Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Safe and just Earth system boundaries
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Germany; University of Potsdam, Germany.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8988-2983
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre. Future Earth Secretariat, Sweden; Australian National University, Australia.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9719-9826
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre. University of Exeter, UK; Georesilience Analytics, UK.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0020-7461
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre.
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 512023 (English)In: Nature, ISSN 0028-0836, E-ISSN 1476-4687, Vol. 619, no 7968, p. 102-111Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The stability and resilience of the Earth system and human well-being are inseparably linked, yet their interdependencies are generally under-recognized; consequently, they are often treated independently. Here, we use modelling and literature assessment to quantify safe and just Earth system boundaries (ESBs) for climate, the biosphere, water and nutrient cycles, and aerosols at global and subglobal scales. We propose ESBs for maintaining the resilience and stability of the Earth system (safe ESBs) and minimizing exposure to significant harm to humans from Earth system change (a necessary but not sufficient condition for justice). The stricter of the safe or just boundaries sets the integrated safe and just ESB. Our findings show that justice considerations constrain the integrated ESBs more than safety considerations for climate and atmospheric aerosol loading. Seven of eight globally quantified safe and just ESBs and at least two regional safe and just ESBs in over half of global land area are already exceeded. We propose that our assessment provides a quantitative foundation for safeguarding the global commons for all people now and into the future.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2023. Vol. 619, no 7968, p. 102-111
National Category
Peace and Conflict Studies Other Social Sciences not elsewhere specified Geosciences, Multidisciplinary
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-229959DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06083-8ISI: 001002578400001PubMedID: 37258676Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85160783146OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-229959DiVA, id: diva2:1864103
Available from: 2024-06-03 Created: 2024-06-03 Last updated: 2025-02-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Rockström, JohanLade, Steven J.Armstrong McKay, David I.Rocha, Juan

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Rockström, JohanLade, Steven J.Armstrong McKay, David I.Rocha, Juan
By organisation
Stockholm Resilience Centre
In the same journal
Nature
Peace and Conflict StudiesOther Social Sciences not elsewhere specifiedGeosciences, Multidisciplinary

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 135 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf