liu.seSök publikationer i DiVA
Ändra sökning
Avgränsa sökresultatet
1 - 15 av 15
RefereraExporteraLänk till träfflistan
Permanent länk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Träffar per sida
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sortering
  • Standard (Relevans)
  • Författare A-Ö
  • Författare Ö-A
  • Titel A-Ö
  • Titel Ö-A
  • Publikationstyp A-Ö
  • Publikationstyp Ö-A
  • Äldst först
  • Nyast först
  • Skapad (Äldst först)
  • Skapad (Nyast först)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Äldst först)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Nyast först)
  • Disputationsdatum (tidigaste först)
  • Disputationsdatum (senaste först)
  • Standard (Relevans)
  • Författare A-Ö
  • Författare Ö-A
  • Titel A-Ö
  • Titel Ö-A
  • Publikationstyp A-Ö
  • Publikationstyp Ö-A
  • Äldst först
  • Nyast först
  • Skapad (Äldst först)
  • Skapad (Nyast först)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Äldst först)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Nyast först)
  • Disputationsdatum (tidigaste först)
  • Disputationsdatum (senaste först)
Markera
Maxantalet träffar du kan exportera från sökgränssnittet är 250. Vid större uttag använd dig av utsökningar.
  • 1.
    Nerini, Francesco Fuso
    et al.
    KTH Royal Inst Technol, Sweden.
    Mazzucato, Mariana
    UCL, England; UCL, England.
    Rockstroem, Johan
    Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res, Germany; Leibniz Assoc, Germany.
    van Asselt, Harro
    Univ Cambridge, England.
    Hall, Jim W.
    Univ Oxford, England.
    Matos, Stelvia
    Univ Surrey, England.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Sovacool, Benjamin
    Boston Univ, MA USA; Bennett Inst Innovat & Policy Accelerat, England.
    Vinuesa, Ricardo
    KTH Royal Inst Technol, Sweden.
    Sachs, Jeffrey
    Columbia Univ, NY USA; UN Sustainable Dev Solut Network SDSN, NY 10115 USA.
    Comments: Extending the Sustainable Development Goals to 2050-a road map2024Ingår i: Nature, ISSN 0028-0836, E-ISSN 1476-4687, Vol. 630, nr 8017, s. 555-558Artikel i tidskrift (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
    Abstract [en]

    The world should redouble its efforts on the SDGs, not abandon them. Here's how to progress the United Nations' agenda towards 2050.

  • 2.
    Malekpour, Shirin
    et al.
    Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
    Allen, Cameron
    Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
    Sagar, Ambuj
    School of Public Policy, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India.
    Scholz, Imme
    Heinrich Böll Foundation, Berlin, Germany.
    Persson, Åsa
    Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Miranda, J. Jaime
    Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
    Bennich, Therese
    Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Dube, Opha Pauline
    University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.
    Kanie, Norichika
    Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University, Fujisawa, Japan.
    Madise, Nyovani
    African Institute for Development Policy, Lilongwe, Malawi.
    Shackell, Nancy
    Fisheries and Oceans Canada at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography in Nova Scotia, Dartmouth, Canada.
    Montoya, Jaime C.
    University of the Philippines College of Medicine, Manila, the Philippines.
    Pan, Jiahua
    Research Centre for Sustainable Development, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, China.
    Hathie, Ibrahima
    Feed the Future Senegal Policy Systems Services, Dakar-Fann, Senegal.
    Bobylev, Sergey N.
    Center for Bioeconomy and Eco-Innovation, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.
    Agard, John
    West Indies St Augustine Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago.
    Al-Ghanim, Kaltham
    Social & Economic Survey Research Institute, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.
    Comments: What scientists need to do to accelerate progress on the SDGs2023Ingår i: Nature, ISSN 0028-0836, E-ISSN 1476-4687, Vol. 621, nr 7978, s. 250-254Artikel i tidskrift (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
  • 3.
    Gottenhuber, Sara
    et al.
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Linköpings universitet, Centrum för klimatpolitisk forskning, CSPR.
    Linnér, Björn-Ola
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Linköpings universitet, Centrum för klimatpolitisk forskning, CSPR.
    Wibeck, Victoria
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Linköpings universitet, Centrum för klimatpolitisk forskning, CSPR.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Greening recovery – Overcoming policy incoherence for sustainability transformations2023Ingår i: Environmental Policy and Governance, ISSN 1756-932X, E-ISSN 1756-9338, Vol. 33, nr 5, s. 546-560Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    Policy coherence is crucial in the 2030 Agenda's transformative ambitions and heralded as of paramount importance to ensure the successful implementation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and climate policy targets. Despite political efforts to achieve policy coherence, apparent trade-offs and goal conflicts have emerged – even in a proclaimed ‘front-runner’ country like Sweden. This paper examines the role of ideas in proposing and legitimising policy options and achieving policy coherence in the light of the Swedish recovery debate in 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideas of a green economic recovery put forward in the public debate are examined through thematic text and frame analysis. We show that ideas of a green transition, boosted by economic recovery spending, draw on a synergistic frame in combining social, environmental, and economic policy options, carrying a potential for coherency. However, the absence of a discussion on power, as in who stands to gain what under which circumstances, coupled with an inherent understanding of a temporal hierarchy of policy priorities does not only impact the ability to design coherent policies but may have considerable impacts on the prospects of achieving sustainability transformations.

