21 Issues for the 21st Century: Results of the UNEP Foresight Process on Emerging Environmental Issues

8/2/2019 21 Issues for the 21st Century: Results of the UNEP Foresight Process on Emerging Environmental Issues

1/60

Results of theUNEP Foresight Process onEmerging Environmental Issues

21 Issues forthe 21stCentury


2/60

Published by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), February 2012

Copyright UNEP 2012

ISBN: 978-92-807-3191-0

DEW/1235/NA

Reproduction

is publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-prot services without special permission

from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication

that uses this publication as a source.

No use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from

the United Nations Environment Programme. Applications for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of the

reproduction, should be addressed to the Director, DCPI, UNEP, P. O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, Kenya.

e use of information from this document for publicity or advertising is not permitted.

Disclaimers

Mention of a commercial company or product in this document does not imply endorsement by UNEP. Trademark names and symbols are

used in an editorial fashion with no intention on infringement on trademark or copyright laws.

e designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on

the part of UNEP concerning the legal status of any country, territory or city or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers

and boundaries.

We regret any errors or omissions that may have been unwittingly made.

Images and illustrations as specied.

Citation

is document may be cited as:

UNEP, 2012. 21 Issues for the 21 st Century: Result of the UNEP Foresight Process on Emerging Environmental Issues.

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya, 56pp.

Cover photograph credits (top to bottom):

bg_knight; UN Photo/R Kollar; Protasov A&N; IIja Mask; WDG Photo

is report can be downloaded at http://www.unep.org/publications/ebooks/ForesightReport/

Cover Design: Audrey Ringler (DEWA, UNEP)

Printing: UNON/Publishing Services Section/Nairobi, ISO 14001:2004-Certied

UNEP promotes

environmentally sound practices

globally and in its own activities. This

report is printed on paper from sustainable

forests including recycled bre. The paper is

chlorine free and the inks vegetable-based.

Our distribution policy aims to reduce

UNEPs carbon footprint.


3/60

Results of the

UNEP Foresight Process onEmerging Environmental Issues

21 Issues forthe 21stCentury


4/60

Coordination: Joseph Alcamo (UNEP Chie Scientist); Norberto Fernandez (Former Chie UNEP/DEWA-Early WarningBranch); Sunday A. Leonard (UNEP Scientic Assistant to Chie Scientist), Pascal Peduzzi (Head, Early Warning Unit, UNEP/DEWA/GRID-Europe); Ashbindu Singh (Chie UNEP/DEWA-Early Warning Branch).

UNEP 2011 Foresight Panel

Pro. John Agard, Department o Lie Sciences, University o the West Indies, rinidad and obagoPro. Joseph Alcamo, Panel Chair, UNEP, KenyaPro. Frank Biermann, Institute or Environmental Studies, VU University Amsterdam, Netherlands;Pro. Malin Falkenmark, Stockholm International Water Institute, SwedenPro. Carl Folke, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, SwedenPro. Michael H. Glantz, Consortium or Capacity Building, University o Colorado, USAPro. Chris Gordon, Institute or Environment and Sanitation Studies, University o Ghana, GhanaDr Telma Krug, National Institute or Space Research, BrazilPro. Rik Leemans, Department Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University, NetherlandsPro. Isabelle Niang, Dpartement de Gologie, Universit Cheikh Anta Diop, SenegalPro. Shuzo Nishioka, Institute or Global Environmental Strategies, JapanPro. Oladele Osibanjo, Department o Chemistry, University o Ibadan, Nigeria

Ms Cristelle Pratt, Independent Environmental Service Proessional, FijiPro. Roberto Snchez-Rodrguez, Department o Urban and Environmental Studies, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, MexicoPro. Mary Scholes, School o Animal, Plant and Environmental Science, University o the Witwatersrand, South AricaPro. Priyadarshi R. Shukla, Indian Institute o Management, IndiaDr Leena Srivastava, Te Energy and Resources Institute, IndiaPro. Michael A. Stocking, Scientic and echnical Advisory Panel (SAP) o the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) / School

o International Development, University o East Anglia, UKPro. Jun Xia, Wuhan University and Centre or Water Resources Research, Chinese Academy o Sciences, P.R. ChinaPro. Coleen Vogel, Department o Geography, University o the Witwatersrand, South AricaPro. Oran R. Young, Bren School o Environmental Science and Management, University o Caliornia, USAPro. Linxiu Zhang, Centre or Chinese Agricultural Policy, Chinese Academy o Sciences, P.R. China

Foresight Panel Facilitator: Marc Gramberger (Prospex bvba).

