Search

There is an urgent need for countries to transition their national food and land-use systems toward food and nutritional security, climate stability, and environmental integrity. How can countries satisfy their demands while jointly delivering the required transformative change to achieve global sustainability targets? Here, we present a collaborative approach developed with the FABLE—Food, Agriculture, Biodiversity, Land, and Energy—Consortium to reconcile both global and national elements for developing national food and land-use system pathways. This approach includes three key features: (1) global targets, (2) country-driven multi-objective pathways, and (3) multiple iterations of pathway refinement informed by both national and international impacts. This approach strengthens policy coherence and highlights where greater national and international ambition is needed to achieve global goals (e.g., the SDGs). We discuss how this could be used to support future climate and biodiversity negotiations and what further developments would be needed.

Without rapid changes to agriculture and food systems, the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change will not be met. Food systems are one of the most important contributors to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but they also need to be adapted to cope with climate change impacts. Although many options exist to reduce GHG emissions in the food system, efforts to develop implementable transformation pathways are hampered by a combination of structural challenges such as fragmented decision-making, vested interests, and power imbalances in the climate policy and food communities, all of which are compounded by a lack of joint vision. New processes and governance arrangements are urgently needed for dealing with potential trade-offs among mitigation options and their food security implications.

Human impacts on the Earth’s biosphere are driving the global biodiversity crisis. Governments are preparing to agree on a set of actions intended to halt the loss of biodiversity and put it on a path to recovery by 2050. We provide evidence that the proposed actions can bend the curve for biodiversity, but only if these actions are implemented urgently and in an integrated manner.

Multicultural representation is a stated goal of many global scientific assessment processes. These processes aim to mobilize a broader, more diverse knowledge base and increase legitimacy and inclusiveness of these assessment processes. Often, enhancing cultural diversity is encouraged through involvement of diverse expert teams and sources of knowledge in different languages. In this article, we examined linguistic diversity, as one representation of cultural diversity, in the eight published assessments of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Our results show that the IPBES assessment outputs are disproportionately filtered through English-language literature and authors from Anglophone countries. To incorporate more linguistic diversity into global ecosystem assessment processes, we present actionable steps for global science teams to recognize and incorporate non-English-language literature and contributions from non-Anglophones. Our findings highlight the need for broad-scale actions that enhance inclusivity in knowledge-synthesis processes through balanced representation of different knowledge holders and sources.

Urban green infrastructure provides ecosystem services that are essential to human wellbeing. A dearth of national-scale assessments in the Global South has precluded the ability to explore how political regimes, such as the forced racial segregation in South Africa during and after Apartheid, have influenced the extent of and access to green infrastructure over time. We investigate whether there are disparities in green infrastructure distributions across race and income geographies in urban South Africa. Using open-source satellite imagery and geographic information, along with national census statistics, we find that public and private green infrastructure is more abundant, accessible, greener and more treed in high-income relative to low-income areas, and in areas where previously advantaged racial groups (i.e. White citizens) reside.

Urban green infrastructure provides ecosystem services that are essential to human wellbeing. A dearth of national-scale assessments in the Global South has precluded the ability to explore how political regimes, such as the forced racial segregation in South Africa during and after Apartheid, have influenced the extent of and access to green infrastructure over time. We investigate whether there are disparities in green infrastructure distributions across race and income geographies in urban South Africa. Using open-source satellite imagery and geographic information, along with national census statistics, we find that public and private green infrastructure is more abundant, accessible, greener and more treed in high-income relative to low-income areas, and in areas where previously advantaged racial groups (i.e. White citizens) reside.

Urban green infrastructure provides ecosystem services that are essential to human wellbeing. A dearth of national-scale assessments in the Global South has precluded the ability to explore how political regimes, such as the forced racial segregation in South Africa during and after Apartheid, have influenced the extent of and access to green infrastructure over time. We investigate whether there are disparities in green infrastructure distributions across race and income geographies in urban South Africa. Using open-source satellite imagery and geographic information, along with national census statistics, we find that public and private green infrastructure is more abundant, accessible, greener and more treed in high-income relative to low-income areas, and in areas where previously advantaged racial groups (i.e. White citizens) reside.