    Ladda ner fulltext (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 4.
    Browne, Katherine
    et al.
    Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Dzebo, Adis
    Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Iacobuta, Gabriela
    German Institute of Development and Sustainability, Bonn, Germany.
    Faus Onbargi, Alexia
    German Institute of Development and Sustainability, Bonn, Germany.
    Shawoo, Zoha
    Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Dombrowsky, Ines
    German Institute of Development and Sustainability, Bonn, Germany.
    Fridahl, Mathias
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Linköpings universitet, Centrum för klimatpolitisk forskning, CSPR.
    Gottenhuber, Sara
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Linköpings universitet, Centrum för klimatpolitisk forskning, CSPR.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Linköpings universitet, Centrum för klimatpolitisk forskning, CSPR. Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    How does policy coherence shape effectiveness and inequality? Implications for sustainable development and the 2030 Agenda2023Ingår i: Sustainable Development, ISSN 0968-0802, E-ISSN 1099-1719, Vol. 31, nr 5, s. 3161-3174Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    During the formulation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, many promoted policy coherence as a key tool to ensure achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a way that “leaves no one behind.” Their argument assumed that coherent policymaking contributes to more effective policies and supports over-arching efforts to reduce inequality. As the 2030 Agenda reaches the halfway point, however, countries are falling short on many SDGs, particularly SDG 10 (reduce inequality). This study revisits the basic assumptions about policy coherence underpinning the SDGs. We systematically screened the peer-reviewed literature to identify 40 studies that provide evidence about whether coherent policymaking contributes to more effective outcomes and helps to reduce inequality. We find that coherent policymaking did not help reduce inequality in a majority of cases and made it worse in several. Our findings challenge the narrative that coherence is a necessary pre-condition for progress on the SDGs for all people.

    Ladda ner fulltext (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 5.
    Pickering, Jonathan
    et al.
    Univ Canberra, Australia.
    Patterson, James
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Biermann, Frank
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Burch, Sarah
    Univ Waterloo, Canada.
    Elliott, Lorraine
    Australian Natl Univ, Australia.
    Gupta, Aarti
    Wageningen Univ, Netherlands.
    Inoue, Cristina Yumie Aoki
    Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Netherlands.
    Ishii, Atsushi
    Tohoku Univ, Japan.
    Kalfagianni, Agni
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Meadowcroft, James
    Carleton Univ, Canada.
    Okereke, Chukwumerije
    Alex Ekwueme Fed Univ Ndufu Alike, Nigeria.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Pluralizing Debates on the Anthropocene Requires Engaging with the Diversity of Existing Scholarship2023Ingår i: Annals of the American Association of Geographers, ISSN 2469-4452, E-ISSN 2469-4460, Vol. 113, nr 2, s. e-i-e-viArtikel i tidskrift (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
    Abstract [en]

