DPV systems, typically small to medium-sized solar power installations on buildings, which primarily and directly supply electricity to industrial, commercial, or residential consumers in proximity. DPV is an advocated renewable substation for climate change and energy saving for merits of low installation costs, high energy efficiency, and the ability to provide decentralized power supply. Our research has theoretical significance in explaining and understanding the development and policy evolution of DPV in China and provide valuable suggestions for future industry policies during grid parity.

Since 2021, China has been phasing out its decade-long feed-in tariff policies, reducing the photovoltaic industry's dependency on subsidies. Despite the challenges posed by declining electricity prices and slowdown in economic growth, the authorities continue to prioritize the development of DPV due to its low investment costs, high energy efficiency, and decentralized power supply, and these technologies have already achieved demand-side parity. Driven by this phenomenon, this study examines the trajectory of DPV diffusion and the evolution of related policies over the last decade. It unravels the dynamic mechanism of DPV investment through theoretical analysis and develops a macro model to identify optimal installation strategies and renewable energy proportions. Our findings highlight the increasing role of green energy and suggest that green finance is crucial for stimulating DPV investment in the era of grid parity. The study concludes with practical recommendations for overcoming DPV challenges in China.

DPV has become a prominent renewable energy solution in other countries but not in China. We probe the system dynamics modeling to give explanation and solution during grid parity.

Greenhouse gas emissions and land use change – from deforestation, forest degradation, and agricultural intensification – are contributing to climate change and biodiversity loss. Important land-based strategies such as planting trees or growing bioenergy crops (with carbon capture and storage) are needed to achieve the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and to enhance biodiversity.

The integrated Land Ecosystems Atmospheric Processes Study (iLEAPS) is an international knowledge-exchange and capacity-building network, specializing in ecosystems and their role in controlling the exchange of water, energy and chemical compounds between the land surface and the atmosphere. We outline priority directions for land–atmosphere interaction research and its contribution to the sustainable development agenda.

Greenhouse-gas emissions from human activities and land use change (from deforestation, forest degradation, and agricultural intensification) are contributing to climate change and biodiversity loss. Afforestation, reforestation, or growing bioenergy crops (with carbon capture and storage) are important land-based strategies to achieve the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and to enhance biodiversity. The effectiveness of these actions depends on terrestrial ecosystems and their role in controlling or moderating the exchange of water, heat, and chemical compounds between the land surface and the atmosphere.

The integrated Land Ecosystems Atmospheric Processes Study (iLEAPS), a global research network of Future Earth, enables the international community to communicate and remain up to date with developments and concepts about terrestrial ecosystems and their role in global water, energy, and biogeochemical cycles. Covering critically important topics such as fire, forestry, wetlands, methane emissions, urban areas, pollution, and climate change, the iLEAPS Global Research Programme sits center stage for some of the most important environmental questions facing humanity. In this paper, we outline the new challenges and opportunities for land–atmosphere interaction research and its role in supporting the broader sustainable development agenda.

Future directions for research into land–atmosphere interactions that supports the sustainable development agenda

To address increasingly pressing social–environmental challenges, the transformative strand of sustainability science seeks to move beyond a descriptive-analytical stance in order to explore and contribute to the implementation of radical alternatives to dominant and unsustainable paradigms, norms, and values. However, in many cases, academia is not currently structured to support and reward inter-/trans-disciplinary and transformative endeavors. This paper introduces a theory of change for the Future Earth Pathways Initiative, and similar initiatives, to help leverage the capacity of sustainability scientists to engage in transformative research.

The increasing body of descriptive-analytical knowledge produced by sustainability science over the last two decades has largely failed to trigger the transformation of policies, norms, and behaviors it was aiming to inform. The emergent transformative strand of sustainability science is a proactive alternative approach seeking to play an active role in processes of societal change by developing knowledge about options, solutions, and pathways, and by participating in their implementation. In principle, scientists can enhance their contribution to more sustainable futures by engaging in transformative research. However, a lack of skills and competencies, relatively unmatured transformative methods and concepts, and an institutional landscape still geared toward disciplinary and descriptive-analytical research, still hinders the sustainability science community from engaging more widely in transformative research. In this paper, the Future Earth Pathways Initiative introduces a theory of change (ToC) for increasing the capacity of sustainability scientists to engage in this type of research. This ToC ultimately aims to build a growing community of practitioners engaged in transformative research, to advance concepts, methods, and paradigms to foster ‘fit-for-purpose transformative research’, and to shape institutions to nurture transformative research-friendly contexts.