This chapter develops and articulates an African futurist approach to framing and meeting the challenges of social-ecological futures. It advocates a broader conception of futures as lived practice embedded within specific places (e.g. Africa) and their histories, and explores how such practice can form an alternative model to current (Western) climate and environmental scenarios. It proposes that narratives from non-Western cultures offer more nuanced and diverse approaches to decision-making under conditions of uncertainty than the archetypical scenarios depicted in current models. This chapter uses science fiction from sub-Saharan Africa as a source for more experiential decision-making that emphasizes a decolonial agenda, which could shape and change the way we use quantitative modelling to consider future trajectories for the planet in the age of the Anthropocene.

Agriculture and food systems are in urgent need of transformation. Various foresight reports unpack food systems’ challenges and propose diverse pathways of change towards sustainability. We interrogate the framings and proposed pathways of eleven selected reports from a food system perspective, with a focus on environmental and climate change implications. We synthesize key drivers of food systems and their impact on food system outcomes. We distil trends and strategies identified across the reports and their scenarios and discuss the diversity of ‘sustainability pathways’ and ‘solution spaces’. There is general agreement that resource protection and adaptation balanced with significant greenhouse gas emission reductions are vital to food system transformation. There is less consensus on the choice of change options and how to address potential trade-offs. While new technologies or consumption changes are described, more attention needs to be paid to overcoming blind spots like implications for equity or changes in governance mechanisms.

Future scenarios and pathways of potential development trajectories are powerful tools to assist with decision-making to address many sustainability challenges. Such scenarios play a major role in global environmental assessments (GEAs). Currently, however, scenarios in GEAs are mostly developed at the global level by experts and researchers, and locally imagined, bottom-up scenarios do not play a role in such assessments. In this paper, we argue that addressing future sustainability challenges for achieving more equitable development in GEAs requires a more explicit role for bottom-up inspired futures. To this end, this paper employs an innovative global assessment framework for exploring alternative futures that are grounded in local realities and existing practical actions, and that can be appropriately scaled to the required decision-making level. This framework was applied in the context of the UN’s Global Environment Outlook 6, a major example of a GEA. We developed novel methods for synthesizing insights from a wide range of local practices and perspectives into global futures. We collected information from crowdsourcing platforms, outcomes of participatory workshops in different regions of the world, and an assessment of reported regional outlooks. We analysed these according to a framework also used by an integrated assessment model in the same GEA. We conclude that bottom-up approaches to identify and assess transformative solutions that envision future pathways towards greater sustainability significantly strengthen current GEA scenario-development approaches. They provide decision makers with required actionable information based on tangible synergistic solutions that have been tested on the ground. This work has revealed that there are significant opportunities for the integration of bottom-up knowledge and insights into GEAs, to make such assessments more salient and valuable to decision makers.

Over the last decade, the need to advance urban resilience research and practice has been emphasised, especially for safeguarding important ecosystem services that are critical for human wellbeing in and around cities. The pace and scale of changes in the Anthropocene make this imperative even more pressing, especially within the context of rapid urbanisation, infrastructure deficits and rising inequalities in the Global South. In this chapter, we contribute to these advances by highlighting the value of taking a social-ecological resilience approach to understanding the contested nature of urban resilience from multiple perspectives. We discuss important principles for exploring and building resilience and how these principles can be used within the context of urban resilience using two examples from the Global South. This chapter also outlines how an intersectionality approach can advance conceptualisation and implementation of resilience by focusing explicitly on how power mediates certain relationships and interdependencies in social-ecological systems. Foregrounding the role of power can assist with better understanding the opportunities for adaptation and transformation and ‘putting the last, first’ in resilience research and practice. We conclude by exploring some key gaps, blindspots and opportunities for a research-action agenda for urban resilience going forward.

