Sustaining ecosystem services: Overcoming the dilemma posed by local actions and planetary boundaries

Jonas, M.; Ometto, Jean Pierre; Batistella, Mateus; Franklin, Oskar; Hall, Marianne; Lapola, David M.; Moran, Emílio F.; Tramberend, Sylvia; Queiroz, Bernardo Lanza; Schaffartzik, Anke; Shvidenko, А.; Nilsson, S.; Nobre, Carlos A.

doi:10.1002/2013ef000224

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…() and Jonas et al . () are a very small selection. However, while all of these and others have the worthy goal of contributing towards sustainability, they have not evaluated quantitatively and directly the potential level and nature of sustainability of the system based on vulnerability, and what anthropogenic influences potentially determine sustainable or unsustainable outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A quantitative approach to determine and evaluate the indicated level and nature of global ecological sustainability

Phillips

2015

Area

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question of global sustainability is concerned with the nature of the environment-human relationship. However, evaluations of global sustainability have been based predominantly on subjective or professional judgement. In this paper, a mathematical model is applied to the data of the 2004 Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) conducted by SOPAC to obtain indicative weighted levels of ecological sustainability (SEc) at the global level. The paper uses and evaluates the results obtained within the context of four influencing factors: population size, population density, GDP and Human Development Index (HDI). The paper also determines whether there is a statistical relationship between SEc-levels and each of the influencing factors. The results highlight a significant quantitative and statistical relationship between population density and obtained levels of SEc, as well as a relationship between GDP and SEc. Furthermore, while HDI and SEc produced a non-statistical curvilinear relationship, it is suggested that this may be indicative of a 'tipping point' scenario as countries develop socioeconomically to the detriment of the environment and consequently sustainability. Based on the mean average of obtained weighted values of global SEc, the indicated global SEc-value is in the range of 0.261-0.299 with an error of ±0.060-0.094, indicating weak sustainability, depending on the inclusion of the most significant or all of the influencing factors evaluated.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A quantitative approach to determine and evaluate the indicated level and nature of global ecological sustainability

Phillips

2015

Area

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors propose shifts in metrics that will re-contextualize campus scale sustainability actions in relation to regionally expressed planetary conditions. These planetary conditions include attitudes and behavior, climate change, biodiversity loss, ocean acidification, the phosphorus (P) cycle, global freshwater use, land use patterns and anthropogenic pollution, as defined by primary research (Jonas et al , 2014; Englund and Berndes, 2014; Vlek and Steg, 2007; Rockström et al , 2009). The “campus as living laboratory” approach is ideally suited to linking these global conditions with regional scale manifestations and potential solutions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological regional analysis applied to campus sustainability performance

Weber¹,

Newman

Hill

2017

IJSHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Sustainability performance in higher education is often evaluated at a generalized large scale. It remains unknown to what extent campus efforts address regional sustainability needs. This study begins to address this gap by evaluating trends in performance through the lens of regional environmental characteristics. Design/methodology/approach Four sustainability metrics across 300 North American institutions are analyzed between 2005 and 2014. The study applies two established regional frameworks to group and assess the institutions: Commission on Environmental Cooperation Ecoregions and WaterStat (water scarcity status). Standard t-tests were used to assess significant differences between the groupings of institutions as compared to the North American study population as a whole. Findings Results indicate that all institutions perform statistically uniformly for most variables when grouped at the broadest (Level I) ecoregional scale. One exception is the Marine West Coast Forest ecoregion where institutions outperformed the North American average for several variables. Only when institutions are grouped at a smaller scale of (Level III) ecoregions do the majority of significant performance patterns emerge. Research limitations/implications This paper demonstrates an ecoregions-based analytical approach to evaluating sustainability performance that contrasts with common evaluation methods in the implementation field. This research also identifies a gap in the literature explicitly linking ecological sub-regions with their associated environmental challenges and identifies next research steps in developing defensible regional targets for applied sustainability efforts. Practical implications The practical implications of this research include the following: substantive changes to methodologies for rating sustainability leadership and performance, a framework that incentivizes institutions to frame sustainability efforts in terms of collaborative or collective impact, a framework within which institutions can meaningfully prioritize efforts, and a potential shift toward regional impact metrics rather than those focused solely on campus-based or generalized targets. Originality/value The authors believe this to be the first effort to analyze North American higher education sustainability performance using regional frameworks.

show abstract

“…But it does make it implausible that the planet, or indeed most of its component systems, are primed to tip irreversibly to a radically different state that is inhospitable. Although the goal of sustainable stewardship of our planet is a laudable and an achievable one, the mechanisms and opportunities to conserve biodiversity and ecosystems lie mostly in targeted, localized actions (Jonas et al, 2014).…”

Section: The Problem With Going From Local Process To a Global Tippinmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the evidence for planetary tipping points?

Brook¹,

Ellis²,

Buettel³

2017

Oxford Scholarship Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter critically evaluates the likelihood that planet Earth will cross one or more global environmental tipping points, resulting in a degraded state that would be difficult to reverse. Ecological tipping points occur when components of a system change rapidly due an initial forcing that is amplified by positive feedbacks, resulting in a regime shift. The chapter examines the evidence in support of biological and geophysical boundaries that clearly delimit a “safe operating space” for people and biodiversity. For individual ecosystems, abrupt state transitions have been documented. However, apart from the climate system, there is scant evidence (or theoretical justification) to support the view that global aggregates like biodiversity, chemical cycles, or resource extraction have planetary thresholds that define the boundaries of a global safe operating space. Acknowledging the absence of clear evidence for thresholds or boundaries at the global level does not diminish the seriousness of anthropogenic impacts. It does, however, imply that local-scale mitigation actions will be most effective.

show abstract

Sustaining ecosystem services: Overcoming the dilemma posed by local actions and planetary boundaries

Cited by 11 publications

References 81 publications

A quantitative approach to determine and evaluate the indicated level and nature of global ecological sustainability

A quantitative approach to determine and evaluate the indicated level and nature of global ecological sustainability

Ecological regional analysis applied to campus sustainability performance

What is the evidence for planetary tipping points?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About