    A recent article in this journal (Jackson 2021) validly emphasized that debates about the Anthropocene need to recognize a diverse range of perspectives, worldviews, and forms of knowledge. In doing so, however, the author mischaracterized scholarship on earth system governance as being antithetical to a critical and pluralistic stance on the Anthropocene. In this commentary we address key concerns about the article: selective and misleading quotations regarding the earth system governance literatures diversity; unwarranted insinuations that juxtapose the implications of this literature with those of slavery and holocausts; and neglect of the breadth and diversity of scholarship on earth system governance. We underscore the need for scholarly debates on the Anthropocene to be informed by a balanced and rigorous assessment of existing scholarship, and for a constructive dialogue between global and locally situated ways of understanding the earth.

  • 6.
    Bennich, Therese
    et al.
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Beaussart, Raphaelle
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Allen, Cameron
    Monash Univ, Australia; UNSW, Australia.
    Malekpour, Shirin
    Monash Univ, Australia.
    Recurring patterns of SDG interlinkages and how they can advance the 2030 Agenda2023Ingår i: One Earth, ISSN 2590-3330, E-ISSN 2590-3322, Vol. 6, nr 11, s. 1465-1476Artikel, forskningsöversikt (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set a vision for a more sustainable world, to be realized by 2030. Progress to date is insufficient and implementation challenges are many, including the need for strategies that maximize synergies and mitigate trade-offs and conflicts among the goals. This scoping review synthesizes 51 recent scientific articles on interlinkages, with findings that can help decision-makers address this challenge. We identify recurring patterns of SDG interlinkages, including SDGs that promote other SDGs (e.g., SDGs 4, 6, and 17) and those at risk due to negative impacts from progress in other areas (e.g., SDGs 14 and 15). Such patterns can inform national and local implementation. Further research is needed to clarify the systemic roles of some SDGs (e.g., SDGs 10-12), understand causal relationships, and assess policy options. We make six recommendations for science to make interlinkages knowledge more accessible and for decision-makers to systematically use this knowledge.

    Ladda ner fulltext (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 7.
    Weitz, Nina
    et al.
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Carlsen, Henrik
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Bennich, Therese
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Nilsson, Mans
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Returning to core principles to advance the 2030 Agenda2023Ingår i: Nature Sustainability, E-ISSN 2398-9629, Vol. 6, s. 1145-1148Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    Principles underpinning the 2030 Agenda - indivisibility, integration and universality - can safeguard against inaction or unsustainable practices but have not yet come into effect. We propose measures to strengthen alignment with them as the world gears up to accelerate implementation at the 2023 SDG Summit.