Humanity is on a deeply unsustainable trajectory. We are exceeding planetary boundaries and unlikely to meet many international sustainable development goals and global environmental targets. Until recently, there was no broadly accepted framework of interventions that could ignite the transformations needed to achieve these desired targets and goals. As a component of the IPBES Global Assessment, we conducted an iterative expert deliberation process with an extensive review of scenarios and pathways to sustainability, including the broader literature on indirect drivers, social change and sustainability transformation. We asked, what are the most important elements of pathways to sustainability? Applying a social–ecological systems lens, we identified eight priority points for intervention (leverage points) and five overarching strategic actions and priority interventions (levers), which appear to be key to societal transformation. The eight leverage points are: (1) Visions of a good life, (2) Total consumption and waste, (3) Latent values of responsibility, (4) Inequalities, (5) Justice and inclusion in conservation, (6) Externalities from trade and other telecouplings, (7) Responsible technology, innovation and investment, and (8) Education and knowledge generation and sharing. The five intertwined levers can be applied across the eight leverage points and more broadly. These include: (A) Incentives and capacity building, (B) Coordination across sectors and jurisdictions, (C) Pre-emptive action, (D) Adaptive decision-making and (E) Environmental law and implementation. The levers and leverage points are all non-substitutable, and each enables others, likely leading to synergistic benefits. Transformative change towards sustainable pathways requires more than a simple scaling-up of sustainability initiatives—it entails addressing these levers and leverage points to change the fabric of legal, political, economic and other social systems. These levers and leverage points build upon those approved within the Global Assessment's Summary for Policymakers, with the aim of enabling leaders in government, business, civil society and academia to spark transformative changes towards a more just and sustainable world. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. Fil: Chan, Kai M. A.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Boyd, David R.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Gould, Rachelle. University of Vermont; Estados Unidos Fil: Jetzkowitz, Jens. Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde Stuttgart; Alemania Fil: Liu, Jianguo. Michigan State University; Estados Unidos Fil: Muraca, Bárbara. University of Oregon; Estados Unidos Fil: Naidoo, Robin. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Beck, Paige. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Satterfield, Terre. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Selomane, Odirilwe. Stellenbosch University; Sudáfrica Fil: Singh, Gerald G.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Sumaila, Rashid. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Ngo, Hien T.. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; Alemania Fil: Boedhihartono, Agni Klintuni. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Agard, John. The University Of The West Indies; Trinidad y Tobago Fil: de Aguiar, Ana Paula D.. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia Fil: Armenteras, Dolors. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; Colombia Fil: Balint, Lenke. BirdLife International; Reino Unido Fil: Barrington-Leigh, Christopher. Mcgill University; Canadá Fil: Cheung, William W. L.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Díaz, Sandra Myrna. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Driscoll, John. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Esler, Karen. Stellenbosch University; Sudáfrica Fil: Eyster, Harold. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Gregr, Edward J.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Hashimoto, Shizuka. The University Of Tokyo; Japón Fil: Hernández Pedraza, Gladys Cecilia. The World Economy Research Center; Cuba Fil: Hickler, Thomas. Goethe Universitat Frankfurt; Alemania Fil: Kok, Marcel. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Lazarova, Tanya. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Mohamed, Assem A. A.. Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate; Egipto Fil: Murray-Hudson, Mike. University Of Botswana; Botsuana Fil: O'Farrell, Patrick. University of Cape Town; Sudáfrica Fil: Palomo, Ignacio. Basque Centre for Climate Change; España Fil: Saysel, Ali Kerem. Boğaziçi University; Turquía Fil: Seppelt, Ralf. Martin-universität Halle-wittenberg; Alemania Fil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research-iDiv; Alemania Fil: Strassburg, Bernardo. International Institute for Sustainability, Estrada Dona Castorina; Brasil Fil: Xue, Dayuan. Minzu University Of China; China Fil: Brondízio, Eduardo S.. Indiana University; Estados Unidos