What would a theory of change for leveraging the transformative capacity of sustainability science look like?

In this paper, we explore how critically important ecosystems on the land provide evaporation to the atmosphere, which will later fall as precipitation elsewhere. Using a model-based analysis that tracks water flowing through the atmosphere, we find that more than two-thirds of the precipitation over critically important ecosystem areas is supplied by evaporation from other land. Likewise, more than 40% of the evaporation from critically important ecosystems falls as precipitation on other land. We conclude our work by discussing the policy implications for how these critically important ecosystems connect spatially distant wild and working lands via the atmospheric water cycle.

Global ecosystems are interconnected via atmospheric water vapor flows. Land use change can modify evaporation from land, altering atmospheric moisture recycling and potentially leading to significant changes in downwind precipitation and associated ecological impacts. We combine insights on global ecosystem-regulated moisture recycling with an analysis of critical natural assets (CNA, the 30% of global land providing most of nature's contributions to people) to reveal the sources and sinks of atmospheric water cycle regulation. We find that 65% of the precipitation over CNA is supplied by evaporation from other land areas. Likewise, CNA regions supply critical moisture as precipitation to terrestrial natural ecosystems and production systems worldwide, with 44% of CNA evaporation falling on terrestrial surfaces. Specifically, the Congo River basin emerges as a hotspot of overlap between local atmospheric water cycle maintenance and concentration of nature's contributions to people. Our results suggest global priority areas for conservation efforts beyond and in support of CNA, emphasizing the importance of sparsely populated managed forests and rangelands, along with wild forests, for fostering moisture recycling to and within CNA. This work also underlines the manifold benefits associated with achieving United Nations Sustainable Development Goal #15, to sustainably manage terrestrial life and conserve biodiversity.

Critically important ecosystems are essential for connecting distant landscapes via the atmospheric water cycle.

Agricultural research is vital for sustainable food production, amid changing challenges. To address these challenges effectively and achieve sustainable food systems, researchers and funding bodies have to prioritize research efforts. We conducted horizon scanning to determine how rice systems might change by 2050 and to identify key research gaps. The study involved 101 rice experts from 31 countries who rated the research gaps based on novelty and relevance. The top 25 research gaps encompass sustainability, agricultural development, rice crop science (including genetics, breeding, and physiology), and policies. Addressing these research gaps will contribute toward the sustainability of rice systems.

Agricultural research and development (AgR&D) is crucial for increasing productivity while preserving natural capital and ensuring sustainable food security. Traditional AgR&D approaches along monodisciplinary lines often have unintended consequences and trade-offs, which can be avoided through integrated and interdisciplinary approaches. One such approach is horizon scanning. We conducted a horizon-scanning activity to identify research gaps to be prioritized for sustainable rice systems by 2050. The horizon scan involved a global and diverse panel of rice experts (101 from 31 countries). The panel responded to questionnaires on the drivers, projections, and research needs for rice AgR&D. Afterward, research gaps were rated on their relevance and novelty to sustainable rice systems. We identified the top 25 research gaps under four themes: sustainability interactions, agricultural development, genetics, breeding and crop physiology, and governance and policies. These gaps highlight research that needs to be prioritized to achieve sustainable rice systems that enhance resilience, conserve biodiversity, and promote socio-economic well-being.

Rice experts select top rice research gaps for achieving sustainable rice systems by 2050.

Individuals and institutions seeking to delay climate action use a variety of new discursive strategies, emphasizing the downsides, spreading fatalism, or betting on technological fixes. This commentary highlights the importance of context when investigating discourses of climate delay. Depending on who holds them and why, some discourses can take on different meanings, hinder or enhance climate action.

In this commentary, we propose a review of ‘Discourses of climate delay’ by Lamb et al. (2020). While we agree that discursive strategies of climate delay are taking new forms, we argue that such analysis should go beyond discourses and investigate the context in which they are enunciated to avoid oversimplifying the complexity of the debate about climate (in)action. Discourses, and the context in which they are enacted, hold an important place in climate deliberations and should be carefully analyzed from a multicultural perspective, open to social diversity.

