“…Justice has emerged as a key condition for effective adaptation, with new empirical work building on previous theoretical developments. While conceptualizations of adaptation justice exist (Juhola et al, 2022; Orlove, 2022), their application in adaptation planning and implementation remains scarce, ambiguous, and rarely accounted for. A global review of policy tools for adaptation found that the most vulnerable and marginalized, who are also the most heavily impacted by climate change, are not considered in the majority of adaptation plans (Ulibarri et al, 2022).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 9.Components of adaptation justice and implications in adaptation planning and processes. Based on Juhola et al (2022) and Orlove et al (2023). …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Examples include forced relocation plans (see insight 8 in immobility), imposition of food crops and technocratic practices, or the use of labels such as ‘climate refugee’ (Brink et al, 2023). Here we highlight three recent conceptual advances for adaptation justice with practical application: the adaptation justice index (Juhola et al, 2022), adaptation rationales (Carr & Nalau, 2023), and locally led adaptation (LLA) (Rahman et al, 2023). Juhola et al (2022) developed the ‘adaptation justice index’ and proposed concrete steps toward more just adaptation planning by identifying where in the planning process justice ought to be included.…”
Non-technical summary. We identify a set of essential recent advances in climate change research with high policy relevance, across natural and social sciences: (1) looming inevitability and implications of overshooting the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) urgent need for a rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges for scaling carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding the future contribution of natural carbon sinks, (5) intertwinedness of the crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) compound events, (7) mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility in the face of climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. Technical summary. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Reports provides the scientific foundation for international climate negotiations and constitutes an unmatched resource for researchers. However, the assessment cycles take multiple years. As a contribution to cross-and interdisciplinary understanding of climate change across diverse research communities, we have streamlined an annual process to identify and synthesize significant research advances. We collected input from experts on various fields using an online questionnaire and prioritized a set of 10 key research insights with high policy relevance. This year, we focus on: (1) the looming overshoot of the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) the urgency of fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges to scale-up carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding future natural carbon sinks, (5) the need for joint governance of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) advances in understanding compound events, (7) accelerated mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility amidst climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. We present a succinct account of these insights, reflect on their policy implications, and offer an integrated set of policy-relevant messages. This science synthesis and science communication effort is also the basis for a policy report contributing to elevate climate science every year in time for the United Nations Climate Change Conference. Social media summary. We highlight recent and policy-relevant advances in climate change researchwith input from more than 200 experts.
“…Justice has emerged as a key condition for effective adaptation, with new empirical work building on previous theoretical developments. While conceptualizations of adaptation justice exist (Juhola et al, 2022; Orlove, 2022), their application in adaptation planning and implementation remains scarce, ambiguous, and rarely accounted for. A global review of policy tools for adaptation found that the most vulnerable and marginalized, who are also the most heavily impacted by climate change, are not considered in the majority of adaptation plans (Ulibarri et al, 2022).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 9.Components of adaptation justice and implications in adaptation planning and processes. Based on Juhola et al (2022) and Orlove et al (2023). …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Examples include forced relocation plans (see insight 8 in immobility), imposition of food crops and technocratic practices, or the use of labels such as ‘climate refugee’ (Brink et al, 2023). Here we highlight three recent conceptual advances for adaptation justice with practical application: the adaptation justice index (Juhola et al, 2022), adaptation rationales (Carr & Nalau, 2023), and locally led adaptation (LLA) (Rahman et al, 2023). Juhola et al (2022) developed the ‘adaptation justice index’ and proposed concrete steps toward more just adaptation planning by identifying where in the planning process justice ought to be included.…”
Non-technical summary. We identify a set of essential recent advances in climate change research with high policy relevance, across natural and social sciences: (1) looming inevitability and implications of overshooting the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) urgent need for a rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges for scaling carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding the future contribution of natural carbon sinks, (5) intertwinedness of the crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) compound events, (7) mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility in the face of climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. Technical summary. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Reports provides the scientific foundation for international climate negotiations and constitutes an unmatched resource for researchers. However, the assessment cycles take multiple years. As a contribution to cross-and interdisciplinary understanding of climate change across diverse research communities, we have streamlined an annual process to identify and synthesize significant research advances. We collected input from experts on various fields using an online questionnaire and prioritized a set of 10 key research insights with high policy relevance. This year, we focus on: (1) the looming overshoot of the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) the urgency of fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges to scale-up carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding future natural carbon sinks, (5) the need for joint governance of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) advances in understanding compound events, (7) accelerated mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility amidst climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. We present a succinct account of these insights, reflect on their policy implications, and offer an integrated set of policy-relevant messages. This science synthesis and science communication effort is also the basis for a policy report contributing to elevate climate science every year in time for the United Nations Climate Change Conference. Social media summary. We highlight recent and policy-relevant advances in climate change researchwith input from more than 200 experts.