Despite increasing scientific understanding of the global environmental crisis, we struggle to adopt the policies science suggests would be effective. One of the reasons for that is the lack of inclusive engagement and dialogue among a wide range of different actors. Furthermore, there is a lack of consideration of differences between languages, worldviews and cultures. In this paper, we propose that engagement across the science-policy interface can be strengthened by being mindful of the breadth and depth of the diverse human-nature relations found around the globe. By examining diverse conceptualizations of ?nature? in more than 60 languages, we identify three clusters: inclusive conceptualizations where humans are viewed as an integral component of nature; non-inclusive conceptualizations where humans are separate from nature; and deifying conceptualizations where nature is understood and experienced within a spiritual dimension. Considering and respecting this rich repertoire of ways of describing, thinking about and relating to nature can help us communicate in ways that resonate across cultures and worldviews. This repertoire also provides a resource we can draw on when defining policies and sustainability scenarios for the future, offering opportunities for finding solutions to global environmental challenges. Fil: Coscieme, Luca. Trinity College Dublin; Irlanda Fil: da Silva Hyldmo, Håkon. Norwegian Environment Agency; Noruega Fil: Fernández-Llamazares, Álvaro. Helsingin Yliopisto; Finlandia Fil: Palomo, Ignacio. Bc3 Basque Centre For Climate Change; España Fil: Mwampamba, Tuyeni H.. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; México Fil: Selomane, Odirilwe. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia Fil: Sitas, Nadia. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia Fil: Jaureguiberry, Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Takahashi, Yasuo. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies; Japón Fil: Lim, Michelle. University of Adelaide; Australia Fil: Barral, María Paula. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas. Centro Cientifico Tecnologico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Innovación Para la Producción Agropecuaria y El Desarrollo Sostenible. - Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Buenos Aires Sur. Estacion Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce. Instituto de Innovación Para la Producción Agropecuaria y El Desarrollo Sostenible.; Argentina Fil: Farinaci, Juliana S.. National Institute For Space Research; Brasil Fil: Diaz-José, Julio. Tecnológico Nacional de México; México Fil: Ghosh, Sonali. Wild life Institute of India; India Fil: Ojino, Joyce. international Institute of Industrial Environmental Economics; Suecia Fil: Alassaf, Amani. The University of Jordan; Jordania Fil: Baatuuwie, Bernard N.. University for Development Studies; Ghana Fil: Balint, Lenke. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds; Reino Unido Fil: Basher, Zeenatul. Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability; Estados Unidos Fil: Boeraeve, Fanny. Research unit Biodiversity and Landscape; Bélgica Fil: Budiharta, Sugeng. Indonesian Institute of Sciences; India Fil: Chen, Ruishan. East China Normal University; China Fil: Desrousseaux, Maylis. Envrionmental Law Institute; Francia Fil: Dowo, Gregory. Department of Applied Biosciences and Biotechnolog; Zimbabue Fil: Febria, Catherine. University of Canterbury; Nueva Zelanda Fil: Ghazi, Houda. Cadi Ayyad University; Marruecos Fil: Harmáčková, Zuzana V.. Czech Academy of Sciences; República Checa Fil: Jaffe, Rodolfo. Instituto Tecnológico Vale; Brasil Fil: Kalemba, Mphatso M.. Environmental Affairs Department; Malaui Fil: Lambini, Cosmas K.. Bayreuth University; Alemania Fil: Lasmana, Felicia P.S.. HCV Resource Network; Reino Unido Fil: Mohamed, Assem A. A.. Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate; Egipto Fil: Niamir, Aidin. Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Center; Alemania Fil: Pliscoff Varas, Patricio Andrés. Universidad Católica de Chile; Chile Fil: Sabyrbekov, Rahat. American University of Central Asia; Kirguistán Fil: Shrestha, Uttam B.. University of Southern Queensland; Australia Fil: Samakov, Aibek. Aigine Cultural Research Center; Kirguistán Fil: Sidorovich, Anna A.. ScientificandPracticalCenterforBioresourcesoftheNationalAcademyofSciencesofBelarus; Bielorrusia Fil: Thompson, Laura. U.S. Geological Survey; Estados Unidos Fil: Valle, Mireia. National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis; Estados Unidos