Contributors to ext: John Agard; Joseph Alcamo; Frank Biermann; Alison Colls; Malin Falkenmark; Carl Folke;Michael H.Glantz; Chris Gordon; essa Goverse; Marc Gramberger; Ruth Harding; Telma Krug; Rik Leemans; Sunday A. Leonard; ShuzoNishioka; Oladele Osibanjo; Pascal Peduzzi; Cristelle Pratt; Roberto Snchez-Rodrguez; Mary Scholes; Priyadarshi R. Shukla;Ashbindu Singh; Leena Srivastava; Michael A. Stocking; Coleen Vogel; Jun Xia; Oran R. Young; Linxiu Zhang.

UNEP Science Focal Points: Mohamed Atani; Mia urner; Alphonse Kambu; Balakrishna Pisupati; Jacqueline Alder; David Jensen;Pushpam Kumar; Ravi Prabhu; Norberto Fernandez; Monika MacDevette; essa Goverse; Stephen womlow; Edoardo Zandri; BobKakuyo; Heidelore Fiedler; Bubu Jallow; David Piper; Daniel Puig; Guido Sonnemann; Michael Spilsbury; Jorn Scharlemann.

Scientic and Expert Review: Keith Alverson (UNEP); Joseph Baker (Queensland Government); Phoebe Barnard (South AricanNational Biodiversity Institute); Peter Koeoed Bjornsen (UNEP); Agneta Sundn Bylhn (UNEP); Peter Gilruth (UNEP); Kas Higuchi(York University); Ashok Khosla (Development Alternatives); R.E. (ed) Munn (University o oronto); Helen Ross (University o

Queensland); Alison Rosser (UNEP, WCMC); Jorn Scharlemann (UNEP, WCMC); John Stone (Carleton University); Mia urner(UNEP); Rusong Wang (Chinese Academy o Sciences); Bernard West (International Union o Pure and Applied Chemistry).

Coordination o Electronic Consultation: Ananda Dias (UNEP); Susan Greenwood Etienne (SCOPE); Norberto Fernandez(UNEP); Veronique Plocq Fichelet (SCOPE); essa Goverse (UNEP); Sunday A. Leonard (UNEP); Erick Litswa (UNEP);Janak Pathak (UNEP); Mick Wilson (UNEP).

Respondents to the Electronic Consultation - Listed in Appendix 1

Production eam and UNEP Secretariat Support: Sarah Abdelrahim; Harsha Dave; Linda Duquesnoy; Pouran Ghaarpour;Eugene Papa; Neeyati Patel; Audrey Ringler; Ron Witt.

Layout and Printing: UNON, Publishing Services Section, ISO 14001:2004 - certied.

Te United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) wishes to thank the Government o Switzerland and in particular theSwiss Federal Ofce or Environment (CH-FOEN) or providing the unds or this work. Tanks also to Christophe Bouvier.

Acknowledgements


5/60

iii

Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................................................. ii

Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................................iv

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................v

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Emerging Temes 21 Issues for the 21st Century ......................................................................................................... 2

able 1: Te 21 Emerging issues .................................................................................................................................... 4

Cross-cutting Issues ........................................................................................................................................................... 5

Issue 001 Aligning Governance to the Challenges o Global Sustainability ................................................................. 6

Issue 002 ransorming Human Capabilities or the 21st Century: Meeting Global Environmental Challengesand Moving owards a Green Economy ..................................................................................................... 7

Issue 003 Broken Bridges: Reconnecting Science and Policy ...................................................................................... 9

Issue 004 Social ipping Points? Catalyzing Rapid and ransormative Changes in Human Behaviour towardsthe Environment ...................................................................................................................................... 11

Issue 005 New Concepts or Coping with Creeping Changes and Imminent Tresholds ........................................ 12

