Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Publications (10 of 144) Show all publications
Søgaard Jørgensen, P., Jansen, R. E. V., Avila Ortega, D. I., Wang-Erlandsson, L., Donges, J., Österblom, H., . . . Crépin, A.-S. (2023). Evolution of the polycrisis: Anthropocene traps that challenge global sustainability. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Biological Sciences, 379(1893), Article ID 20220261.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Evolution of the polycrisis: Anthropocene traps that challenge global sustainability
Show others...
2023 (English)In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Biological Sciences, ISSN 0962-8436, E-ISSN 1471-2970, Vol. 379, no 1893, article id 20220261Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The Anthropocene is characterized by accelerating change and global challenges of increasing complexity. Inspired by what some have called a polycrisis, we explore whether the human trajectory of increasing complexity and influence on the Earth system could become a form of trap for humanity. Based on an adaptation of the evolutionary traps concept to a global human context, we present results from a participatory mapping. We identify 14 traps and categorize them as either global, technology or structural traps. An assessment reveals that 12 traps (86%) could be in an advanced phase of trapping with high risk of hard-to-reverse lock-ins and growing risks of negative impacts on human well-being. Ten traps (71%) currently see growing trends in their indicators. Revealing the systemic nature of the polycrisis, we assess that Anthropocene traps often interact reinforcingly (45% of pairwise interactions), and rarely in a dampening fashion (3%). We end by discussing capacities that will be important for navigating these systemic challenges in pursuit of global sustainability. Doing so, we introduce evolvability as a unifying concept for such research between the sustainability and evolutionary sciences.

Keywords
cultural evolution, social–ecological systems, participatory mapping, complex adaptive systems, evolutionary traps
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-225226 (URN)10.1098/rstb.2022.0261 (DOI)37952617 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85176728902 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Swedish Research Council
Available from: 2024-01-11 Created: 2024-01-11 Last updated: 2024-01-12Bibliographically approved
Hahn, T., Sioen, G. B., Gasparatos, A., Elmqvist, T., Brondizio, E., Gómez-Baggethun, E., . . . Takeuchi, K. (2023). Insurance value of biodiversity in the Anthropocene is the full resilience value. Ecological Economics, 208, Article ID 107799.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Insurance value of biodiversity in the Anthropocene is the full resilience value
Show others...
2023 (English)In: Ecological Economics, ISSN 0921-8009, E-ISSN 1873-6106, Vol. 208, article id 107799Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Recently two distinctly different conceptualisations of insurance value of biodiversity/ ecosystems have been developed. The ecosystem framing addresses the full resilience value without singling out subjective risk pref-erences. Conversely, the economic framing focuses exactly on this subjective value of risk aversion, implying that the insurance value is zero for risk neutral persons. Here we analyse the differences conceptually and empirically, and relate this to the broader socio-cultural dimensions of social-ecological resilience. The uncertainty of the Anthropocene blurs the distinction between subjective/objective. We show that the economic framing has been operationalised only in specific cases while the broader literature on resilience, disaster risk reduction, and nature-based solutions tend to address the full value of resilience. Yet, the empirical literature that relates to insurance value of biodiversity is hardly consistent with resilience theory because the slow underlying variables defining resilience are rarely addressed. We suggest how the empirical literature on insurance value can be better aligned with resilience theory. Since the ecosystem framing of insurance value captures the essence of the resilience, we propose using the concept resilience value as it may reduce the present ambiguity in terminology and conceptualisation of insurance value of biodiversity.

Keywords
Insurance value of ecosystems, Natural insurance value, Ecosystem services, General resilience, Specified resilience
National Category
Biological Sciences Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-216361 (URN)10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107799 (DOI)000955367700001 ()2-s2.0-85149864622 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2023-04-17 Created: 2023-04-17 Last updated: 2023-05-03Bibliographically approved
Walker, B., Crépin, A.-S., Nyström, M., Anderies, J. M., Andersson, E., Elmqvist, T., . . . Vincent, J. R. (2023). Response diversity as a sustainability strategy. Nature Sustainability, 6(6), 621-629
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Response diversity as a sustainability strategy
Show others...
2023 (English)In: Nature Sustainability, E-ISSN 2398-9629, Vol. 6, no 6, p. 621-629Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Financial advisers recommend a diverse portfolio to respond to market fluctuations across sectors. Similarly, nature has evolved a diverse portfolio of species to maintain ecosystem function amid environmental fluctuations. In urban planning, public health, transport and communications, food production, and other domains, however, this feature often seems ignored. As we enter an era of unprecedented turbulence at the planetary level, we argue that ample responses to this new reality — that is, response diversity — can no longer be taken for granted and must be actively designed and managed. We describe here what response diversity is, how it is expressed and how it can be enhanced and lost.

National Category
Ecology Environmental Sciences Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-215461 (URN)10.1038/s41893-022-01048-7 (DOI)000928228800004 ()2-s2.0-85147149552 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2023-03-16 Created: 2023-03-16 Last updated: 2023-09-25Bibliographically approved
Rockström, J., Norström, A. V., Matthews, N., Biggs, R. (., Folke, C., Harikishun, A., . . . Nel, D. (2023). Shaping a resilient future in response to COVID-19. Nature Sustainability (6), 897-907
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Shaping a resilient future in response to COVID-19
Show others...
2023 (English)In: Nature Sustainability, E-ISSN 2398-9629, no 6, p. 897-907Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Science today defines resilience as the capacity to live and develop with change and uncertainty, which is well beyond just the ability to ‘bounce back’ to the status quo. It involves the capacity to absorb shocks, avoid tipping points, navigate surprise and keep options alive, and the ability to innovate and transform in the face of crises and traps. Five attributes underlie this capacity: diversity, redundancy, connectivity, inclusivity and equity, and adaptive learning. There is a mismatch between the talk of resilience recovery after COVID-19 and the latest science, which calls for major efforts to align resilience thinking with sustainable development action.

National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Human Geography
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-218039 (URN)10.1038/s41893-023-01105-9 (DOI)000986087700002 ()2-s2.0-85159147282 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2023-07-26 Created: 2023-07-26 Last updated: 2023-10-09Bibliographically approved
Folke, C. & Kautsky, N. (2022). Aquaculture and ocean stewardship. Ambio, 51(1), 13-16
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Aquaculture and ocean stewardship
2022 (English)In: Ambio, ISSN 0044-7447, E-ISSN 1654-7209, Vol. 51, no 1, p. 13-16Article in journal, Editorial material (Other academic) Published
National Category
Agricultural Science, Forestry and Fisheries Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-204964 (URN)10.1007/s13280-021-01528-8 (DOI)000628733600004 ()33715093 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85102717565 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-05-23 Created: 2022-05-23 Last updated: 2022-05-23Bibliographically approved
Chapin III, F. S., Weber, E. U., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., van den Bergh, J., Adger, W. N., . . . de Zeeuw, A. (2022). Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts. Ambio, 51(9), 1907-1920
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Ambio, ISSN 0044-7447, E-ISSN 1654-7209, Vol. 51, no 9, p. 1907-1920Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Transformation toward a sustainable future requires an earth stewardship approach to shift society from its current goal of increasing material wealth to a vision of sustaining built, natural, human, and social capital—equitably distributed across society, within and among nations. Widespread concern about earth’s current trajectory and support for actions that would foster more sustainable pathways suggests potential social tipping points in public demand for an earth stewardship vision. Here, we draw on empirical studies and theory to show that movement toward a stewardship vision can be facilitated by changes in either policy incentives or social norms. Our novel contribution is to point out that both norms and incentives must change and can do so interactively. This can be facilitated through leverage points and complementarities across policy areas, based on values, system design, and agency. Potential catalysts include novel democratic institutions and engagement of non-governmental actors, such as businesses, civic leaders, and social movements as agents for redistribution of power. Because no single intervention will transform the world, a key challenge is to align actions to be synergistic, persistent, and scalable.

Keywords
Anthropocene, Earth stewardship, Institutions, Market economy, Social norms, Transformation
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-204044 (URN)10.1007/s13280-022-01721-3 (DOI)000779756600001 ()35380347 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85127542545 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-04-20 Created: 2022-04-20 Last updated: 2022-08-05Bibliographically approved
Levin, S. A., Anderies, J. M., Adger, N., Barrett, S., Bennett, E. M., Cardenas, J. C., . . . Wilen, J. (2022). Governance in the Face of Extreme Events: Lessons from Evolutionary Processes for Structuring Interventions, and the Need to Go Beyond. Ecosystems (New York. Print), 25(3), 697-711
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Governance in the Face of Extreme Events: Lessons from Evolutionary Processes for Structuring Interventions, and the Need to Go Beyond
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Ecosystems (New York. Print), ISSN 1432-9840, E-ISSN 1435-0629, Vol. 25, no 3, p. 697-711Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The increasing frequency of extreme events, exogenous and endogenous, poses challenges for our societies. The current pandemic is a case in point; but once-in-a-century weather events are also becoming more common, leading to erosion, wildfire and even volcanic events that change ecosystems and disturbance regimes, threaten the sustainability of our life-support systems, and challenge the robustness and resilience of societies. Dealing with extremes will require new approaches and large-scale collective action. Preemptive measures can increase general resilience, a first line of protection, while more specific reactive responses are developed. Preemptive measures also can minimize the negative effects of events that cannot be avoided. In this paper, we first explore approaches to prevention, mitigation and adaptation, drawing inspiration from how evolutionary challenges have made biological systems robust and resilient, and from the general theory of complex adaptive systems. We argue further that proactive steps that go beyond will be necessary to reduce unacceptable consequences.