  • 8.
    Bustamante, Mercedes
    et al.
    Univ Brasilia, Brazil.
    Roy, Joyashree
    Asian Inst Technol, Thailand.
    Ospina, Daniel
    Future Earth Secretariat, Sweden.
    Achakulwisut, Ploy
    Stockholm Environm Inst SEI, Thailand.
    Aggarwal, Anubha
    Delhi Technol Univ, India.
    Bastos, Ana
    Max Planck Inst Biogeochem, Germany.
    Broadgate, Wendy
    Future Earth Secretariat, Sweden.
    Canadell, Josep G.
    CSIRO Environm, Australia.
    Carr, Edward R.
    Clark Univ, MA 01602 USA.
    Chen, Deliang
    Univ Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Cleugh, Helen A.
    Australian Natl Univ, Australia.
    Ebi, Kristie L.
    Univ Washington, WA USA.
    Edwards, Clea
    Arizona State Univ, AZ USA.
    Farbotko, Carol
    Griffith Univ, Australia.
    Fernandez-Martinez, Marcos
    Ctr Ecol Res & Forestry Applicat CREAF, Spain.
    Froelicher, Thomas L.
    Univ Bern, Switzerland.
    Fuss, Sabine
    Mercator Res Inst Global Commons & Climate Change, Germany; Humboldt Univ, Germany.
    Geden, Oliver
    German Inst Int & Secur Affairs, Germany.
    Gruber, Nicolas
    Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Switzerland.
    Harrington, Luke J.
    Univ Waikato, New Zealand.
    Hauck, Judith
    Helmholtz Ctr Polar and Marine Res, Germany.
    Hausfather, Zeke
    Stripe, CA USA; Berkeley Earth, CA USA.
    Hebden, Sophie
    Future Earth Secretariat, Sweden.
    Hebinck, Aniek
    Erasmus Univ, Netherlands.
    Huq, Saleemul
    Int Ctr Climate Change & Dev ICCCAD, Bangladesh; Int Inst Environm & Dev IIED, England; Independent Univ Bangladesh IUB, Bangladesh.
    Huss, Matthias
    Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Switzerland.
    Jamero, M. Laurice P.
    Manila Observ, Philippines.
    Juhola, Sirkku
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Kumarasinghe, Nilushi
    Future Earth Secretariat, Canada; Sustainabil Digital Age, Canada.
    Lwasa, Shuaib
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Mallick, Bishawjit
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Martin, Maria
    Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res PIK, Germany.
    Mcgreevy, Steven
    Univ Twente, Netherlands.
    Mirazo, Paula
    Arizona State Univ, AZ USA.
    Mukherji, Aditi
    CGIAR, India.
    Muttitt, Greg
    Int Inst Sustainable Dev IISD, Switzerland.
    Nemet, Gregory F.
    Univ Wisconsin Madison, WI USA.
    Obura, David
    CORDIO East Africa, Kenya.
    Okereke, Chukwumerije
    Univ Reading, England.
    Oliver, Tom
    UN Econ Commiss Africa, Ethiopia.
    Orlove, Ben
    Columbia Univ, NY USA.
    Ouedraogo, Nadia S.
    UN Econ Commiss Africa, Ethiopia.
    Patra, Prabir K.
    Japan Agcy Marine Earth Sci & Technol JAMSTEC, Japan; Res Inst Humanity & Nat RIHN, Japan.
    Pelling, Mark
    UCL, England.
    Pereira, Laura M.
    Univ Witwatersrand, South Africa; Stockholm Univ, Sweden.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst SEI, Sweden.
    Pongratz, Julia
    Ludwig Maximilians Univ Munchen, Germany; Max Planck Inst Meteorol, Germany.
    Prakash, Anjal
    Indian Sch Business, India.
    Rammig, Anja
    Tech Univ Munich, Germany.
    Raymond, Colin
    Univ Calif Los Angeles, CA USA.
    Redman, Aaron
    Arizona State Univ, AZ USA; Monitoring & Evaluating Climate Commun & Educ Proj, Canada.
    Reveco, Cristobal
    Climate Serv Ctr Germany GERICS, Germany.
    Rockstroem, Johan
    Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res PIK, Germany; Univ Potsdam, Germany.
    Rodrigues, Regina
    Univ Fed Santa Catarina, Brazil.
    Rounce, David R.
    Carnegie Mellon Univ, PA USA.
    Schipper, E. Lisa F.
    Univ Bonn, Germany.
    Schlosser, Peter
    Arizona State Univ, AZ USA.
    Selomane, Odirilwe
    Univ Pretoria, South Africa.
    Semieniuk, Gregor
    Univ Massachusetts, MA USA.
    Shin, Yunne-Jai
    Univ Montpellier, France.
    Siddiqui, Tasneem A.
    Univ Dhaka, Bangladesh.
    Singh, Vartika
    Humboldt Univ, Germany; Int Food Policy Res Inst IFPRIN, India; Indian Inst Management, India.
    Sioen, Giles B.
    Future Earth Secretariat, Japan; Natl Inst Environm Studies, Japan.
    Sokona, Youba
    African Climate Policy Ctr, Mali.
    Stammer, Detlef
    Univ Hamburg, Germany.
    Steinert, Norman J.
    NORCE Norwegian Res Ctr, Norway; Bjerknes Ctr Climate Res, Norway.
    Suk, Sunhee
    Future Earth Secretariat, Japan; Nagasaki Univ, Japan.
    Sutton, Rowan
    Univ Reading, England.
    Thalheimer, Lisa
    United Nations Univ, Germany; Univ Oxford, England.
    Thompson, Vikki
    Royal Netherlands Meteorol Inst KNMI, Netherlands.
    Trencher, Gregory
    Kyoto Univ, Japan.
    van der Geest, Kees
    United Nations Univ, Germany.
    Werners, Saskia E.
    United Nations Univ, Germany; Wageningen Univ & Res, Netherlands.
    Wuebbelmann, Thea
    Climate Serv Ctr Germany GERICS, Germany.
    Wunderling, Nico
    Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res PIK, Germany; Stockholm Univ, Sweden.
    Yin, Jiabo
    Wuhan Univ, Peoples R China.
    Zickfeld, Kirsten
    Simon Fraser Univ, Canada.
    Zscheischler, Jakob
    UFZ Helmholtz Ctr Environm Res, Germany; Tech Univ Dresden, Germany.
    Ten new insights in climate science 20232023Ingår i: Global Sustainability, E-ISSN 2059-4798, Vol. 7, artikel-id e19Artikel, forskningsöversikt (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    Non-technical summary We identify a set of essential recent advances in climate change research with high policy relevance, across natural and social sciences: (1) looming inevitability and implications of overshooting the 1.5 degrees C warming limit, (2) urgent need for a rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges for scaling carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding the future contribution of natural carbon sinks, (5) intertwinedness of the crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) compound events, (7) mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility in the face of climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems.Technical summary The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Reports provides the scientific foundation for international climate negotiations and constitutes an unmatched resource for researchers. However, the assessment cycles take multiple years. As a contribution to cross- and interdisciplinary understanding of climate change across diverse research communities, we have streamlined an annual process to identify and synthesize significant research advances. We collected input from experts on various fields using an online questionnaire and prioritized a set of 10 key research insights with high policy relevance. This year, we focus on: (1) the looming overshoot of the 1.5 degrees C warming limit, (2) the urgency of fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges to scale-up carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding future natural carbon sinks, (5) the need for joint governance of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) advances in understanding compound events, (7) accelerated mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility amidst climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. We present a succinct account of these insights, reflect on their policy implications, and offer an integrated set of policy-relevant messages. This science synthesis and science communication effort is also the basis for a policy report contributing to elevate climate science every year in time for the United Nations Climate Change Conference.Social media summary We highlight recent and policy-relevant advances in climate change research - with input from more than 200 experts.