Issue 006 Coping with Migration Caused by New Aspects o Environmental Change.............................................. 14

Food, Biodiversity and Land Issues ................................................................................................................................... 16

Issue 007 New Challenges or Ensuring Food Saety and Food Security or 9 Billion People .................................... 17

Issue 008 Beyond Conservation: Integrating Biodiversity across the Environmental and Economic Agendas ........... 19

Issue 009 Boosting Urban Sustainability and Resilience ........................................................................................... 20

Issue 010 Te New Rush or Land: Responding to New National and International Pressures ................................. 22

Freshwaters and Marine Issues ........................................................................................................................................ 24

Issue 011 New Insights on Water-Land Interactions: Shit in the Management Paradigm? ...................................... 25Issue 012 Shortcutting the Degradation o Inland Waters in Developing Countries ................................................. 26

Issue 013 Potential Collapse o Oceanic Systems Requires Integrated Ocean Governance ........................................ 27

Issue 014 Coastal Ecosystems: Addressing Increasing Pressures with Adaptive Governance ....................................... 29

Climate Change Issues .................................................................................................................................................... 31

Issue 015 New Challenges or Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation:Managing the Unintended Consequences ................................................................................................. 32

Issue 016 Acting on the Signal o Climate Change in the Changing Frequency o Extreme Events .......................... 33

Issue 017 Managing the Impacts o Glacier Retreat ................................................................................................. 35

Energy, echnology, and Waste Issues ............................................................................................................................. 37

Issue 018 Accelerating the Implementation o Environmentally-Friendly Renewable Energy Systems ..................... 38

Issue 019 Greater Risk than Necessary? Te Need or a New Approach or MinimizingRisks o Novel echnologies and Chemicals ............................................................................................. 39

Issue 020 Changing the Face o Waste: Solving the Impending Scarcity o Strategic Minerals andAvoiding Electronic Waste ....................................................................................................................... 41

Issue 021 Te Environmental Consequences o Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors .............................................. 43

Appendix 1 Respondents to Electronic Questionnaire ...................................................................................................... 45

Appendix 2 Description o the Foresight Process ............................................................................................................... 46

able of Contents


6/60

iv 21 Issues for the 21st Century

Results of the UNEP 2011 Foresight Process on Emerging Environmental Issues

Sound science is critical to UNEPs work in termso advising governments on the challenges and theopportunities o a rapidly changing world.

In order to achieve sustainable development, nations and theircitizens need to know how the policies o the past are impactingthe present: equally the judgements and assessments o likelyuture trends need to be kept high on the international radarscreen.

In 2010, in support o the road to Rio+20 and UNEPs

work towards an inclusive Green Economy, a unique andtransormational consultative process was instigated to answera set o critical scientic questions on what will be the bigemerging issues over the coming years.

Te UNEP Foresight Panel, involving over 20 distinguishedscientists rom around the world, spent close to a yeardiscussing and consulting with some 400 other scientists andexperts globally via an electronic survey.

Te goal was to deliver an international consensus and apriority list o the top emerging environmental issues alongside

options or action.

Emerging environmental issues were dened as issues witheither a positive or negative global environmental impact thatare recognized by the scientic community as very importantto human well-being, but not yet receiving adequate attentionrom the policy community.

Te issues chosen were termed as emerging based onnewness, which can be the result o: new scientic knowledge;new scales or accelerated rates o impact; heightened level oawareness; and/or new ways o responding to the issue.

Tis report is the outcome o that process and presents theidentied issues titled: 21 Issues or the 21st Century. Teseissues cut across all major global environmental themesincluding ood production and ood security; cities and landuse; biodiversity, resh water and marine; climate change andenergy, technology and waste issues.

Meanwhile, another cluster o issues were chosen thatessentially cut across sectors and individual themes.

Tese address questions surrounding such issues as the

governance required to more eectively tackle 21st centurysustainability challenges, including the urgency to bridge thegap between the scientic and policy communities and therelevance o social tipping points to sustainable consumption.

Te ndings o the report, which was coordinated by theOce o the UNEP Chie Scientist and the UNEPs Divisiono Early Warning and Assessment, are aimed at all sectors osociety committed to realizing a more intelligent, decisive andorward-looking response to challenges o our times.

