers and its production is over-reliant on chemicals, leading to high levels of carbon emissions and soil degradation. Short food supply chains (SFSCs) have been advocated as more sustainable alternatives and have been explicitly mentioned by the Dutch government and the EU as a strategy towards achieving sustainability goals. While SFSCs are viable on a small scale, scaling and mainstreaming them has proven difficult due to low margins, high costs, and steep learning curves. Their economic underperformance is particularly glaring when compared to the highly cost-efficient - albeit energy and resource intensive - conventional commercial supply chains. In practice, SFSCs therefore remain isolated success stories, failing to contribute to systemic change in food systems. In efforts to enhance the performance of SFSCs, this paper introduces the GAIN transition model, a novel framework based on gamification which provides a holistic and actionable framework for SFSC actors to coalesce and strategize around a common vision. We illustrate the underlying principles of GAIN and its potential for institutionalizing SFSCs. We find that thus far, GAIN has helped to catalyze action and has proven a useful tool which provides a common language for actors to navigate this complex space. Future research and more dissemination are needed to conclude with more certainty on the quantitative impact of GAIN in terms of enabling and strengthening SFSCs.