Keywords
Resilience, Robustness, Extreme events, Governance, Prevention, Mitigation, Adaptation
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-197955 (URN)10.1007/s10021-021-00680-2 (DOI)000693526700002 ()34512142 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85114407433 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-10-21 Created: 2021-10-21 Last updated: 2022-06-03Bibliographically approved
Österblom, H., Folke, C., Rocha, J., Bebbington, J., Blasiak, R., Jouffray, J.-B., . . . Lubchenco, J. (2022). Scientific mobilization of keystone actors for biosphere stewardship. Scientific Reports, 12, Article ID 3802.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Scientific mobilization of keystone actors for biosphere stewardship
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Scientific Reports, E-ISSN 2045-2322, Vol. 12, article id 3802Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The biosphere crisis requires changes to existing business practices. We ask how corporations can become sustainability leaders, when constrained by multiple barriers to collaboration for biosphere stewardship. We describe how scientists motivated, inspired and engaged with ten of the world’s largest seafood companies, in a collaborative process aimed to enable science-based and systemic transformations (2015–2021). CEOs faced multiple industry crises in 2015 that incentivized novel approaches. New scientific insights, an invitation to collaborate, and a bold vision of transformative change towards ocean stewardship, created new opportunities and direction. Co-creation of solutions resulted in new knowledge and trust, a joint agenda for action, new capacities, international recognition, formalization of an organization, increased policy influence, time-bound goals, and convergence of corporate change. Independently funded scientists helped remove barriers to cooperation, provided means for reflection, and guided corporate strategies and actions toward ocean stewardship. By 2021, multiple individuals exercised leadership and the initiative had transitioned from preliminary and uncomfortable conversations, to a dynamic, operational organization, with capacity to perform global leadership in the seafood industry. Mobilizing transformational agency through learning, collaboration, and innovation represents a cultural evolution with potential to redirect and accelerate corporate action, to the benefit of business, people and the planet. 

National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-203512 (URN)10.1038/s41598-022-07023-8 (DOI)000764883800007 ()35246555 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85125796589 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-04-04 Created: 2022-04-04 Last updated: 2022-09-15Bibliographically approved
Norström, A. V., Agarwal, B., Balvanera, P., Baptiste, B., Bennett, E. M., Brondízio, E., . . . Spierenburg, M. (2022). The programme on ecosystem change and society (PECS) - a decade of deepening social-ecological research through a place-based focus. Ecosystems and People, 18(1), 598-608
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The programme on ecosystem change and society (PECS) - a decade of deepening social-ecological research through a place-based focus
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Ecosystems and People, ISSN 2639-5908, E-ISSN 2639-5916, Vol. 18, no 1, p. 598-608Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS) was established in 2011, and is now one of the major international social-ecological systems (SES) research networks. During this time, SES research has undergone a phase of rapid growth and has grown into an influential branch of sustainability science. In this Perspective, we argue that SES research has also deepened over the past decade, and helped to shed light on key dimensions of SES dynamics (e.g. system feedbacks, aspects of system design, goals and paradigms) that can lead to tangible action for solving the major sustainability challenges of our time. We suggest four ways in which the growth of place-based SES research, fostered by networks such as PECS, has contributed to these developments, namely by: 1) shedding light on transformational change, 2) revealing the social dynamics shaping SES, 3) bringing together diverse types of knowledge, and 4) encouraging reflexive researchers.

Keywords
Christian Albert, Ecosystem social-ecological systems, sustainability science, transformations, valuation, co-production, reflexive
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-211555 (URN)10.1080/26395916.2022.2133173 (DOI)000876240500001 ()
Available from: 2022-11-25 Created: 2022-11-25 Last updated: 2022-12-07Bibliographically approved
Österblom, H., Bebbington, J., Blasiak, R., Sobkowiak, M. & Folke, C. (2022). Transnational Corporations, Biosphere Stewardship, and Sustainable Futures. Annual Review Environment and Resources, 47, 609-635
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Transnational Corporations, Biosphere Stewardship, and Sustainable Futures
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Annual Review Environment and Resources, ISSN 1543-5938, E-ISSN 1545-2050, Vol. 47, p. 609-635Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Corporations are perceived as increasingly powerful and critically important to ensuring that irreversible climatological or ecological tipping points on Earth are not crossed. Environmental impacts of corporate activities include pollution of soils, freshwater and the ocean, depletion of ecosystems and species, unsustainable use of resources, changes to air quality, and alteration of the global climate. Negative social impacts include unacceptable working conditions, erosion of traditional practices, and increased inequalities. Multiple formal and informal mechanisms have been developed, and innovative examples of corporate biosphere stewardship have resulted in progress. However, the biosphere crisis underscores that such efforts have been insufficient and that transformative change is urgently needed. We provide suggestions for aligning corporate activities with the biosphere and argue that such corporate biosphere stewardship requires more ambitious approaches taken by corporations, combined with new and formalized public governance approaches by governments.

Keywords
accounting, corporations, governance, private sector, resilience, social-ecological
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Social and Economic Geography
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-211654 (URN)10.1146/annurev-environ-120120-052845 (DOI)000869731800023 ()
Available from: 2022-11-24 Created: 2022-11-24 Last updated: 2022-11-24Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-4050-3281

Search in DiVA

Show all publications