While the initial ocus was to inorm the Rio+20 Summit

taking place in Brazil in 2012, 21 Issues or the 21st Centurywill be clearly relevant to environmental policy-making andscientic priority setting or many years to come as well as thetrajectory o UNEPs uture work programme.

Foreword

Achim Steiner

United Nations Under-Secretary-General, and

Executive Director United Nations Environment Programme


7/60

Executive Summary v

he purpose o the UNEP Foresight Process is toproduce, every two years, a careul and authoritativeranking o the most important emerging issues related

to the global environment. UNEP aims to inorm the UN andwider international community about these issues on a timely

basis, as well as provide input to its own work programme andthat o other UN agencies, thereby ullling the stipulation oits mandate: keeping the global environment under reviewand bringing emerging issues to the attention o governmentsand the international community or action.

Te concept o emerging issues is subjective. It is used in thisreport to describe issues that are recognized as very importantby the scientic community, but are not yet receiving adequateattention rom the policy community. Denitions o veryimportant and adequate are let open to those identiying theissues. Emerging issues are urther dened as those that are:

qCritical to the global environment. Te issue can be eitherpositive or negative but must be environmental in nature,or environmentally-related.

qGiven priority over the next one to three years in the workprogramme o UNEP and, or, other UN institutions and,or, other international institutions concerned with theglobal environment.

qHave a large spatial scale. Issues should either be global,continental or universal in nature (by universal we mean

an issue occurring in many places around the world).

qRecognised as emerging based on newness, which canbe the result o: new scientic knowledge; new scales oraccelerated rates o impact; heightened level o awareness;and, or, new ways to respond to the issue.

Te UNEP Foresight Process has been designed so as toencourage the creative thinking o participants and to beinclusive at the same time. At the core o the process is aForesight Panel consisting o 22 distinguished members o thescientic community rom 16 developing and industrialized

countries, covering all world regions and internationallyrecognized because o their expertise in one or moreenvironmental or related issues.

Important steps in the process included:

qA canvass o ideas rom the UNEP community to obtain arst list o emerging issues.

qwo acilitated meetings, during which the ForesightPanel expanded, debated and ranked the list o issues ina structured and systematic process. Some issues were

combined and redened, resulting in the selection o 21priority issues.

qAn extensive electronic consultation o scientistsworldwide, in which more than 400 scientists providedeedback on the preliminary issues selected by the Panelduring their rst meeting.

T I: 21 I t 21t CtTe output o the UNEP Foresight Process is a ranked list o 21emerging issues described in a way that reects their linkagesto the various dimensions o sustainable development. Teissues relate to the major themes o the global environment,as well as important cross-cutting issues. Below, a summarydescription o the issues is provided according to the dierentclusters rather than their ranking.

Cross-cutting Issues001: Aligning Governance to the Challenges o GlobalSustainability (Ranked #1). Te current system o

international environmental governance, with its maze ointerlocking multilateral agreements, evolved during the 20thcentury, and is believed by many to be unsuitable or the 21 stcentury. Some commentators believe that this system lacks thenecessary representativeness, accountability and eectivenessor the transition to sustainability, and that a much higherlevel o participation and transparency is needed. New modelso governance are being tested, ranging rom public-private-community partnerships to alliances between environmentalistand other civil society groups. However, the eectiveness onovel governance arrangements is unclear and requires urtherscrutiny.

002: ransorming Human Capabilities or the 21stCentury: Meeting Global Environmental Challenges andMoving owards a Green Economy (Ranked #2). Adaptingto global change and attaining a green economy will require avariety o new capabilities, in particular new job skills, modeso learning, management approaches and research eorts.Action is needed to close the skills gaps in the green sector;update educational institutions to better meet educationalneeds or sustainability work; train managers to better identiyand respond to global environmental change; and encourageresearch to address the sustainability challenge.

003: Broken Bridges: Reconnecting Science and Policy(Ranked #4). o cope with global environmental change, oursociety needs strategies and policies that are underpinned by astrong science and evidence base. But many believe the linkagebetween the policy and science communities is inadequate oreven deteriorating, and that this broken bridge is hinderingthe development o solutions to global environmental change.Tis problem requires a new look at the way science is organizedand how the science-policy interace can be improved.