  • 9.
    Biermann, Frank
    et al.
    Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
    Oomen, Jeroen
    Urban Futures Studio, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
    Gupta, Aarti
    Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
    Ali, Saleem H.
    Department of Geography and Spatial Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA; Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the Global Environment Facility, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
    Conca, Ken
    School of International Service, American University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
    Hajer, Maarten A.
    Urban Futures Studio, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
    Kashwan, Prakash
    Department of Political Science, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA.
    Kotzé, Louis J.
    Faculty of Law, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
    Leach, Melissa
    Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
    Messner, Dirk
    German Environment Agency, Dessau-Roßlau, Germany.
    Okereke, Chukwumerije
    Centre for Climate Change and Development, Alex-Ekwueme Federal University Ndufu-Alike, Abakaliki, Nigeria.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Potočnik, Janez
    International Resource Panel, United Nations Environment Programme, Paris, France; SYSTEMIQ, UK.
    Schlosberg, David
    Sydney Environment Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
    Scobie, Michelle
    Institute of International Relations, The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago.
    VanDeveer, Stacy D.
    McCormack Graduate School of Policy and Global Studies, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
    Solar geoengineering: The case for an international non‐use agreement2022Ingår i: Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, ISSN 1757-7780, E-ISSN 1757-7799, Vol. 13, nr 3, artikel-id e754Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    Solar geoengineering is gaining prominence in climate change debates as an issue worth studying; for some it is even a potential future policy option. We argue here against this increasing normalization of solar geoengineering as a speculative part of the climate policy portfolio. We contend, in particular, that solar geoengineering at planetary scale is not governable in a globally inclusive and just manner within the current international political system. We therefore call upon governments and the United Nations to take immediate and effective political control over the development of solar geoengineering technologies. Specifically, we advocate for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering and outline the core elements of this proposal.

