Search

Radical and quick transformations towards sustainability will be fundamental to achieving a more sustainable future. However, deliberate interventions to reconfigure systems will result in winners and losers, with the potential for greater or lesser equity and justice outcomes. Positive tipping points (PTPs) have been proposed as interventions in complex systems with the aim to (a) reduce the likelihood of negative Earth system tipping points and/or (b) increase the likelihood of achieving just social foundations. However, many narratives around PTPs often do not take into account the entire spectrum of impacts the proposed alternatives could have or still rely on narratives that maintain current unsustainable behaviours and marginalize many people (i.e. do not take "b" into account). One such example is the move from petrol-based to electric vehicles. An energy transition that remains based on natural resource inputs from the Global South must be unpacked with an equity and justice lens to understand the true cost of this transition. There are two arguments why a critical engagement with these and other similar proposals needs to be made. First, the idea of transitioning through a substitution (e.g. of fuel) while maintaining the system structure (e.g. of private vehicles) may not necessarily be conceived as the kind of radical transformation being called for by global scientific bodies like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Second, and probably more importantly, the question of positive for whom, positive where, and positive how must be considered. In this paper, we unpack these narratives using a critical decolonial view from the south and outline their implications for the concept of tipping points. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radical and quick transformations towards sustainability have winners and losers, with equity and justice embedded to a greater or a lesser extent. According to research, only the wealthiest 1-4% of the global population will radically need to change their consumption, behaviours, societal values and beliefs in order to make space for an equitable and sustainable future for nature and people. However, narratives around many 'positive' tipping points, such as the energy transition, do not take into account the entire spectrum of impacts the proposed alternatives could have or still rely on narratives that maintain current unsustainable behaviours and marginalise many people. One such example is the move from petrol-based to electric vehicles. An energy transition that remains based on natural resource inputs from the Global South must be unpacked with an equity and justice lens to understand the "true cost" of this transition. Another is the role of 'nature-based solutions' to address climate resilience, where 'nature' in some parts of the world needs to be maintained as an offset for the continued lifestyles of the wealthy, usually in different parts of the world from where this nature is supposed to be maintained. There are two arguments why a critical engagement with these and other similar proposals needs to be made. First, the idea of transitioning through a substitution (e.g., of fuel), whilst maintaining the system structure (e.g., of private vehicles) may not necessarily be conceived as the kind of radical transformation being called for by global scientific or governmental bodies like the IPCC and IPBES. Secondly, and probably more importantly, the question of positive for whom, and positive where must be considered. In this paper, we unpack these narratives in the context of what they mean for the idea of positive tipping points using a critical decolonial view from the South. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The yellow clam fishery in Uruguay provides a longstanding case study of co-management in small-scale fisheries. This paper employs a participatory approach to examine the co-management experience in the yellow clam fishery and distil numerous lessons for implementing the Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication (SSF Guidelines). There were three main findings in the study. First, from the perspective of the fishers, co-management has proven successful in advancing gender equity, human rights and subjective well-being within the fishery, which align with the SSF Guidelines. Second, co-management is likely most effective at achieving the goals of the SSF Guidelines when it is accompanied by wide-scale structural changes in legislation and efforts to improve its coherence across areas of jurisdiction. Third, the nature and rate of socio-economic and ecological change currently being experienced - and which is expected to continue - requires a significant amount of flexibility in co-management arrangements in order for them to deliver on the intended outcomes of the SSF Guidelines. These findings help further the implementation of the SSF Guidelines through co-management in the yellow clam fishery, and serve as a learning platform for scaling up good practices to other small-scale fisheries of Uruguay. Additionally, the findings can also be applied in other regions dealing with similar issues in the management and governance of small-scale fisheries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]