004: Social ipping Points? Catalyzing Rapid and

ransormative Changes in Human Behaviour towardsthe Environment (Ranked #5). New social science researchhas articulated the way in which damaging human behaviour

Executive Summary


8/60

vi 21 Issues for The 21st CenTury


can be transormed by public policy in a positive directionwithin a relatively short period o time. An example is thetransormation o the public view o cigarette smoking whichswitched rom being a ashionable activity to a dangerous healthhazard within one generation in many countries. Can theseinsights also be applied to transorming habits o consumptionthat lead to destructive environmental changes? What publicincentives economic, inormative or prohibitions would

work best to achieve this transormation?

005: New Concepts or Coping with Creeping Changesand Imminent Tresholds (Ranked #18). Many humaninteractions with the natural environment cause a slow,incremental and cumulative degradation o the environment;e.g., stratospheric ozone depletion, acid rain, tropicaldeorestation, mangrove destruction, and biodiversity loss,among others. Ironically, these creeping changes are typicallyoverlooked in their early stages when they can be most easilyaddressed. Tey only become noticeable when their negativeconsequences appear, by which time they are irreversible

or more costly to mitigate. Hence, eective early warningmonitoring systems are needed to spot them early on, beorethey become environmental hotspots.

006: Coping with Migration Caused by New Aspects oEnvironmental Change (Ranked #20). A growing body ostudies suggests that environmental change will become anincreasingly important actor in the displacement o people.Environmental change includes both rapid-onset events, suchas more requent or intense coastal and river ooding, andslow-onset processes such as land degradation and sea levelrise. Among the response options to environmental migration

are: improving prediction o migration, incorporating plansor coping with migration into national adaptation plans,extending national and international immigration policies toinclude environmental migrants, and trying to mitigate theunderlying causes o environmental migration.

Food, Biodiversity and Land Issues007: New Challenges or Ensuring Food Saety and FoodSecurity or 9 Billion People (Ranked #3). Although oodsecurity is a longstanding issue, the world needs to conront anew set o challenges such as climate change, competition orland rom bioenergy production, heightened water scarcity,

and possible shortalls o phosphorus or ertilizer. Food saetyalso aces new challenges rom increasing disease transmissionrom animals to people and ood contamination. Tere is anurgent need to increase the security and saety o the worldsood supply by setting up more comprehensive early warningsystems, supporting smallholder armers, reducing ood waste,and increasing agricultural eciency.

008: Beyond Conservation: Integrating Biodiversity acrossthe Environmental and Economic Agendas (Ranked#7). In recent years, two important threads o research havedocumented how biodiversity is intertwined with other aspects

o society and nature. One thread has articulated the linkagesbetween biodiversity and other environmental issues (impact oclimate change on ecosystems; interaction between ecosystems

and the water cycle); and the other, the interrelationshipbetween biodiversity and economics (valuation o ecosystemservices; the role o biodiversity in underpinning economicactivities). It is time to act on these new scientic insights andtreat biodiversity as more than a nature conservation issue. It istime to ully integrate the issue o biodiversity into the globalenvironmental and economic agendas.

009: Boosting Urban Sustainability and Resilience(Ranked #11). Te issue o sustainability o cities has to dowith both the environmental quality within cities that cityresidents have to live with, and the environmental changescaused by cities outside o their borders. oday neither aspectis particularly sustainable, especially in developing countries.Te key to sustainability lies in the concept o green cities oreco cities which dier rom conventional cities in that theyare more compact, have a vital mix o land uses within theirboundaries, provide many dierent low-energy transportationopportunities, and produce some o their own renewableenergy. Such cities would provide their citizens with a high

level o environmental quality and liveability, and have a lowerenvironmental ootprint outside their borders.

010: Te New Rush or Land: Responding to New Nationaland International Pressures (Ranked #12). Concernsover uture energy and ood supplies have led to a new rushor acquiring lands in developing countries by both oreignand national investors. Research shows that the rate o landacquisition has greatly accelerated over the past ew years. Tereis a need to better understand the scale o the phenomenon,the main countries at risk, and the trade-os involved. It is alsoimportant to grasp how this trend will aect livelihoods, ood

security, ecosystem services, and conicts. Putting saeguards inplace, such as assessing the potential environmental, economicand social impacts o land deals beore they are nalized, couldminimize the drawbacks to the host country while allowing theinvesting countries to gain the ood and energy security theyaim or by acquiring land.