The United Nations 2030 Agenda catalysed the development of global target-seeking sustainability-oriented scenarios representing alternative pathways to reach the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Implementing the SDGs requires connected actions across local, national, regional, and global levels; thus, target-seeking scenarios need to reflect alternative options and tensions across those scales. We argue that the design of global sustainability-oriented target-seeking scenarios requires a consistent process for capturing multiple and contrasting perspectives on how to reach the goals, including the perspectives from multiple scales (e.g. local, national, regional) and geographic regions (e.g. the Global South). Here we propose a novel approach to co-design global target-seeking scenarios, consisting of (a) capturing global perspectives on pathways to the SDGs through a review of existing global scenarios; (b) a multi-stakeholder process to obtain multiple sub-global perspectives on pathways to sustainability; (c) an analysis of convergences, and crucially, divergences between global and regional perspectives on pathways to reach the SDGs, feeding into the design of new target-seeking scenario narratives. As a case study, we use the results of the 2018 African Dialogue on The World in 2050, discussing the future of agriculture and food systems. The identified divergent themes emerging from our analysis included urbanization, population growth, agricultural practices, and the roles of different actors in the future of agriculture. The results challenge some of the existing underlying assumptions of the current sustainability-oriented global scenarios (e.g. population growth, urbanisation, agricultural practices), indicating the relevance and timeliness of the proposed approach. We suggest that similar approaches can be replicated in other contexts to better inform the process of sustainability-oriented scenario co-design across scales, regions and cultures. In addition, we highlight the implications of the approach for scenario quantification and the evolution of modeling tools.

The Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON) was established to promote and provide guidance toward a global observation network on biodiversity and ecosystems for decision makers and the scientific community. Here we comment on three key challenges in the development and implementation of monitoring schemes and indicators of ecosystem services (ES): (1) combining ES observations, data and methods across scales; (2) identifying operational ES metrics that consider the interactions between people and ecosystems; and (3) integrating the diversity of socio-cultural values and knowledge into monitoring activities. We discuss these challenges with the goal to stimulate the ES research community to help tackle these focus areas in ES monitoring.

The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are described as integrated and indivisible, where sustainability challenges must be addressed across sectors and scales to achieve global-level sustainability. However, SDG monitoring mostly focuses on tracking progress at national-levels, for each goal individually. This approach ignores local and cross-border impacts of national policies and assumes that global-level progress is the sum of national, sector-specific gains. In this study, we investigate effects of reforestation programs in China on countries supplying forest and agricultural commodities to China. Using case studies of rubber and palm oil production in Southeast Asian countries, soy production in Brazil and logging in South Pacific Island states, we investigate cross-sector effects of production for and trade to China in these exporting countries. We use a three-step multi-method approach. 1) We identify distal trade flows and the narratives used to justify them, using a telecoupling framework; 2) we design causal loop diagrams to analyse social-ecological processes of change in our case studies driven by trade to China and 3) we link these processes of change to the SDG framework. We find that sustainability progress in China from reforestation is cancelled out by the deforestation and cross-sectoral impacts supporting this reforestation abroad. Narratives of economic development support commodity production abroad through unrealised aims of benefit distribution and assumptions of substitutability of socio-ecological forest systems. Across cases, we find the analysed trade supports unambiguous progress on few SDGs only, and we find many mixed effects – where processes that support the achievement of SDGs exist, but are overshadowed by counterproductive processes. Our study represents a useful approach for tracking global-level impacts of national sustainability initiatives and provides cross-scale and cross-sectoral lenses through which to identify drivers of unsustainability that can be addressed in the design of effective sustainability policies.

Early-career experts can play a fundamental role in achievingplanetary sustainability by bridging generational divides anddeveloping novel solutions to complex problems. We arguethat intergenerational partnerships and interdisciplinarycollaboration among early-career experts will enableemerging sustainability leaders to contribute fully to asustainable future. We review 16 international,interdisciplinary, and sustainability-focused early-careercapacity building programs. We conclude that such programsare vital to developing sustainability leaders of the future andthat decision-making for sustainability is likely to be bestserved by strong institutional cultures that promoteintergenerational learning and involvement. Fil: Lim, Michelle. University of Adelaide; Australia Fil: Lynch, Abigail J.. National Climate Change And Wildlife Science Center; Estados Unidos Fil: Fernández Llamazares, Álvaro. Helsinki University Of Technology; Finlandia Fil: Balint, Lenke. Anglia Ruskin University; Reino Unido Fil: Basher, Zeenatul. Michigan State University; Estados Unidos Fil: Chan, Ivis. Sarasota Bay Foundation; Estados Unidos Fil: Jaureguiberry, Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Mohamed, AAA. Agricultural Research Center. Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate; Egipto Fil: Mwampamba, Tuyeni H.. Institute Of Ecosystems And Sustainability Research; México. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; México Fil: Palomo, Ignacio. Basque Centre For Climate Change, Spain; España. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; España Fil: Pliscoff, Patricio. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile; Chile Fil: Salimov, Rashad A.. Institute Of Botany, Azerbaijan Nat. Academy Of Science; Azerbaiyán Fil: Samakov, Aibek. Department Of Ethnology, University Of Tübingen; Alemania Fil: Selomane, Odirilwe. Natural Resources And The Environment; Sudáfrica. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia Fil: Shrestha, Uttam B.. The University Of Queensland; Australia Fil: Sidorovich, Anna A.. Scientific And Practical Center For Bioresources; Bielorrusia