Are all discourses of climate delay discourses of delay? Context matters when debating whether a discourse promotes (in)action.

Loss and damage is treated as comprising separate ‘economic’ and ‘non-economic’ dimensions in research and policy. While this has contributed to greater awareness and visibility of non-economic values, our empirical insights show that the two are inextricably linked and that research aimed at informing policy must be better attuned to the multifaceted and cascading nature of loss and damage.

In research and policy, climate-related loss and damage is commonly categorized as either ‘economic’ or ‘non-economic’. One clear benefit of this dichotomy is that it has raised people's awareness of the often under-discussed intangible loss and damage. However, empirical research shows that these two categories are inextricably linked. Indeed, ‘economic’ and ‘non-economic’ loss and damage often overlap, with items that are valued in monetary terms also having non-monetary significance. For example, the loss of a home due to flooding is not only a financial loss but can also have a profound impact on identity and well-being. Moreover, ‘economic’ loss and damage can cascade into ‘non-economic’ loss and damage, and vice versa. For example, when a household incurs economic losses due to drought, this may prevent their children from attending school, which has long-term financial consequences. We argue that rather than dichotomizing loss and damage, recognizing that it is multidimensional, interwoven, and evolving over time will open up new avenues for research that better reflect reality and can therefore better inform policies to address loss and damage.

This comment shows how economic and non-economic loss and damage are linked, which has important policy implications.

As adaptation deficits become increasingly evident and widespread, barriers to adaptation draw more attention as a key reason. However, the current understanding of the barriers is limited, making it challenging to provide practical solutions for real-world adaptation policy processes. This study aims to identify the origins, influences, and relationships of common barriers to national adaptation policy processes, and to analyse their causal mechanisms. The findings present a barrier map that illustrates potential causal mechanisms of common barriers to national adaptation policy processes and, based on it, suggest a systematic approach for practical solutions.

Despite progress in national adaptation policies in the last two decades, the adaptation deficit is getting wider and barriers to adaptation are regarded as a key reason for it. However, our understanding of barriers to adaptation does not help improve real adaptation processes. Based on South Korean and UK cases, this study identified 17 common barriers to national adaptation policy processes and placed them in four categories. It also identified the barriers' origins and influences, drew a common barrier map underlying national adaptation policy processes and identified causal mechanisms of the common barriers, which were limitedly addressed in the earlier literature. The results highlight that understanding the causal mechanisms of barriers to national adaptation policy processes is important to devise practical solutions to overcome barriers and improve the effectiveness of real adaptation processes. The findings also offer a practical understanding of common barriers to national adaptation policy, which can help adaptation policy stakeholders and practitioners to diagnose policy problems, analyse what barriers and origins are related to the problems, decide what should be addressed first to solve the problems, and ultimately make efforts to reduce the current adaptation deficit.

New study identifies causal mechanisms of 17 common barriers to national adaptation policy processes & suggests a systematic approach to overcome the barriers.

Rapid population growth in urban areas requires an effective transposition of sustainable development goals to the urban realm, for which the New Urban Agenda was adopted by most countries worldwide. The progress report of its implementation was discussed in this study to identify strengths and weaknesses in the process that assist nations in the design and application of effective actions to achieve a more sustainable urban development.

The adoption of the 2030 Agenda represents a daunting challenge for countries worldwide, which found its continuation in the New Urban Agenda (NUA) geared predominantly toward urban settlements. Although the achievement of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) has been widely monitored by global and national institutions, the progress of the NUA has not been properly addressed to date. With the purpose of filling this gap, this study aims to gauge the implementation level of the NUA through the analysis of all status reports issued hitherto by countries, on the basis of the reporting template designed to this effect by the United Nations. Findings revealed the scarce attention paid to report national progress on the application of the NUA, particularly marked in the most developed economies. Reporting guidelines showed a poor coverage of the SDGs, being mostly focused on a limited number of these as well as the institutional and economic dimensions. The low level of NUA implementation and the questionable effectiveness of the reporting framework for monitoring are main conclusions. Some recommendations were lastly suggested to enhance the application process of the NUA.