Freshwaters and Marine Issues011: New Insights on Water-Land Interactions: Shit inthe Management Paradigm (Ranked #6). Recent scienticresearch has provided a new view on how water and landinteract, locally to globally. For example, scientists now

better understand the extent to which changes in land useprooundly aect downwind rainall patterns, and havecomputed the huge volumes o water appropriated (transpiredor evaporated) by society to produce rained crops (blueversus green water ows). Tis new knowledge provides anew impetus or bringing water and land management closertogether. Te result could be a boost in water productivity andhigher ood production per litre o water, as well as new wayso maintaining the quality o water.

012: Shortcutting the Degradation o Inland Watersin Developing Countries (Ranked #15). Water quality

degradation, channel modications, and overshing aresome o the actors posing a growing threat to the reshwaterecosystems and inland sheries o developing countries. But


9/60

Executive Summary vii

as developing countries stand on the brink o large-scaledegradation o their inland waters, they have the option oshortcutting this degradation by taking advantage o orward-looking water technologies and management techniques thatwere not available to countries in Europe and North Americaat the time they began contaminating their waterways.

013: Potential Collapse o Oceanic Systems Requires

Integrated Ocean Governance (Ranked #13). Oceansprovide many earth system unctions including the regulationo climate and the hydrological cycle, as well as provide habitator a rich diversity o organisms, and ood, materials andenergy or human use. But the oceanic environment is acedwith increasing threats to its long-term integrity, including:acidication, overshing, land and marine-based pollution,widespread habitat destruction, and the prolieration oinvasive species. Tere is a growing presumption that thecurrent approach to managing oceans will be unable to preventa collapse o some oceanic systems. Tis is because, amongother reasons, responsible bodies are dispersed across UN

agencies. Reorms are needed and new orms o governanceshould be considered and evaluated, including the option oestablishing a new coordinating body or integrated oceangovernance.

014: Coastal Ecosystems: Addressing Increasing Pressureswith Adaptive Governance (Ranked #19). Increased pressurerom the exploitation o coastal resources is signicantlyaecting coastal ecosystems. Settlements, industries,agriculture, sheries and trade are concentrated in coastalzones; hence sensitive and highly valuable coastal ecosystemsare subjected to on-going degradation. Present management

approaches are inadequate or halting the tide o degradation.Tereore, an adaptive governance approach is needed thatinvolves the delegation o management, rights, and power insuch a way that encourages the participation o all stakeholders.

Climate Change Issues015: New Challenges or Climate Change Mitigation and

Adaptation: Managing the Unintended Consequences(Ranked #7). When scaled up, mitigation and adaptationmeasures may have unintended consequences. For example, largescale wind arms may disrupt the migratory behaviour o birds;new massive sea walls will protect the populations but may also

eliminate valuable natural wetlands; and large scale geoengineeringschemes could have many unintended impacts. Tese potentialnegative side eects should be assessed, and then minimized oravoided in order to maintain support or climate policies.

016: Acting on the Signal o Climate Change in theChanging Frequency o Extreme Events (Ranked #16).A spate o new scientic studies have compared climatemodelling results with observational evidence and conrmedthe hypothesis that climate change could alter the requency,strength and distribution o extreme events. For example,studies have linked global warming with increased risk o

ooding in England and Wales; with increased summerrainall variability in Southeast United States; and with theintensication o heavy precipitation events over much o the

land area o the Northern Hemisphere. Tese new ndingsunderscore the need to adapt to a changing requency oextreme events, and suggest that medium term early warningsystems might be possible.

017: Managing the Impacts o Glacier Retreat (Ranked#21). Recent research shows that many glaciers are in retreatand some have an accelerating rate o melting. Tese changes

pose threats to many people and ecosystems, especially in theHimalayas, Central Asia and Andes. Treats include the risko ooding rom the bursting o natural dams holding backglacial lakes, as well as the eventual decline o runo duringthe dry season in some regions. A much better understandingo the hydrological consequences and economic and socialimpacts o glacier retreat is needed, and the development oadaptation strategies is equally urgent.

