- Sep 2024
-
-
for - The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability - Camilo Mora et al. - 6th mass extinction - biodiversity loss - question - 2024 - Sept 13 - how do we reconcile climate departure with quantification of earth system boundary biodiversity safe and just limit? - to - climate departure map - map of major cities - 2013 - to - researchgate paper - The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability - 2013 - Camilo Mora et al
paper details - title: The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability - author: - Camilo Mora, - Abby G. Frazier, - Ryan J. Longman, - Rachel S. Dacks, - Maya M. Walton, - Eric J. Tong, - Joseph J. Sanchez, - Lauren R. Kaiser, - Yuko O. Stender, - James M. Anderson, - Christine M. Ambrosino, - Iria Fernandez-Silva, - Louise M. Giuseffi, - Thomas W. Giambelluca - date - 9 October, 2013 - publication Nature 502, 183-187 (2013) - https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12540 - https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12540
Summary - This is an extremely important paper with a startling conclusion of the magnitude of the social and economic impacts of the biodiversity disruption coming down the pipeline - It is likely that very few governments are prepared to adapt to these levels of ecosystemic disruption - Climate departure is defined as an index of the year when: - The projected mean climate of a given location moves to a state that is - continuously outside the bounds of historical variability - Climate departure is projected to happen regardless of how aggressive our climate mitigation pathway - The business-as-usual (BAU) scenario in the study is RCP85 and leads to a global climate departure mean of 2047 (+/- 14 years s.d.) while - The more aggressive RCP45 scenario (which we are currently far from) leads to a global climate departure mean of 2069 (+/- 18 years s.d.) - So regardless of how aggressive we mitigate, we cannot avoid climate departure. - What consequences will this have on economies around the world? How will we adapt? - The world is not prepared for the vast ecosystem changes, which will reshape our entire economy all around the globe.
question - 2024 - Sept 13 - how do we reconcile climate departure with quantification of earth system boundary biodiversity safe and just limit? - Annotating the Sept 11, 2024 published Earth Commission paper in Lancet, the question arises: - How do we reconcile climate departure dates with the earth system boundary quantification of safe limits for biodiversity? - There, it is claimed that: - 50 to 60 % of intact nature is required<br /> - https://hyp.is/Mt8ocnIEEe-C0dNSJFTjyQ/www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(24)00042-1/fulltext - a minimum of 20 to 25% of human modified ecosystems is required - https://hyp.is/AKwa4nIHEe-U1oNQDdFqlA/www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(24)00042-1/fulltext - in order to mitigate major species extinction and social disruption crisis - And yet, Mora et al.'s research and subsequent climate departure map shows climate departure is likely to take place everywhere on the globe, with - aggressive RCP decarbonization pathway only delaying climate departure from - Business-As-Usual RCP pathway - by a few decades at most - And this was a 2011 result. 13 years later in 2024, I expect climate departure dates have likely gotten worse and moved closer to the present
from - Gupta, Joyeeta et al.(2024). A just world on a safe planet: a Lancet Planetary Health–Earth Commission report on Earth-system boundaries, translations, and transformations. The Lancet Planetary Health, Volume 0, Issue 0 - https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelancet.com%2Fjournals%2Flanplh%2Farticle%2FPIIS2542-5196(24)00042-1%2Ffulltext&group=world
to - climate departure map - of major cities of the world - 2013 - https://hyp.is/tV1UOFsKEe-HFQ-jL-6-cw/www.hawaii.edu/news/2013/10/09/study-in-nature-reveals-urgent-new-time-frame-for-climate-change/ - full research paper - researchgate
Tags
- to - climate departure map - map of major cities - 2013
- climate departure
- Camilo Mora
- from - Gupta, Joyeeta et al.(2024). A just world on a safe planet: a Lancet Planetary Health–Earth Commission report on Earth-system boundaries, translations, and transformations. The Lancet Planetary Health, Volume 0, Issue 0
- to - The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability
Annotators
URL
-
-
www.thelancet.com www.thelancet.com
-
The remainder of this Commission is organised into four parts
for - safe and just earth system boundaries - translations and transformations - 4 parts
earth system boundaries - translations and transformations - 4 parts - part 1 - theoretical framework - part 2 - quantification of - safe and just ESB, - which ones are transgressed - who are the victims - safe and just corridor - base - ceiling - for timeframe - present - 2050 - part 3 - translating - safe and just ESB - approaches - challenges - enabling conditions - to - cities - businesses
-
Although Doughnut Economics' safe and just indicators2525.O'Neill, DW ∙ Fanning, AL ∙ Lamb, WF ∙ et al.A good life for all within planetary boundariesNat Sustain. 2018; 1:88-95CrossrefScopus (980)Google Scholar include justice elements, our work goes further by quantifying these elements in the same units as the safe ESBs and by operationalising and quantifying justice issues.