Most countries worldwide show little interest in the application of the New Urban Agenda.

Despite 50 years of good science showing the urgency for action on remedying climate change, the business and political worlds have been exceedingly slow in actualizing climate solutions. Now excess climate-related deaths have mounted to more than 5 million people per year. In this Intelligence Briefing, we identify a few targeted driving actions through economic taxation, ending subsidies, and pursuit of legal cases for climate homicide, among many others. Scientists can play a vital role in providing supporting scientific evidence for policies and prosecutions, and model climate behaviors in their personal and professional lives.

Based on our analysis of the current global situation regarding carbon (CO2) in the atmosphere, we note that the earth has reached a dangerous 420 ppm, compared to staying under the 350 ppm necessary for human sustainability; and carbon concentration in the atmosphere is still climbing, as fossil fuel firms are continuing to delay and dilute regulatory efforts. This paper suggests action on several fronts. Governments can impose improved taxation regimes that involve unitary, windfall, and luxury taxes on carbon and the consumption of natural assets. Cutting subsidies to fossil fuel firms via COP actions can reduce carbon, by making renewable energy more competitive. We suggest recognizing the excess deaths by carbon pollution as homicide and charging responsible companies as was done in the case of asbestos and tobacco. If timely action is not taken, we caution about the potential rise of climate violence of emerging ‘new politics’ and increased global population displacement. Science, government, and business sectors need to collaborate in transdisciplinary ways to produce further actionable knowledge. Scientists can lead by example by reducing their own carbon footprints.

Fund climate action by taxing billionaires, eliminating subsidies, and suing fossil companies for climate homicide. The science community is focused on and committed to systems changes – seeking both natural systems, and social and economic systems to be sustainable. Yet systems that are in-place now producing carbon dioxide (herein aka carbon), are not taking adequate scientifically recommended actions; or worse, they are changing in the wrong directions. How can we move from producing more scientific knowledge to science-based actions, and what can scientists do to support such actions? In this Intelligence Briefing, we suggest some pathways for action.

Achieving sustainability on the ground poses a challenge in decoding globally defined goals, such as sustainable development goals, and aligning them with local perspectives and realities. This decoding necessitates the understanding of the multifaceted dimensions of the sustainability challenges in a given context, including their underlying causes. In case studies from Brazilian drylands, we illustrate how an enhanced multiscale participatory method, combined with systems thinking tools, can shed light on systemic structures that currently entrench unsustainable development trajectories. This method offers insights into co-designing potential pathways toward sustainable futures and unlocking transformative capacities of the local population.

Translating United Nations global sustainable development goals (SDGs) into actions that address local realities and aspirations is an urgent challenge. It requires new thinking and approaches that foster the discussion about the main challenges to implementing the SDGs at multiple levels. This paper presents a novel multiscale participatory approach that combines the popular Three Horizons diagram with the formalism of causal loop diagrams in systems thinking. We present results from six multi-stakeholder dialogues held across drylands in Brazil with a focus on desired futures aligned with SDGs. Focusing on identifying the root causes and systemic structures of unsustainability, participants identified lock-ins, leverage points, and interventions for how these could be changed. The core lock-ins are the discontinuity of public policies, and the historical land and power concentration reinforced by the current expansion of large-scale agricultural, mining, and energy projects. The proposed interventions are structural and – if implemented – would contribute to achieving SDGs in an integrated manner. The unique approach developed in this study can provide leverage as it bridges the inclusivity of participatory visioning with the change potential of systems thinking tools to tackle root causes and unleash societal transformations.

We are not achieving SDGs. Understanding root causes of unsustainability is critical to move toward sustainable and just futures.

Substantive carbon is sequestered in mangrove, saltmarsh, seagrass, and other marine ecosystems. Blue carbon is considered to offer potential for enhanced carbon sequestration. Bringing blue carbon to market, however, presents risks to local people and communities with livelihood and other connections to these environments. While efforts are forged to establish payments for ecosystem services, blue carbon presents critical challenges to social and environmental justice. In this paper, we synthesize insights from relevant literature and provide direction for future research on the social and cultural dimensions of blue carbon.

