Search

Societal transformations for addressing climate change are intensely contested and at risk of resistance and backlash to ambitious policy action. But they are frequently modeled through heuristics such as S‐curves which abstract from such conflicts, assuming increasing returns to scale as a driver of transformations. This is the case even while scholars accept the presence of political conflict in transformation processes. Within political science and allied disciplines, the notions of policy feedback and policy coalitions have been deployed to understand how such political conflicts may be understood. But these approaches risk gravitating toward an instrumental design impulse that inadvertently downplays conflict. We argue that policy action for societal transformations should be re‐conceptualized as an unfolding series of battle‐settlement events whereby heated episodic political struggles over a certain policy object or issue play out and eventually settle in ways that structure future debates while nonetheless remaining indeterminate and open to challenge or reversal. Such an approach reflects the varied empirical experiences of climate policy action to date which include both accumulation and reversal. It also helps explain trajectories of change that are discontinuous and lurching in contrast to common images of transformation as progressive and cumulative. We illustrate this approach through two cases of unfolding societal transformation on climate change: coal phaseout in the United Kingdom and renewable energy uptake in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many governments have set ambitious targets for tree planting and increased woodland cover as a key part of actions to reach net‐zero carbon emissions by 2050. However, many uncertainties remain concerning how and where to expand tree cover, what species to plant, and how best to manage new plantations. Much contemporary forestry has been based on even‐aged monocultures, largely because of perceived advantages for timber production. However, in order to play a key role in climate change mitigation future forests will have to achieve timber production (and wider ecosystem service provision) alongside resilience to biotic and abiotic challenge. It is therefore crucial that appropriate informed decisions are made with regard to the structure, composition, and planning of future forests, in order to provide sustainable solutions that provide environmental, economic, and health benefits to society. Genetically diverse, mixed, and irregular forests, with their higher biodiversity and niche complementarity, are promising new forest configurations for regulating the water cycle, storing carbon, and delivering other goods and services. In the following discussion, we have used UK information to illustrate the benefits of mixed woodland versus monocultures and highlighted current issues related to government initiatives and policies for current and future forests. However, similar issues and problems are encountered globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]