Search Climate Insights Directory

The author argues that first-wave environmentalism failed because it lacked a convincing narrative on economic growth, failed to establish relative urgency against immediate poverty and debt crises, and remained isolated within environmental ministries. He evaluates the High Level Panel on Global Sustainability's report as a successful attempt to address these gaps through recommendations on green jobs, carbon pricing, and private sector engagement. However, he warns that the 'zero draft' for the Rio+20 outcome document remains largely aspirational and risks falling back into the 'environmental trap'.

The paper argues that Earth system interactions can be governed through comprehensive governance packages across different sub-systems and levels. It identifies three primary governance functions to manage these interactions: reducing system stress, risks, and vulnerabilities; navigating the transformation of economic activity; and developing a diversity of options. The analysis specifically considers the challenges of applying the planetary boundaries framework to the EU region to avoid shifting environmental problems from one sub-system to another.

The SEI Research Forum Book of Abstracts compiles 60 research summaries from the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) staff. The research spans four primary themes: Managing Environmental Systems, Reducing Climate Risk, Transforming Governance, and Rethinking Development. Key areas of investigation include the 'planetary boundaries' framework, the socio-economic drivers of clean cooking and sanitation in India and Africa, the effectiveness of climate adaptation policies in the UK and Sweden, and the geopolitical dynamics of climate negotiations involving BASIC countries. The document highlights a mix of completed research, ongoing projects, and future research ideas aimed at bridging science and policy for sustainable development.

The report analyzes three global energy scenarios—Baseline, Basic Energy Access (BEA), and Shared Development Agenda (SDA)—to determine the pathways required to provide sustainable energy for all while limiting global warming to 2°C. It argues that achieving these goals requires a massive socio-technical transformation, including the virtual phase-out of conventional fossil fuels for electricity by 2050 and a significant increase in renewable energy and energy efficiency. Through 20 case studies, the document identifies barriers such as vested interests, high entry costs for the poor, and institutional inertia, while proposing a multi-level governance framework to coordinate innovation, mobilize finance, and align national policies with global sustainable development goals.

The report recommends that nations adopt strategic principles to accelerate the global energy transition. These include implementing policies for energy efficiency and renewable energy scale-up, creating a transparent global investment fund for poor and emerging economies, developing policy assessment frameworks based on planetary boundaries to manage Earth systems risks, and using sustainable energy measures as a metric for development and environmental progress.

The document presents a framework for a global energy assessment to support the Rio+20 Earth Summit, focusing on a 'triple global energy challenge': providing affordable energy for all, phasing out fossil fuels to stabilize the climate, and operating within Earth system boundaries. It proposes a 'new model' of development where all countries reach a GDP per capita equivalent to current middle-income levels by 2050, requiring a massive transition to renewable energy and efficiency. The authors recommend the adoption of strategic principles, including a transparent global investment fund for renewables in poor economies and the use of the planetary boundaries framework to manage environmental risks.

The report argues that climate change and armed conflict act as mutually reinforcing drivers of harm, creating a polycrisis that disproportionately affects vulnerable populations. It highlights how climate change serves as a 'threat multiplier' by exacerbating resource scarcity and instability, while military activities contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions and environmental degradation. The document emphasizes the resulting collapse of health systems and the emergence of infectious diseases in conflict zones. It calls for integrated climate, health, and peacebuilding strategies, including a transition to renewable energy and greater military accountability for emissions, to break this cycle of harm.

The handbook evaluates six carbon removal methods: BioCCS, afforestation/reforestation, biochar, terrestrial enhanced weathering, DACCS, and soil carbon sequestration. It highlights the trade-offs between permanence, cost, and ecological impact, emphasizing that land-based solutions often conflict with planetary boundaries and food security, while technological solutions like DACCS face high energy and cost barriers. The document recommends prioritizing sustainable feedstocks, rights-based approaches for local communities, and the development of standardized monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) frameworks.

The document provides a comprehensive list of requirements for a successful Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). It advocates for a rights-based approach, the adoption of a 'Whole Government Approach' to mainstreaming, and the prohibition of destructive activities like deep-sea mining and fracking. It argues against voluntary commitments, biodiversity offsetting, and the use of high-risk technologies such as geoengineering and synthetic biology, while calling for public finance from developed countries to support biodiversity conservation in developing nations.

The document argues that the Global Biodiversity Framework must be based on binding norms rather than voluntary commitments and must address the structural economic drivers of biodiversity loss. It advocates for a rights-based approach that protects indigenous peoples and environmental defenders, the elimination of harmful subsidies, and the prohibition of high-impact industrial activities like deep-sea mining and Arctic oil extraction. The text explicitly rejects the commodification of nature, biodiversity offsets, and the use of geoengineering or synthetic biology as solutions to the environmental crisis.

