Equity and sustainability in the Anthropocene: a social–ecological systems perspective on their intertwined futures

Abstract

Non-technical summaryIt is no longer possible nor desirable to address the dual challenges of equity and sustainability separately. Instead, they require new thinking and approaches which recognize their interlinkages, as well as the multiple perspectives and dimensions involved. We illustrate how equity and sustainability are intertwined, and how a complex social–ecological systems lens brings together advances from across the social and natural sciences to show how (in)equity and (un)sustainability are produced by the interactions and dynamics of coupled social–ecological systems. This should help understand which possible pathways could lead to sustainable and fair futures.

Four Paradoxes of the User–Provider Interface: A Responsible Innovation Framework for Sea Ice Services

“…We use a working definition of sustainability adopted from Leach et al (2018) as a dynamic one referring to the "long-term maintenance of desirable and meaningful life support systems which are biophysically, culturally and socially determined" [30]. In doing so, we too consider sustainability as both a process and outcome of coupled environmental and social dimensions and their local and cross-scale interactions.…”

“…Addressing sustainable futures in the new geological epoch of the Anthropocene [37] is an endeavor in which researchers and practitioners are increasingly confronted with the dynamics between equity, i.e., the notion that everyone should have what they need for wellbeing in their given context, and sustainability [30]. Equity notably emerged, for example, as an essential building block of sustainability in the United Nations' Agenda 2030, and is foundational to its Sustainable Development Goals [38].…”

“…In other words, while the totality of impacts from human development threaten the parameters of liveability for our species as a whole, the consequences of scientific and technological innovation (both positive and negative) have privileged societies unequally. These outcomes have impacted distributional equity (the allocation of resources, costs and benefits), recognitional equity (the acknowledgement of, and respect for, identities, values and rights), and procedural equity (the extent to which different groups are able to participate in governance) [30].…”

“…Similarly, the location for points of intervention, where, and for whom socio-technical innovations are made or not made, has normative implications. These implications serve as a counterpoint to formerly reductionist, linear cause-effect governance of risks: Anticipating adverse events in the Anthropocene requires an understanding of emerging properties of social-ecological systems, tipping points, appropriate interventions and innovations, and conceptualizations of desired, or at least acceptable, futures [26,30,45,46].…”

Advancing the integration of ecosystem services and livelihood adaptation

“…As the Sustainable Development Goals seek to enhance multiple benefits that people derive from nature, we must contend with the challenge of aggregate tradeoffs between goals, and there are increasingly productive research approaches for doing so [155,156]. But we must also contend with the implications of those tradeoffs in terms of equity [157]. Today we see rapid methodological advances emerging in this arena [51,52,60,121,151,[158][159][160], and the ESLA framework advances this critical endeavor by combining existing strengths, embracing dynamism, facilitating coupled empirical-modeling research, and adopting a bottom-up approach that recognizes that in SSNRD systems, sustainability and equity ultimately depend on the way that individuals, households and communities experience and navigate the challenges of livelihood adaptation.…”