Blue carbon has been proposed as a nature-based solution to mitigate climate change and is the focus of concerted scientific and policy attention. The rush to operationalize blue carbon however, presents significant risks for social and environmental justice where it intersects with inequality and marginalization. To date, the reasonable and just consequences of the social transformation that will accompany blue carbon are under-examined. We undertake a structured literature review of research published over the past decade that addresses the social and cultural dimensions of blue carbon, and chart four themes: (1) conceptual issues, (2) governance issues; (3) emergent lessons (from practice); and (4) future research directions that address: social acceptability; processes to address social justice including engagement, participation, and benefit sharing; information and data deficits; and institutional governance reform. If the stated opportunities are to be fully realized, we argue the social and cultural dimensions of blue carbon, and its intersections with social justice, must be attended to explicitly and clarified.

Just transitions to climate change mean attending to people, culture, and livelihoods as blue carbon is operationalized.

This study combines revolutionary theory with emerging polycrisis discourses to show how various international and national factors and events can become intertwined, creating polycrisis events that can lead to revolutionary moments. Revolutionary moments can further contribute to stresses that cause polycrisis or systemic dysfunction elsewhere, due to our entanglement of global systems. Through the help of two case studies, the Young Turk Revolution and the Arab Spring, this study highlights how revolutions emerge and how they can unfold in the future.

Revolutions – the overthrow or unseating of governmental forces through mass mobilization – have played a crucial role in major societal transformations throughout history (Lawson, 2019, Anatomies of revolution; Goldstone, 2014, Revolutions: A very short introduction). One component of revolutionary theory, past and present, are the ways different factors and forces interact to create revolutionary moments, specifically how international/transnational and internal societal events interconnect to generate revolutionary situations, trajectories, and outcomes. Revolutionary theorist George Lawson (2019) notes that global networks are intermeshed in that they can produce multiple, complex stressors and triggers that cause revolution in what he terms an ‘inter-social approach’. Building on these insights, we argue here through the case studies of the Young Turk Revolution and Arab Spring that the conceptualization of polycrisis as a causal entanglement of crises in multiple global systems provides a critical lens to understand revolutions.

In an age of polycrisis, risk of revolution increases. Explore how revolutions form and learn their future paths.

This article examines the challenges and opportunities to integrate diverse sources of evidence in assessments produced by international platforms working at the science–policy interface. Diversity (or pluralism) of sources of literature, both in terms of their geographic origin and disciplinary focus, is essential for assessments to inform decision-making across social–ecological contexts. Using the recently completed ‘Methodological Assessment of the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature’ of the Intergovernmental Science–Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services as a case, we find that significant effort has been dedicated to reviewing diverse literature. We discuss three strategies to expand pluralism in future assessments.

Representing plural views in science–policy platforms is essential to avoid reproducing geographic and epistemic biases that permeate contemporary scientific knowledge production and synthesis. The Intergovernmental Science–Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has strived to produce assessments that incorporate information from diverse regions and knowledge systems. We explore the geographic and epistemic pluralism of the literature included in the ‘Methodological Assessment of the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature’ (VA), and the challenges and opportunities to achieve such knowledge pluralism. We applied a bibliometric analysis to the sources of evidence cited in the VA, and reflected on the assessment development process, in which we were directly involved. Our results highlight the success of different strategies developed by VA experts to engage with diverse sources of literature. Still, most evidence was English-language academic literature produced in Western Europe, Canada, and the United States, echoing the prominence of this literature in scientific publication in environmental disciplines. Reflecting on our experiences, we discuss strategies that could further enhance the geographic and epistemic pluralism in the information reviewed for future environmental assessments produced by IPBES and other international science–policy platforms.

Epistemic and geographic pluralism was partially achieved in IPBES Values Assessment, and can be further enhanced in future assessments.

There is abundant research about the impacts that large-scale mining produces on territories to the detriment of their social and environmental sustainability. However, during our research in Chile and Peru, we also identified local transformative initiatives that pursue sustainable development by proposing alternatives to how the socio-ecological impacts of natural resource extraction are produced and distributed throughout society. Specifically, we ask the question: How do local communities in Chile and Peru that are affected by mining activities engage in community-based environmental monitoring (CBEM)?

By examining how local communities in Chile and Peru engage in community environmental monitoring, this paper argues that local political organisation and institutional innovations are crucial for the emergence of transformations towards sustainability. Local political organisation and mobilisation can create a window of opportunity for discussion about extractive activities and their impacts, as well as possible proposals for alternatives. Institutional innovations triggered by local political work can lead to the implementation of such initiatives. Our findings are based on qualitative case studies of CBEM in Chile and Peru, in areas with high levels of environmental degradation due to mining. In Chile we analysed a case of community air monitoring in a copper processing area, and in Peru a case of community water monitoring in a mining area. Drawing on debates on social transformation and political ecology theory, this study aims to show CBEM promotes changes towards a more democratic and preventive environmental governance, and encourages the recognition of environmental injustices.

This paper analyses how local communities in Chile and Peru engage in community environmental monitoring in areas affected by the presence of extractive industries. We identified local transformative initiatives that pursue sustainable development by proposing alternatives to how the socio-environmental impacts of natural resource extraction are produced and distributed in society. Our findings are based on qualitative case studies of community-based air and water monitoring in extractive areas in Chile and Peru.

Growth in resource consumption and associated environmental degradation threatens food systems, with millions of people living in hunger globally, demonstrating the need for greater socio-ecological efficiency in food provisioning. This paper considers how sustainable consumption can ensure that human needs with regards to food provisioning (food security) are met within globally sustainable limits. It follows a sectoral approach to sustainable consumption corridors (SCCs), to develop an indicator framework for a food provisioning systems SCC.

Bridging social and ecological evaluations of sustainability in food systems has proved to be a challenge, illustrating the need for indicator sets which link environmental impacts and social achievement within a single framework. This work aims to fill that research gap by considering how the sustainable consumption corridor (SCC) framework can be used to examine the socio-ecological efficiency of food provisioning systems and developing a comprehensive SCC framework for food provisioning. The framework uses domains to define the minimum level of consumption needed to meet human needs (social foundation [SF]) and the maximum level of environmental impact the earth system can tolerate (ecological ceiling [EC]) while sustainably meeting those needs. It does so through the production of an indicator set for food provisioning systems that gives indicators and thresholds for the EC and SF domains within a single framework. This output is followed by a discussion of how this global SCC framework could be altered for use in different contexts, and suggestions for how such a framework could inform consumption linked sustainability policy.

This work puts forth a sustainable consumption corridor framework to evaluate if food provisioning systems are meeting human needs within sustainable limits.

Transdisciplinary sustainability scientists work with many different actors in pursuit of change. In so doing they make choices about why and how to engage with different perspectives in their research. Reflexivity – active individual and collective critical reflection – is considered an important capacity for researchers to address the resulting ethical and practical challenges. We developed a framework for reflexivity as a transformative capacity in sustainability science through a critical systems approach, which helps make any decisions that influence which perspectives are included or excluded in research explicit. We suggest that transdisciplinary sustainability research can become more transformative by nurturing reflexivity.

Transdisciplinary sustainability science is increasingly applied to study transformative change. Yet, transdisciplinary research involves diverse actors who hold contrasting and sometimes conflicting perspectives and worldviews. Reflexivity is cited as a crucial capacity for navigating the resulting challenges, yet notions of reflexivity are often focused on individual researcher reflections that lack explicit links to the collective transdisciplinary research process and predominant modes of inquiry in the field. This gap presents the risk that reflexivity remains on the periphery of sustainability science and becomes ‘unreflexive’, as crucial dimensions are left unacknowledged. Our objective was to establish a framework for reflexivity as a transformative capacity in sustainability science through a critical systems approach. We developed and refined the framework through a rapid scoping review of literature on transdisciplinarity, transformation, and reflexivity, and reflection on a scenario study in the Red River Basin (US, Canada). The framework characterizes reflexivity as the capacity to nurture a dynamic, embedded, and collective process of self-scrutiny and mutual learning in service of transformative change, which manifests through interacting boundary processes – boundary delineation, interaction, and transformation. The case study reflection suggests how embedding this framework in research can expose boundary processes that block transformation and nurture more reflexive and transformative research.

Transdisciplinary sustainability research may become more transformative by nurturing reflexivity as a dynamic, embedded, and collective learning process.