Scenario analyses have been used in multiple science-policy assessments to better understand complex plausible futures. Scenario archetype approaches are based on the fact that many future scenarios have similar underlying storylines, assumptions, and trends in drivers of change, which allows for grouping of scenarios into typologies, or archetypes, facilitating comparisons between a large range of studies. The use of scenario archetypes in environmental assessments foregrounds important policy questions and can be used to codesign interventions tackling future sustainability issues. Recently, scenario archetypes were used in four regional assessments and one ongoing global assessment within the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). The aim of these assessments was to provide decision makers with policy-relevant knowledge about the state of biodiversity, ecosystems, and the contributions they provide to people. This paper reflects on the usefulness of the scenario archetype approach within science-policy processes, drawing on the experience from the IPBES assessments. Using a thematic analysis of (a) survey data collected from experts involved in the archetype analyses across IPBES assessments, (b) notes from IPBES workshops, and (c) regional assessment chapter texts, we synthesize the benefits, challenges, and frontiers of applying the scenario archetype approach in a science-policy process. Scenario archetypes were perceived to allow syntheses of large amounts of information for scientific, practice-, and policy-related purposes, streamline key messages from multiple scenario studies, and facilitate communication of them to end users. In terms of challenges, they were perceived as subjective in their interpretation, oversimplifying information, having a limited applicability across scales, and concealing contextual information and novel narratives. Finally, our results highlight what methodologies, applications, and frontiers in archetype-based research should be explored in the future. These advances can assist the design of future large-scale sustainability-related assessment processes, aiming to better support decisions and interventions for equitable and sustainable futures. © 2019 by the author(s). Nadia Sitas, Ryan Blanchard, and Patrick O'Farrell were supported by SwedBio at Stockholm Resilience Centre funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). Zuzana Harm??kov? and Reinette Biggs were supported by the GRAID programme funded by the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA). Reinette Biggs was also supported by the South African Research Chairs Initiative (SARChI) (grant 98766) and the Swedish Research Council (grant 621-2014-5137). Eefje den Belder was funded by the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality of the Netherlands. Support to Paula A. Harrison was provided by UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the EU-funded IMPRESSIONS project (Grant Agreement 603416).

Enhancing the governance of social-ecological systems for more equitable and sustainable development is hindered by inadequate knowledge about how different social groups and communities rely on natural resources. We used openly accessible national survey data to develop a metric of overall dependence on natural resources. These data contain information about households sources of water, energy, building materials and food. We used these data in combination with Bayesian learning to model observed patterns of dependence using demographic variables that included: gender of household head, household size, income, house ownership, formality status of settlement, population density, and in-migration rate to the area. We show that a small number of factors in particular population density and informality of settlements can explain a significant amount of the observed variation with regards to the use of natural resources. Subsequently, we test the validity of these predictions using alternative, open access data in the eThekwini and Cape Town metropolitan areas of South Africa. We discuss the advantages of using a selection of predictors which could be supplied through remotely sensed and open access data, in terms of opportunities and challenges to produce meaningful results in data-poor areas. With data availability being a common limiting factor in modelling and monitoring exercises, access to inexpensive, up-to-date and free to use data can significantly improve how we monitor progress towards sustainability targets. A small selection of openly accessible demographic variables can predict household s dependence on local natural resources. SB and FV are supported by the Basque Government through the BERC 2018-2021 program and by Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness MINECO through BC3 María de Maeztu excellence accreditation MDM-2017-0714.