    Ladda ner fulltext (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 10.
    Pickering, Jonathan
    et al.
    Univ Canberra, Australia.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Democratising planetary boundaries: experts, social values and deliberative risk evaluation in Earthsystem governance2020Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, ISSN 1523-908X, E-ISSN 1522-7200, Vol. 22, nr 1, s. 59-71Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    Recent debates about the concept of planetary boundaries recall longstanding concerns about whether ecological limits are compatible with ecological democracy. The planetary boundaries framework (originally set out in Rockstrom et al., 2009a, 2009b) defines values for key Earth-system processes such as climate change and biodiversity that aim to maintain a safe distance from thresholds or levels that could endanger human wellbeing. Despite having a significant impact in policy debates, the framework has been criticised as implying an expert-driven approach to governing global environmental risks that lacks democratic legitimacy. Drawing on research on deliberative democracy and the role of science in democratic societies, we argue that planetary boundaries can be interpreted in ways that remain consistent with democratic decision-making. We show how an iterative, dialogical process to formulate planetary boundaries and negotiate planetary targets could form the basis for a democratically legitimate division of labour among experts, citizens and policy-makers in evaluating and responding to Earth-system risks. Crucial to this division of evaluative labour is opening up space for deliberative contestation about the value judgments inherent in collective responses to Earth-system risks, while also safeguarding the ability of experts to issue warnings about what they consider to be unacceptable risks.

    Ladda ner fulltext (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 11.
    Zoha, Shawoo
    et al.
    Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI).
    Dzebo, Adis
    Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI); Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University.
    Hägele, Ramona
    German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
    Iacobuta, Gabriela
    German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
    Chan, Sander
    German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
    Muhoza, Cassilde
    Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI).
    Osano, Philip
    Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI).
    Francisco, Marie
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för ekonomisk och industriell utveckling, Statsvetenskap. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI).
    Linnér, Björn-Ola
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten.
    Vijge, Marjanneke J.
    Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University.
    Increasing policy coherence between NDCs and SDGs: a national perspective2020Rapport (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
    Abstract [en]

    Key messages 

    • The Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 include cross-cutting and ambitious goals, as defined in nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Countries are more likely to meet these goals if they enhance policy coherence between the two agendas.
    • An initial analysis identifies the synergies and conflicts between NDC goals and SDGs in six countries – Germany, Kenya, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sweden and the Philippines – and offers insights on the key barriers and governance challenges to policy coherence.
    • The Agenda 2030 goal to reduce inequality, or SDG 10, conflicts with other goals in all six countries, appearing when governments plan for just energy transitions away from fossil fuels, promote economic growth for poverty alleviation, or enact fuel taxes that open up an urban-rural divide.
    • Institutional measures, such as reducing government fragmentation, can increase policy coherence. But policymakers also must look to the underlying political factors that are at the root of policy incoherence, such as the values, norms and vested interests unique to each country
  • 12.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Global adaptation governance: An emerging but contested domain2019Ingår i: Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, ISSN 1757-7780, E-ISSN 1757-7799, Vol. 10, nr 6, artikel-id e618Artikel, forskningsöversikt (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    Adaptation to climate change has steadily risen on global policy agendas and entered a new era with the 2015 Paris Agreement, which established a global goal on adaptation. While this goal responds to calls to strengthen global governance of adaptation, it has not yet been operationalized. Further, few studies take stock of current global adaptation governance to inform the implementation of the goal. Against this background this review asks: To what extent is there global governance of climate change adaptation? Can it be characterized as a strong domain of global governance? In what ways is it contested? Global adaptation governance is defined here as occurring when state and non-state actors in the global (including transnational) sphere authoritatively and intentionally shape the actions of constituents towards climate change adaptation as a public goal. Although empirical evidence is scant, it is proposed here that global adaptation governance is indeed emerging. Yet, its further strengthening appears contested. First, measurement of progress towards adaptation as a public goal at the global level is severely challenged by the ambiguity of adaptation and the lack of distinct metrics. Second, the lack of a clear global-level problem-framing, or recognition of adaptation as a global public good, has meant limited legitimacy of global governance initiatives. A consequence of contestation is that governance forms and functions used so far have not been authoritative in how they seek to shape actions. The review concludes by identifying research needs for advancing science and policy on adaptation. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance amp;gt; Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

    Ladda ner fulltext (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 13.
    Benzie, Magnus
    et al.
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Governing borderless climate risks: moving beyond the territorial framing of adaptation2019Ingår i: International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, ISSN 1567-9764, E-ISSN 1573-1553, Vol. 19, nr 4-5, s. 369-393Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    Despite the increasing relevance of cross-border flows of goods, capital and people in shaping risks and opportunities today, we still live in a bordered world, where the nation state plays a key role in planning and governance. Yet, climate change impacts will not be contained within country borders, meaning that climate change adaptation governance should also consider borderless climate risks that cascade through the international system, in relatively simple or highly complex ways. In this paper, we demonstrate how the notion of borderless climate risks challenges the dominant territorial framing of adaptation and its problem structure. To advance knowledge, we ask: why has a territorial framing and the national and sub-national scales dominated adaptation governance? How do borderless climate risks challenge this framing and what are possible governance responses? We draw on constructivist international relations theory and propose that the epistemic community that developed to interpret climate change adaptation for decision-makers had certain features (e.g. strong environmental sciences foundation, reliance on place-based case study research) that established and subsequently reinforced the territorial framing. This framing was then reinforced by an international norm that adaptation was primarily a national or local responsibility, which has paradoxically also informed calls for international responsibility for funding adaptation. We conclude by identifying types of governance responses at three different scales-national and bilateral; transnational; international and regional-and invite more systematic evaluation by the IR community.

  • 14.
    Persson, Åsa
    et al.
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Dzebo, Adis
    Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden; Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Special issue: Exploring global and transnational governance of climate change adaptation2019Ingår i: International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, ISSN 1567-9764, E-ISSN 1573-1553, Vol. 19, nr 4-5, s. 357-367Artikel i tidskrift (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
    Abstract [en]

    n/a

    Ladda ner fulltext (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 15.
    Biermann, Frank
    et al.
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Betsill, Michele M.
    Colorado State Univ, CO 80523 USA.
    Burch, Sarah
    Univ Waterloo, Canada.
    Dryzek, John
    Univ Canberra, Australia.
    Gordon, Christopher
    Univ Ghana, Ghana.
    Gupta, Aarti
    Wageningen Univ, Netherlands.
    Gupta, Joyeeta
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Inoue, Cristina
    Univ Brasilia, Brazil.
    Kalfagianni, Agni
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Kanie, Norichika
    Keio Univ, Japan.
    Olsson, Lennart
    Lund Univ, Sweden.
    Persson, Åsa
    Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för tema, Tema Miljöförändring. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Stockholm Environm Inst, Sweden.
    Schroeder, Heike
    Univ East Anglia, England.
    Scobie, Michelle
    Univ West Indies, Trinid and Tobago.
    The Earth System Governance Project as a network organization: a critical assessment after ten years2019Ingår i: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, ISSN 1877-3435, E-ISSN 1877-3443, Vol. 39, s. 17-23Artikel, forskningsöversikt (Refereegranskat)
    Abstract [en]

    The social sciences have engaged since the late 1980s in international collaborative programmes to study questions of sustainability and global change. This article offers an in-depth analysis of the largest long-standing social-science network in this field: the Earth System Governance Project. Originating as a core project of the former International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, the Earth System Governance Project has matured into a global, self-sustaining research network, with annual conferences, numerous taskforces, research centers, regional research fellow meetings, three book series, an open access flagship journal, and a lively presence in social media. The article critically reviews the experiences of the Earth System Governance network and its integration and interactions with other programmes over the last decade.

1 - 15 av 15
RefereraExporteraLänk till träfflistan
Permanent länk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf