Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Journal Article
    Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity
    (2009) Rockström, Johan; Steffen, Will; Noone, Kevin; Persson, Åsa; Chapin, F. Stuart; Lambin, Eric; Lenton, Timothy M.; Scheffer, Marten; Folke, Carl; Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim; Nykvist, Björn; de Wit, Cynthia A.; Hughes, Terry; van der Leeuw, Sander; Rodhe, Henning; Sörlin, Sverker; Snyder, Peter K.; Costanza, Robert; Svedin, Uno; Falkenmark, Malin; Karlberg, Louise; Corell, Robert W.; Fabry, Victoria J.; Hansen, James; Walker, Brian H.; Liverman, Diana; Richardson, Katherine; Crutzen, Paul; Foley, Jonathan
    "Anthropogenic pressures on the Earth System have reached a scale where abrupt global environmental change can no longer be excluded. We propose a new approach to global sustainability in which we define planetary boundaries within which we expect that humanity can operate safely. Transgressing one or more planetary boundaries may be deleterious or even catastrophic due to the risk of crossing thresholds that will trigger non-linear, abrupt environmental change within continental- to planetary-scale systems. We have identified nine planetary boundaries and, drawing upon current scientific understanding, we propose quantifications for seven of them. These seven are climate change (CO2 concentration in the atmosphere <350 ppm and/or a maximum change of +1 W m-2 in radiative forcing); ocean acidification (mean surface seawater saturation state with respect to aragonite ³ 80% of pre-industrial levels); stratospheric ozone (<5% reduction in O3 concentration from pre-industrial level of 290 Dobson Units); biogeochemical nitrogen (N) cycle (limit industrial and agricultural fixation of N2 to 35 Tg N yr-1) and phosphorus (P) cycle (annual P inflow to oceans not to exceed 10 times the natural background weathering of P); global freshwater use (<4000 km3 yr-1 of consumptive use of runoff resources); land system change (<15% of the ice-free land surface under cropland); and the rate at which biological diversity is lost (annual rate of <10 extinctions per million species). The two additional planetary boundaries for which we have not yet been able to determine a boundary level are chemical pollution and atmospheric aerosol loading. We estimate that humanity has already transgressed three planetary boundaries: for climate change, rate of biodiversity loss, and changes to the global nitrogen cycle. Planetary boundaries are interdependent, because transgressing one may both shift the position of other boundaries or cause them to be transgressed. The social impacts of transgressing boundaries will be a function of the social–ecological resilience of the affected societies. Our proposed boundaries are rough, first estimates only, surrounded by large uncertainties and knowledge gaps. Filling these gaps will require major advancements in Earth System and resilience science. The proposed concept of 'planetary boundaries' lays the groundwork for shifting our approach to governance and management, away from the essentially sectoral analyses of limits to growth aimed at minimizing negative externalities, toward the estimation of the safe space for human development. Planetary boundaries define, as it were, the boundaries of the 'planetary playing field' for humanity if we want to be sure of avoiding major human-induced environmental change on a global scale."
  • Journal Article
    Facing Global Change Through Social-Ecological Research
    (2006) Folke, Carl; Gunderson, Lance
    "Some people claim that we have recently witnessed a tipping point in the perceptions and values of western-oriented leaders and others involved in issues related to global environmental change. Western cultures now recognize that environmental issues formerly viewed as external to society are in reality embedded in the dynamics of the biosphere, and that economies are fundamentally dependent on the capacity of the environment to support and generate the preconditions for human and societal development."
  • Journal Article
    Resilience and Global Sustainability
    (2010) Folke, Carl; Gunderson, Lance
    "Last year, Ecology and Society published an article on planetary boundaries, a sister article to a shorter version in Nature, reflecting the dynamic preconditions of the biosphere for a prosperous development of human societies. Within less than a year, the planetary boundaries concept has reached international policy efforts as witnessed in the quote above. Also, work on social-ecological systems and integrated science for resilience and sustainability, the focus of this journal, is truly escalating worldwide, witnessed, for example, in millions of hits on search engines. It is in the context of integrative science that we are really pleased to be editors of Ecology and Society. We are not specializing into a well-defined niche within a well-defined discipline. We are exploring, experimenting, and encouraging publication of work that takes us into new terrain, that not only generates information and knowledge, but that helps us understand the complex nature of intertwined social-ecological systems in the context of resilience and sustainability at all scales and across them."
  • Journal Article
    Aligning Key Concepts for Global Change Policy: Robustness, Resilience, and Sustainability
    (2013) Anderies, John M.; Folke, Carl; Walker, Brian; Ostrom, Elinor
    "Globalization, the process by which local social-ecological systems (SESs) are becoming linked in a global network, presents policy scientists and practitioners with unique and difficult challenges. Although local SESs can be extremely complex, when they become more tightly linked in the global system, complexity increases very rapidly as multi-scale and multi-level processes become more important. Here, we argue that addressing these multi-scale and multi-level challenges requires a collection of theories and models. We suggest that the conceptual domains of sustainability, resilience, and robustness provide a sufficiently rich collection of theories and models, but overlapping definitions and confusion about how these conceptual domains articulate with one another reduces their utility. We attempt to eliminate this confusion and illustrate how sustainability, resilience, and robustness can be used in tandem to address the multi-scale and multi-level challenges associated with global change."