Non-technical summaryWe argue that the ways in which we as humans derive well-being from nature – for example by harvesting firewood, selling fish or enjoying natural beauty – feed back into how we behave towards the environment. This feedback is mediated by institutions (rules, regulations) and by individual capacities to act. Understanding these relationships can guide better interventions for sustainably improving well-being and alleviating poverty. However, more attention needs to be paid to how experience-related benefits from nature influence attitudes and actions towards the environment, and how these relationships can be reflected in more environmentally sustainable development projects.

Urban green infrastructure provides ecosystem services that are essential to human wellbeing. A dearth of national-scale assessments in the Global South has precluded the ability to explore how political regimes, such as the forced racial segregation in South Africa during and after Apartheid, have influenced the extent of and access to green infrastructure over time. We investigate whether there are disparities in green infrastructure distributions across race and income geographies in urban South Africa. Using open-source satellite imagery and geographic information, along with national census statistics, we find that public and private green infrastructure is more abundant, accessible, greener and more treed in high-income relative to low-income areas, and in areas where previously advantaged racial groups (i.e. White citizens) reside. Areas with White residents report 6-fold higher income, have 11.7% greater tree cover, 8.9% higher vegetation greenness and live 700 m closer to a public park than areas with predominantly Black African, Indian, and Coloured residents. The inequity in neighborhood greenness levels has been maintained (for Indian and Coloured areas) and further entrenched (for Black African areas) since the end of Apartheid in 1994 across the country. We also find that these spatial inequities are mirrored in both private (gardens) and public (street verges, parks, green belts) spaces, hinting at the failure of governance structures to plan for and implement urban greening initiatives. By leveraging open-access satellite data and methods presented here, there is scope for civil society to monitor urban green infrastructure over time and thereby hold governments accountable to addressing environmental justice imperatives in the future. Interact with the data here: green-apartheid.zsv.co.za .

Sustainable development goals (SDGs), which recognise the interconnections between social, economic and ecological systems, have ignited new interest in indicators able to integrate trends in - and ...

The imperative to measure progress towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has resulted in a proliferation of targets and indicators fed by an ever-expanding set of observations. This proliferation undermines one principal purpose of the SDGs: to provide a framework for coordinated action across policy domains. Systems approaches to defining Essential Variables have focused monitoring of climate, biodiversity and oceans and offer opportunities to coordinate SDG monitoring. We propose four criteria and a process to identify Essential SDG Variables (ESDGVs), which will highlight interactions and gaps in current monitoring. The ESDGV criteria suggest a research agenda to: develop and test interdisciplinary system models; test transformations theory for sustainable development; analyse policy interactions; and formulate models to support further refinements of ESDGVs and SDG monitoring.

The United Nations&rsquo, Agenda 2030 marks significant progress towards sustainable development by making explicit the intention to integrate previously separate social, economic and environmental agendas. Despite this intention, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which were adopted to implement the agenda, are fragmented in their formulation and largely sectoral. We contend that while the design of the SDG monitoring is based on a systems approach, it still misses most of the dynamics and complexity relevant to sustainability outcomes. We propose that insights from the study of social-ecological systems offer a more integrated approach to the implementation of Agenda 2030, particularly the monitoring of progress towards sustainable development outcomes. Using five key features highlighted by the study of social-ecological systems (SESs) relevant to sustainable development: (1) social-ecological feedbacks, (2) resilience, (3) heterogeneity, (4) nonlinearity, and (5) cross-scale dynamics. We analyze the current set of SDG indicators based on these features to explore current progress in making them operational. Our analysis finds that 59% of the indicators account for heterogeneity, 33% for cross-scale dynamics, 23% for nonlinearities, and 18% and 17%, respectively, for social-ecological feedbacks and resilience. Our findings suggest limited use of complex SES science in the current design of SDG monitoring, but combining our findings with recent studies of methods to operationalize SES features suggests future directions for sustainable development monitoring for the current as well as post 2030 set of indicators.