6 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
- ItemKey determinants of global land-use projections([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2019) Stehfest, Elke; van Zeist, Willem-Jan; Valin, Hugo; Havlik, Petr; Popp, Alexander; Kyle, Page; Tabeau, Andrzej; Mason-D’Croz, Daniel; Hasegawa, Tomoko; Bodirsky, Benjamin L.; Calvin, Katherine; Doelman, Jonathan C.; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Humpenöder, Florian; Lotze-Campen, Hermann; van Meijl, Hans; Wiebe, KeithLand use is at the core of various sustainable development goals. Long-term climate foresight studies have structured their recent analyses around five socio-economic pathways (SSPs), with consistent storylines of future macroeconomic and societal developments; however, model quantification of these scenarios shows substantial heterogeneity in land-use projections. Here we build on a recently developed sensitivity approach to identify how future land use depends on six distinct socio-economic drivers (population, wealth, consumption preferences, agricultural productivity, land-use regulation, and trade) and their interactions. Spread across models arises mostly from diverging sensitivities to long-term drivers and from various representations of land-use regulation and trade, calling for reconciliation efforts and more empirical research. Most influential determinants for future cropland and pasture extent are population and agricultural efficiency. Furthermore, land-use regulation and consumption changes can play a key role in reducing both land use and food-security risks, and need to be central elements in sustainable development strategies.
- ItemReconciling irrigated food production with environmental flows for Sustainable Development Goals implementation(London : Nature Publishing Group, 2017) Jägermeyr, J.; Pastor, A.; Biemans, H.; Gerten, D.Safeguarding river ecosystems is a precondition for attaining the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) related to water and the environment, while rigid implementation of such policies may hamper achievement of food security. River ecosystems provide life-supporting functions that depend on maintaining environmental flow requirements (EFRs). Here we establish gridded process-based estimates of EFRs and their violation through human water withdrawals. Results indicate that 41% of current global irrigation water use (997 km 3 per year) occurs at the expense of EFRs. If these volumes were to be reallocated to the ecosystems, half of globally irrigated cropland would face production losses of ≥10%, with losses of ∼20-30% of total country production especially in Central and South Asia. However, we explicitly show that improvement of irrigation practices can widely compensate for such losses on a sustainable basis. Integration with rainwater management can even achieve a 10% global net gain. Such management interventions are highlighted to act as a pivotal target in supporting the implementation of the ambitious and seemingly conflicting SDG agenda.
- ItemThe COVID‐19 Pandemic Not Only Poses Challenges, but Also Opens Opportunities for Sustainable Transformation(Hoboken, NJ : Wiley-Blackwell, 2021) Pradhan, Prajal; Subedi, Daya Raj; Khatiwada, Dilip; Joshi, Kirti Kusum; Kafle, Sagar; Chhetri, Raju Pandit; Dhakal, Shobhakar; Gautam, Ambika Prasad; Khatiwada, Padma Prasad; Mainaly, Jony; Onta, Sharad; Pandey, Vishnu Prasad; Parajuly, Keshav; Pokharel, Sijal; Satyal, Poshendra; Singh, Devendra Raj; Talchabhadel, Rocky; Tha, Rupesh; Thapa, Bhesh Raj; Adhikari, Kamal; Adhikari, Shankar; Chandra Bastakoti, Ram; Bhandari, Pitambar; Bharati, Saraswoti; Bhusal, Yub Raj; Bahadur BK, Man; Bogati, Ramji; Kafle, Simrin; Khadka, Manohara; Khatiwada, Nawa Raj; Lal, Ajay Chandra; Neupane, Dinesh; Neupane, Kaustuv Raj; Ojha, Rajit; Regmi, Narayan Prasad; Rupakheti, Maheswar; Sapkota, Alka; Sapkota, Rupak; Sharma, Mahashram; Shrestha, Gitta; Shrestha, Indira; Shrestha, Khadga Bahadur; Tandukar, Sarmila; Upadhyaya, Shyam; Kropp, Jürgen P.; Bhuju, Dinesh RajThe COVID-19 pandemic has impacted social, economic, and environmental systems worldwide, slowing down and reversing the progress made in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). SDGs belong to the 2030 Agenda to transform our world by tackling humankind's challenges to ensure well-being, economic prosperity, and environmental protection. We explore the potential impacts of the pandemic on SDGs for Nepal. We followed a knowledge co-creation process with experts from various professional backgrounds, involving five steps: online survey, online workshop, assessment of expert's opinions, review and validation, and revision and synthesis. The pandemic has negatively impacted most SDGs in the short term. Particularly, the targets of SDG 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 13 have and will continue to have weakly to moderately restricting impacts. However, a few targets of SDG 2, 3, 6, and 11 could also have weakly promoting impacts. The negative impacts have resulted from impeding factors linked to the pandemic. Many of the negative impacts may subside in the medium and long terms. The key five impeding factors are lockdowns, underemployment and unemployment, closure of institutions and facilities, diluted focus and funds for non-COVID-19-related issues, and anticipated reduction in support from development partners. The pandemic has also opened a window of opportunity for sustainable transformation, which is short-lived and narrow. These opportunities are lessons learned for planning and action, socio-economic recovery plan, use of information and communication technologies and the digital economy, reverse migration and “brain gain,” and local governments' exercising authorities.