“…Epistemic justice is inherently intertwined with four dimensions of justice: distributive, procedural, recognition, and restorative (57,58). The interconnectedness between these different dimensions of justice helps articulate the critical role of knowledge and epistemic justice in building just NbS for water management.…”
Section: Implications Of Epistemic Justice For Other Dimensions Of Ju...mentioning
Over the last decade, Nature-based Solutions (NbS) for water management have gained traction as triple-win options for climate action due to their ability to address social, economic, and environmental challenges. Recent developments in the literature of NbS have resulted in a body of work addressing questions about knowledge and justice. In line with these developments, this paper proposes the Knowledge and Epistemic Injustice for NbS for Water Framework (KEIN Framework) to identify the production of epistemic injustices in the design of NbS for water management. The KEIN framework draws on questions about knowledge and power raised by Avelino (2021) and five mechanisms that lead to epistemic injustice based on the work by Fricker (2007) and Byskov (2021). We apply the framework to examine a proposal presented to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) that included NbS for water management and Indigenous Peoples in South America. Rather than being an analysis of the project or the GCF per se, the goal of this analysis is to demonstrate the utility of the framework to analyze proposals during the design stage. We argue that proposals submitted to the GCF are reflective of a broadly held international environmental logic. We also identified indications that knowledge was organized and treated in a way that favored external actors at the expense of local actors. Our analysis also revealed prejudices against people’s epistemic capacities, with potential implications for how the generation of local knowledge is adopted on the ground. The framework illustrates how the design of NbS may minimally disrupt power relations due to the influential role that some actors have in generating knowledge. This study contributes to the operationalization of epistemic justice in designing NbS. Through the application of the proposed framework, the study contributes to future work advancing the construction of epistemically just NbS.
“…Who is it for and who might be impacted by its implementation? (Juhola et al, 2022). Further, teams need to agree on the analysis and implications of results and the implementation of findings.…”
Non-technical summary. Transdisciplinary approaches for sustainability brings natural and social science researchers together with non researchers to fill gaps in scientific knowledge and catalyze change. By connecting diverse academic fields and sectors, it addresses complex problems and enables learning for problem solving. However, institutional barriers, funding constraints, time limitations, and evaluation criteria hinder collaborative progress. Our review reveals tensions at institutional and individual levels. Our findings underscore the significance of soft skills in assembling effective transdisciplinary teams. Embracing transdisciplinary science, as suggested by our review, can enhance problem-solving, and foster transformations for sustainability and resilience. Technical summary. Sustainability challenges in the age of the Anthropocene require researchers and practitioners to collaborate across multiple academic disciplines and multiple professions outside of universities. In this paper we draw on theories of institutional logics to explore how those involved in transdisciplinary environmental research and practice draw on particular sets of values and norms but encounter challenges to collaboration. These institutional logics include (among others) seeking societal/environmental impact, commercial objectives, and academic knowledge generation. In this paper we review the growing literature on the research experience of transdisciplinarity in sustainability; discuss the processes of managing such research; and present a framework that outlines the challenges and tensions at each stage of the innovation/research process. We set out an agenda for managing tension that calls for recognizing the challenges, learning how to work with tensions, and building capabilities for future careers involving transdisciplinary research. The paper shows a key competence or skill for transdisciplinarians is the ability to develop complex collaborative relationships for sustainability drawing together different institutional logics, approaches, methods, goals, and values. Social media summary. Transdisciplinary science: bridging disciplines, solving challenges. Soft skills and collaboration key to success.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