The document provides a comprehensive guide for the Global Biodiversity Framework, emphasizing the need for binding rules over voluntary commitments and the integration of human rights, especially for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. It argues that biodiversity loss is driven by the current economic system and unsustainable consumption, calling for a 'Whole Government Approach' to integrate biodiversity across all sectors. Key recommendations include the elimination of harmful subsidies for industrial farming and aquaculture, the prohibition of high-risk technologies like geoengineering, and the rejection of biodiversity offsetting and market-based solutions. The text stresses that conservation must prioritize existing habitats and be supported by public funding, particularly from developed nations to developing ones.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) provides a detailed critique and set of proposals to amend the first draft of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. FoEI argues for more ambitious targets, such as increasing the goal for ecosystem area gain from 15% to 20% and reducing invasive species introduction by 90% instead of 50%. The organization emphasizes the need to halt biodiversity loss entirely rather than just slowing its rate, and advocates for the explicit inclusion of human rights, the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs), and the phasing out of highly hazardous pesticides. FoEI also proposes a new 'Goal E' focused on a comprehensive implementation mechanism and suggests that financial resources for biodiversity should be significantly increased, citing a need to address 4-6 trillion USD in harmful incentives.

The document argues that the current global economic system, driven by neoliberal ideology, has failed by causing environmental destruction and extreme inequality. It proposes five key pillars for transformation: ensuring universal public services through tax justice, scaling up social ownership and cooperatives, supporting local markets and fair trade, adopting wellbeing-based economic indicators instead of GDP, and establishing binding international rules to hold transnational corporations accountable for human rights and environmental abuses.

The report introduces a framework for 'Inclusive Green Economies' (IGE) designed to decouple economic growth from resource consumption while ensuring social equity. It outlines five guiding principles—Wellbeing, Justice, Planetary Boundaries, Efficiency and Sufficiency, and Good Governance—and suggests ten catalytic activities to accelerate this transition. The document emphasizes that the transition is an adaptive process likely taking 10-20 years, requiring collaboration between governments, businesses, and civil society to move from awareness and pressure to policy decisions and behavioral change.

The report examines the relationship between natural capital and human prosperity, arguing that current economic systems fail to accurately measure, value, and manage nature. It highlights that while human wealth has increased, renewable natural capital is being depleted due to a lack of appropriate price signals and a flawed assumption that nature is easily substitutable by man-made capital. The authors propose integrating natural capital into comprehensive national wealth accounts and using the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a framework for protecting critical natural capital. Key recommendations include establishing Natural Capital Committees, using non-market valuation techniques, and supporting R&D for technologies that reduce pressure on nature.

The document outlines nine fundamental principles of resilience science, emphasizing that resilience involves the capacity to cope, adapt, and transform rather than simply 'bouncing back'. It highlights the importance of diversity, relationship-building, agency, and the need to address power imbalances and social inequalities to ensure equitable resilience. The principles argue that investing in resilience reduces future costs and requires a continuous cycle of learning and innovation to navigate accelerating risks within planetary boundaries.

The fact sheet outlines nine core principles of resilience science, emphasizing that resilience involves the ability to cope, adapt, and transform within planetary boundaries. It argues that investing in resilience reduces future costs and requires addressing power imbalances and social inequalities to ensure equitable outcomes.

The document outlines nine core principles of resilience science, defining resilience as the capacity to cope, adapt, and transform amidst uncertainty. It emphasizes that resilience is a cyclical process of learning and innovation that requires diversity, strong social and ecological relationships, and the active management of trade-offs. The text argues that investing in resilience reduces future costs and requires addressing power imbalances and historical injustices to ensure equitable outcomes.

The document argues that poverty and environmental degradation are mutually reinforcing systemic issues that must be addressed together. It traces the shift from measuring poverty solely by household income to multidimensional indices, such as the Human Development Index (HDI) and the Planetary-Pressures Adjusted HDI, which incorporate carbon emissions and material footprints. The text highlights how climate change, conflict, and the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affect the poor, while noting that the resource consumption of the wealthiest 10% of the global population prevents the poor from escaping poverty within planetary boundaries. It recommends that governments shift from GDP-centric metrics to national well-being indices that include marginalized groups and environmental health.

The document identifies six primary threats to the ocean: acidification, warming, hypoxia, sea level rise, pollution, and overuse of resources. It argues that these stressors often act synergistically, increasing the risk of catastrophic tipping points. The authors propose a shift from traditional cost-benefit analysis to an insurance-based risk model to better account for high-impact, low-probability events. Economically, the text estimates that the cost of damage under a high-emission scenario could reach USD 1,980 billion by 2100, suggesting that rapid carbon abatement could save over a trillion dollars per year by the end of the century. The Pacific Ocean is presented as a critical case study for coordinated regional action.