for - comparison - doughnut economics - vs - safe and just earth system boundaries
-
Visualisation of the concept of the safe and just corridor
for - diagram - visualization - safe and just corridor
-
system transformations that could move humanity into a safe and just corridor
for - rapid whole system change - to move humanity to a safe and just corridor
-
for - earth system boundaries - safe and just earth system boundaries - cross translated - to cities and business - planetary boundaries - downscaled planetary boundaries - urban planetary boundaries - Johan Rockstrom - Xuemei Bao - Lancet paper - just and safe earth system boundaries - Earth Commission report
paper details - title: A just world on a safe planet: a Lancet Planetary Health–Earth Commission report on Earth-system boundaries, translations, and transformations - authors: - Joyeeta Gupta - Xuemei Bao - Johan Rockstrom - Diana M Liverman <br /> - Dahe Qin - Ben Stewart-Koster - et al - publication: Lancet 2024, Sept 11
summary
Tags
- comparison - doughnut economics - vs - safe and just earth system boundaries
- downscaled planetary boundaries
- diagram - visualization - safe and just corridor
- safe and just earth system boundaries - translations and transformations - 4 parts
- urban planetary boundaries
- earth system boundaries - downscaled to cities
- Xuemei Bao
- Earth Commission Report 2024
- rapid whole system change - to move humanity to a safe and just corridor
- cross scale translated earth system boundaries
- Johan Rockstrom
- Lancet paper - just and safe earth system boundaries - 2024
- earth system boundaries - cross-scale translation - to cities and businesses
Annotators
URL
-
- Nov 2023
-
docdrop.org docdrop.org
-
- for:social tipping points - within safe and just earth system boundaries
-
- Sep 2023
-
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
-
- for: urban development, inequality, just boundaries, safe and just boundaries, climate justice, urban planetary boundaries, livable cities, earth system boundaries, earth system justice
- title: Urban inequalities in the 21st century economy
- author: Jan niman, Yehua Dennis Wei
- date: Apr 2, 2020
- source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7124478/
-
-
www.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com
-
- for: green city, living city, environmental justice, safe and just transition, safe and just boundaries earth system boundaries, just transition, climate justice, cross-scale translation of earth system boundaries
- title: Environmental justice in a very green city: Spatial inequality in exposure to urban nature, air pollution and heat in Oslo, Norway
- author: Zander S. Venter, Helene Figari, Olve Krange, Vegard Gundersen
- date: Feb. 2023
- source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896972207293X#f0005
-
- Aug 2023
-
www.nature.com www.nature.com
-
- for: safe and just boundaries, earth system boundaries, planetary boundaries
- title
- Safe and just Earth system boundaries
-
-
docdrop.org docdrop.org
-
- for: earth system boundaries, safe and just boundaries, planetary boundaries, doughnut economics, bend the curve
- title Earth System Boundaries for a Just World on a Safe Planet
- source
- Future Earth, Earth Commission
- date
- June 2023
-
- Jul 2023
-
docdrop.org docdrop.org
-
- for: safe and just boundaries, earth system justice, planetary boundaries
-
this is now quantifying this this safe space but for the first time also doing it for justice so measuring the maximum allowed 00:15:33 of significant harm to people and the key take home here is the following in the outer ring here the red and green you see the safe boundary definitions 00:15:45 the blue lines are the assessment of justice so not surprisingly if we care about people the safe bound is about the stability of the planet but if we care about avoiding significant harm to hundreds of millions of people across 00:15:58 the world the climate boundary shrinks from 1.5 down to one degree
- for: earth system boundaries, planetary boundaries, safe and just boundaries, earth system justice, just boundaries
- key finding
- if we include justice in the planetary boundaries, then the 1.5 Deg C target becomes 1.0 Deg C.
- In other words, we have already breached the safe and just boundary!
-
- Mar 2023
-
www.nature.com www.nature.com
-
Within the Earth Commission, we aim to propose ‘safe and just Earth system boundaries’ (ESBs) that go beyond planetary boundaries as they also include a justice perspective and suggest transformations to achieve them3.
- The = Earth Commission,
- proposes ‘safe and just Earth system boundaries’ (ESBs)
- that go beyond planetary boundaries as
- they also include a justice perspective
- suggest transformations to achieve them.
