Search

Integrating scenarios and models to assess the sustainability of future regional ecosystem services is at the forefront of ecosystem service science. However, there are a lack of comprehensive reviews on this topic. Therefore, this study provides a systematic review of the research progress considering two aspects: ecosystem service scenario simulation and sustainability assessments based on the concept of a "safe operating space." We found that (1) a number of studies have already started to explore methods for evaluating the sustainability of future ecosystem services; (2) in terms of scenario construction methods, most existing studies have adopted the global classical scenario downscaling approach, while less consideration has been given to the important socio-economic-environmental characteristics of a region itself, which affect the credibility and policy relevance of scenarios; and (3) in terms of sustainability simulation evaluation, most existing studies are qualitative comparisons of the sustainability of ecosystem services within different scenarios, while quantitative methods are lacking. We proposed an approach that combined participatory scenario construction and a regional safe operating space to address the above identified challenges. Successfully implementing this research approach would provide decision makers with more accurate and practical early warning information regarding the sustainability of future ecosystem services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policymakers and global energy models are increasingly looking towards hydrogen as an enabling energy carrier to decarbonize hard-to-abate sectors (projecting growth in hydrogen consumption in the magnitude of hundreds of megatons). Combining scenarios from global energy models and life cycle impacts of different hydrogen production technologies, the results of this work show that the life cycle emissions from proposed configurations of the hydrogen economy would lead to climate overshoot of at least 5.4–8.1× of the defined "safe" space for greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and the cumulative consumption of 8–12% of the remaining carbon budget. This work suggests a need for a science-based definition of "clean" hydrogen, agnostic of technology and compatible with a "safe" development of the hydrogen economy. Such a definition would deem blue hydrogen environmentally unviable by 2025–2035. The prolific use of green hydrogen is also problematic however, due to the requirement of a significant amount of renewable energy, and the associated embedded energy, land, and material impacts. These results suggest that demand-side solutions should be further considered, as the large-scale transition to hydrogen, which represents a "clean" energy shift, may still not be sufficient to lead humanity into a "safe" space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Weak sustainability, WS, attempts a comprehensive notion of sustainability, sustaining human welfare directly, or equivalently, sustaining inclusive wealth, IW, sufficient to sustain welfare. Sustainability is, in principle, forever, and accordingly, IW is conceived and assessed in a very long-term context. Given that future outcomes are unobservable, IW assessments are conducted in terms of expectations. However, this introduces pervasive circular reasoning: the calculated value of IW assumes that our expectations will be met, but that is the question. Optimistic expectations (for example) increase calculated IW, which, in turn, increases our confidence that our society is on a sustainable path. Given the logical difficulties of projecting IW into the future, analysts resort to tracking IW at regular intervals through the recent past. This reduces, but does not eliminate, the circularity problem. The signals from tracking IW are less than perfect from a policy perspective: they are too aggregate, perhaps masking impending crises regarding particular resources until it is too late; and too dependent on imperfect markets; and they document the recent past, so policy managers are always playing catch-up. WS-based sustainability policy frameworks include WS-plus, which invokes ad hoc strong sustainability, SS, patches to address threatened resource crises. It may also be possible to allow a degree of WS flexibility for individual jurisdictions within the constraints of a global safe operating space, SOS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Renewable energy targets in the European Union (EU) have raised the demand for timber and are expected to increase dependence on imports. However, EU timber consumption levels are already disproportionally high compared to the rest of the world. The question is, how much timber is available for the EU to sustainably harvest and import, in particular considering sustainable forest management practices, a safe operating space for land-system change, and the global distribution of "common good" resources. This article approaches this question from a supply angle to develop a reference value range for the current as well as future sustainable supply of timber at the EU-27 and global levels. For current supply estimates, national-level data on forest area available for wood supply, productivity in that area, as well as the rate available for harvest were collected and aggregated into three potential supply scenarios. For future supply estimates, a safe operating space scenario halting land use change, a sensitivity analysis, and a literature review were performed. To provide both a comparison of global versus EU sustainable supply capacities and to develop a benchmark toward evaluating and comparing levels of consumption to sustainable supply capacities, per capita calculations were made. Results revealed that the per capita sustainable supply potential of EU forests is estimated to be around three times higher than the global average in 2050. Whether a global or EU reference value is more appropriate for EU policy orientation, considering both strengthened economic and cultural ties to the forest in forest-rich countries as well as the need to prevent problem shifting associated with exporting land demands abroad, is discussed. Further research is needed to strengthen and harmonize data, improve methods for modeling future scenarios and incorporate interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder perspectives toward the development of robust and politically relevant reference values for sustainable consumption levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many of the environment and natural resources that constitute key "safe operating spaces", as designated by planetary boundaries, are being exploited by a handful of large firms with considerable market share. In this paper, we discuss how the environment and natural resources that occur within a safe operating space can be treated as an exploitable finite stock. We use an optimal depletion model to show how the extraction of these exhaustible assets can be managed optimally, and allow for adjustment in price paths due to technological innovation and environmental externalities. Given the growing market concentration and monopoly power in the key economic sectors that exploit the environment and resources that constitute many safe operating spaces, we then explore how monopoly conditions can alter the extraction and price path of the environmental assets over time compared to that under competitive market conditions. We show that the monopoly may be compatible with more sustainable use, by extending the life of the exploitable, depletable stock, at the expense of firms capturing excessive resource rents from exploitation. This tradeoff means that any policies implemented to tax the excessive monopoly rents need to be designed without compromising the sustainable use of the environment. The tax revenue raised can be channeled into protecting or regenerating natural assets that are essential for global environmental sustainability. If investment in regeneration efforts is sufficiently substantial, or if the wider social and environmental values associated with the exhaustible assets are taken into account, then the safe operating space may be conserved indefinitely. Such policy challenges will become increasingly important as dominant firms exert market power over the planet's remaining environment and resources that constitute key "safe operating spaces", as designated by planetary boundaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]