- Item2°C and SDGs: United they stand, divided they fall?(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2016) von Stechow, Christoph; Minx, Jan C.; Riahi, Keywan; Jewell, Jessica; McCollum, David L.; Callaghan, Max W.; Bertram, Christoph; Luderer, Gunnar; Baiocchi, GiovanniThe adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the new international climate treaty could put 2015 into the history books as a defining year for setting human development on a more sustainable pathway. The global climate policy and SDG agendas are highly interconnected: the way that the climate problem is addressed strongly affects the prospects of meeting numerous other SDGs and vice versa. Drawing on existing scenario results from a recent energy-economy-climate model inter-comparison project, this letter analyses these synergies and (risk) trade-offs of alternative 2 °C pathways across indicators relevant for energy-related SDGs and sustainable energy objectives. We find that limiting the availability of key mitigation technologies yields some co-benefits and decreases risks specific to these technologies but greatly increases many others. Fewer synergies and substantial trade-offs across SDGs are locked into the system for weak short-term climate policies that are broadly in line with current Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), particularly when combined with constraints on technologies. Lowering energy demand growth is key to managing these trade-offs and creating synergies across multiple energy-related SD dimensions. We argue that SD considerations are central for choosing socially acceptable 2 °C pathways: the prospects of meeting other SDGs need not dwindle and can even be enhanced for some goals if appropriate climate policy choices are made. Progress on the climate policy and SDG agendas should therefore be tracked within a unified framework.
- ItemBioenergy production and sustainable development: Science base for policymaking remains limited(Milton Park : Taylor & Francis, 2016) Robledo‐Abad, Carmenza; Althaus, Hans‐Jörg; Berndes, Göran; Bolwig, Simon; Corbera, Esteve; Creutzig, Felix; Garcia‐Ulloa, John; Geddes, Anna; Gregg, Jay S.; Haberl, Helmut; Hanger, Susanne; Harper, Richard J.; Hunsberger, Carol; Larsen, Rasmus K.; Lauk, Christian; Leitner, Stefan; Lilliestam, Johan; Lotze‐Campen, Hermann; Muys, Bart; Nordborg, Maria; Ölund, Maria; Orlowsky, Boris; Popp, Alexander; Portugal‐Pereira, Joana; Reinhard, Jürgen; Scheiffle, Lena; Smith, PeteThe possibility of using bioenergy as a climate change mitigation measure has sparked a discussion of whether and how bioenergy production contributes to sustainable development. We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature to illuminate this relationship and found a limited scientific basis for policymaking. Our results indicate that knowledge on the sustainable development impacts of bioenergy production is concentrated in a few well‐studied countries, focuses on environmental and economic impacts, and mostly relates to dedicated agricultural biomass plantations. The scope and methodological approaches in studies differ widely and only a small share of the studies sufficiently reports on context and/or baseline conditions, which makes it difficult to get a general understanding of the attribution of impacts. Nevertheless, we identified regional patterns of positive or negative impacts for all categories – environmental, economic, institutional, social and technological. In general, economic and technological impacts were more frequently reported as positive, while social and environmental impacts were more frequently reported as negative (with the exception of impacts on direct substitution of GHG emission from fossil fuel). More focused and transparent research is needed to validate these patterns and develop a strong science underpinning for establishing policies and governance agreements that prevent/mitigate negative and promote positive impacts from bioenergy production.
- ItemArticulating the effect of food systems innovation on the Sustainable Development Goals(Amsterdam : Elsevier, 2021) Herrero, Mario; Thornton, Philip K.; Mason-D'Croz, Daniel; Palmer, Jeda; Bodirsky, Benjamin L.; Pradhan, Prajal; Barrett, Christopher B.; Benton, Tim G.; Hall, Andrew; Pikaar, Ilje; Bogard, Jessica R.; Bonnett, Graham D.; Bryan, Brett A.; Campbell, Bruce M.; Christensen, Svend; Clark, Michael; Fanzo, Jessica; Godde, Cecile M.; Jarvis, Andy; Loboguerrero, Ana Maria; Mathys, Alexander; McIntyre, C. Lynne; Naylor, Rosamond L.; Nelson, Rebecca; Obersteiner, Michael; Parodi, Alejandro; Popp, Alexander; Ricketts, Katie; Smith, Pete; Valin, Hugo; Vermeulen, Sonja J.; Vervoort, Joost; van Wijk, Mark; van Zanten, Hannah HE; West, Paul C.; Wood, Stephen A.; Rockström, JohanFood system innovations will be instrumental to achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, major innovation breakthroughs can trigger profound and disruptive changes, leading to simultaneous and interlinked reconfigurations of multiple parts of the global food system. The emergence of new technologies or social solutions, therefore, have very different impact profiles, with favourable consequences for some SDGs and unintended adverse side-effects for others. Stand-alone innovations seldom achieve positive outcomes over multiple sustainability dimensions. Instead, they should be embedded as part of systemic changes that facilitate the implementation of the SDGs. Emerging trade-offs need to be intentionally addressed to achieve true sustainability, particularly those involving social aspects like inequality in its many forms, social justice, and strong institutions, which remain challenging. Trade-offs with undesirable consequences are manageable through the development of well planned transition pathways, careful monitoring of key indicators, and through the implementation of transparent science targets at the local level.