-
Safe and just ESBs aim to:
- stabilize the Earth system,
- protect species and ecosystems,
- avoid tipping points,
- minimize ‘significant harm’ to people while ensuring access to resources for a dignified life and escape from poverty.
-
If justice is not considered,
- the biophysical limits may not be adequate
-
to protect current generations from significant harm
-
Comment
- Similar to aims of doughnut economics
-
Since minimum access levels for the poor cannot be met within the ESBs without substantial reallocation of resources, we propose minimum access levels for all people. These levels provide the floor or foundation of a corridor, while the ESBs constitute the ceiling (Fig. 6). If resources, responsibilities and risks are allocated in a just manner (Fig. 1), we consider this a ‘safe and just corridor’.
- Second stage of characterizing the Safe and Just Corridor
- Since minimum access levels for the poor cannot be met within the ESBs without substantial reallocation of resources,
- minimum access levels for ALL people is proposed (Annotator's emphasis)
- These levels provide the floor or foundation of a Safe and Just corridor (Fig. 6)
- the ESBs constitute the ceiling of the Safe and Just corridor (Fig. 6).
-
The black line in Fig. 5 shows that redistribution is not enough; if everyone’s emissions are equalized at escape from poverty levels, then we would still overshoot the climate boundaries
- First stage of characterizing the Safe and Just Corridor
- The black line in Fig. 5 shows that
- redistribution is not enough
- if everyone’s emissions are equalized at escape from poverty levels, then
- we would STILL overshoot the climate boundaries (annotator's emphasis)
- hypothetical pressure from 62% of humanity that is lacking humane access to resources is equal to the pressure exerted by 4% of the elits of humanity
-
Preserving ecosystem area is sometimes critiqued as ‘fortress conservation’ by environmental justice scholars, limiting access for poor or Indigenous people68. An ecosystem area boundary therefore requires careful consideration and involvement of the local communities, for example by not demanding that intact areas preclude human inhabitation and sustainable use and/or recognizing the role of Indigenous peoples and local communities in already protecting these areas.
- Comment
- "Fortress conservation" is an example of approaching safe boundaries but not considering JUST boundaries.
-
Safe and just ESBs aim to stabilize the Earth system, protect species and ecosystems and avoid tipping points, as well as minimize ‘significant harm’ to people while ensuring access to resources for a dignified life and escape from poverty. If justice is not considered, the biophysical limits may not be adequate to protect current generations from significant harm. However, strict biophysical limits, such as reducing emissions or setting aside land for nature, can, for example, reduce access to food and land for vulnerable people, and should be complemented by fair sharing and management of the remaining ecological space on Earth4.
- The meaning of safe and JUST ESBs
- Safe:
- stabilize the Earth system,
- protect species and ecosystems,
- avoid tipping points
- JUST:
- minimize ‘significant harm’ to people
- while ensuring access to resources for a dignified life and escape from poverty.
- If JUSTice is not considered,
- the biophysical limits may not be adequate to protect current generations from significant harm.
- IF JUSTICE is not explicitly included, it can lead to a progress trap.
- Strict biophysical limits, such as reducing emissions or setting aside land for nature,
- may lead to intended consequences that reduce access to food and land for vulnerable people.
- To mitigate this, biophysical limited should be complemented by fair sharing and management of the remaining ecological space on Earth.
-
joint knowledge to identify safe and just ESBs
- collaboration between natural and social scientists that uses joint knowledge to identify safe and just ESBs for:
- blue water,
- climate change,
- biodiversity,
- nutrients (nitrogen and phosporus),
- air pollution
- collaboration between natural and social scientists that uses joint knowledge to identify safe and just ESBs for:
Tags
- 62 to 4
- ESB
- Earth system justice example
- safe and just
- fortress conservation
- carbon inequality
- safe and just corridor
- safe and just ESBs
- redistribution is insufficient
- Planetary justice
- Progress trap
- Earth system boundaries
- Earth System Justice
- wealth inequality
- Safe and just transition
- Safe and just ESBs
- Doughnut Economics
Annotators
URL
-
- Jan 2023
-
docdrop.org docdrop.org
-
there are amazing people worldwide that are working to protect the local to Global Commons the next step is to involve businesses 00:11:44 countries cities and people worldwide to accept Earth system boundaries and the just Transformations we need to live within these boundaries
!- required transformation : global movement to accept and live writing these boundaries
-
can we quantify safe and just Earth 00:04:20 system boundaries or an earth system corridor in 2019 the Global Commons Alliance created the Earth commission to answer this question
!- key question : can we quantify a safe and just corridor?
-
we need in this Century a safe and just Corridor for all people to exit the danger zone but also to ensure that all people have access to basic needs rights 00:04:07 uh rights to a water food energy and infrastructure
!- definition : safe and just corridor
-
we're taking colossal risks with the future of civilization on Earth We're degrading life support system that we all depend on we're actually pushing 00:00:57 the entire Earth system to a point of destabilization pushing Earth outside of the state that has support civilization since we left the last ice age 10 000 years ago this requires a transformation to safe 00:01:11 and just Earth system boundaries for the whole world economy
!- Title : Leading the charge through earth’s new normal !- speakers : Johan Rockstrom et al.
-
- Dec 2022
-
agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com
-
2030 (UNGA, 2015) provides a global consensus on key justice principles of access and a starting point for an analysis of a safe and just corridor that aims to ensure that “no one will be left behind.
!- starting point : Agenda 2030, UNGA 2015
-
By identifying safe and just target ranges, the question arises: How can we achieve these targets and live within the corridor? Transforming toward a “just” world may be a pre-condition for being able to achieve a “safe” world. Leverage points to achieve such transformations are essential for governing our commons.
!- role : leverage points - Leverage points play a critical role to achieve transformation to a safe and just corridor
-
We propose that the stricter of the safe and just target ranges for each variable should define the safe and just corridor (Figure 2). Furthermore, we propose to identify a spread of safe and just targets corresponding to different physical risk tolerances and different understandings of environmental justice.
!- range : safe and just corridors - identify a range of safe and just corridors for society to choose - depending on different physical risk tolerances / environmental justice
-
Second, a key question is how biophysically “safe” targets can be achieved while also meeting goals for human well-being and justice. For example, meeting the social goals of Agenda 2030 without widespread transformations may lead to crossing safe targets for the biophysical state of the Earth system (Sachs et al., 2019). Achieving biophysical targets, such as 1.5°C for climate or increasing ecosystem protection, can undermine well-being, if, for example, bioenergy competes with food production, or protected areas undermine local livelihoods (Hasegawa et al., 2020).
!- safe and just : tradeoffs - something that is safe can still be unjust - ie. meeting Agenda 2030 for human wellbeing without widespread transformation may lead to violating safe biophysical targets
-
First, an “unsafe” world is likely to increase inequality, so “safe” would seem a necessary pre-condition for “just”—but not always a sufficient one. A “safe” target from a biophysical perspective may not be adequate to prevent large-scale risks to humans in specific contexts. For example, there are large risks for many human populations even with a 1.5°C climate target (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2018).
!- safe and just : tradeoffs - safe can still result in unjust
-
Identifying safe ranges for these systems in isolation, for example as the planetary boundary framework has done (Rockström et al., 2009; Steffen, Richardson, et al., 2015), will not be enough to describe a safe corridor.
!- limitations : planetary boundary framework - planetary boundary framework is insufficient to describe a safe corridor
-
An integrated framework is needed that aligns safe and just Earth system variables while also accounting for sub-global scales and interactions between Earth system processes.
!- identified need : integrated framework to align safe and just earth system variables while accounting for sub-global scales and interactions between earth system processes
-
our goal of synthesizing a range of safe and just conditions rather than prescribing any specific solution.
!- goal : safe and just corridor research - develop a range of safe and just conditions for civilization to choose from
-
An integrated people and planet perspective is required to guide human development and use of the global commons We outline an approach to defining a safe and just corridor for a stable and resilient planet supporting human development A conceptual framework for linking safe and just Earth system targets is proposed
!- key points: for a safe and just corridor - 1. Integrated people and planet strategy - 2. outline of an approach that defines safe and just corridor - 3. conceptual framework linking safe and just targets
-
safe as primarily referring to a stable Earth system and just targets as being associated with meeting human needs and reducing exposure to risks.
!- in other words : "safe" and "just" - thinking in terms of doughnut economics, safe refers to staying within biophysical constraints and just refers to staying within socio-economic constraints of human civilization to ensure wellbeing
-
Keeping the Earth system in a stable and resilient state, to safeguard Earth's life support systems while ensuring that Earth's benefits, risks, and related responsibilities are equitably shared, constitutes the grand challenge for human development in the Anthropocene. Here, we describe a framework that the recently formed Earth Commission will use to define and quantify target ranges for a “safe and just corridor” that meets these goals.
!- Earth Commission : framework for safe and just corridor
-