Energy, echnology, and Waste Issues018: Accelerating the Implementation o Environmentally-Friendly Renewable Energy Systems (Ranked #7). As the

world seeks solutions to climate change, it looks increasinglytowards renewable energy. But regardless o the large potentialor renewable energy worldwide, this potential has notbeen realized due to many barriers. An important task is toidentiy the means to eliminate the economic, regulatory andinstitutional barriers to renewable energy that undermine itscompetitiveness with conventional energy sources.

019: Greater Risk than Necessary? Te Need or a NewApproach or Minimizing Risks o Novel echnologies andChemicals (Ranked #10).We are xed in a pattern by whichsociety rst produces new technologies and chemicals and then

ex post acto tries to evaluate the impacts o what it has produced.Te latest examples are the questions raised by applications osynthetic biology and nanotechnology. With the acceleratedpace by which novel technologies and chemicals are beingdeployed, a new approach should be considered by which theirimplications are systematically and comprehensively assessedbeorethey reach the production phase with the aim to minimizetheir risks to society and nature. While this is happening insome parts o the world or some technologies and chemicals, itis worth making this a universal approach and this may requirenew orms o international governance.

020: Changing the Face o Waste: Solving the ImpendingScarcity o Strategic Minerals and Avoiding Electronic

Waste (Ranked #14). Increased demand or high-tech andrenewable energy equipment is contributing to a depletiono strategic minerals, including rare earth metals. Tis iscompounded by planned obsolescence and other wasteulmanuacturing habits. Te increased exploitation o mineralsis also causing greater waste management problems, inparticular, the build-up o electronic wastes (e-wastes). Apromising option is to maximize the recovery o metals andother materials rom electronic and other waste streams (socalled waste mining). Tis will slow down the extraction

and depletion o minerals, reduce the quantity o their wastes,and thereby lessen their associated environmental and otherimpacts.


10/60

viii 21 Issues for The 21st CenTury


021: Te Environmental Consequences o DecommissioningNuclear Reactors (Ranked #17). Many o the worlds nuclearreactors are aging and will need to be decommissioned verysoon. Tis is o concern because decommissioning is a majoroperation which produces large amounts o radioactive wastethat need to be disposed o saely. Tere is an inadequatenumber o trained proessionals to handle these operations,

even though the number o plants needing decommissioningwill at least double within the next 10 years. Te Fukushimanuclear accident in March 2011 has urther accelerated the planso some countries to close their nuclear plants. Internationalinterventions, procedures, policies and cooperation are neededto minimize the potential danger posed by decommissioningactivities to society and the environment.


11/60

Introduction 1

Why a Foresight Study?

he world today is conronted with many dierentemerging environmental issues including newproblems to solve and new solutions to evaluate

and possibly implement. Which emerging issues are most

important? Which require our attention? Tese are thequestions dealt with in this report.

At the outset it is important to point out that emergingissues is a subjective concept. What qualies as emergingto one community may be yesterdays news to another. Hereemerging is meant to apply to those issues already recognized

by the scientic community but thought to be insucientlyattended to by the policy community and the rest o the society.

Box 1. Guidelines or Emerging Global Environmental Issues

An emerging issue in the UNEP Foresight Process is dened as an issue with either a positive or negative global environmentalimpact that is recognized by the scientic community as very important to human well being, but has not yet received adequateattention rom the policy community. Te denitions o very important and adequate are let open to those identiying theissues.

Te recognition o an issue as emerging is based on newness. Newness o an issue can be as a result o new scienticknowledge, new scales or accelerated rates o impact, a heightened level o awareness, and, or new ways to respond to the

issue.

Te emerging issue must be critical to the global environmentand must be environmental in nature or environmentally-related.

Te issue has to be o a large spatial scale. It should either be global, continental or universal in nature (by universal wemean an issue occurring in many places around the world).

Te issue should be given priority over thenext one to three years in the work programme o UNEP, and, or other UNinstitutions and, or, other international institutions concerned with some aspect o the global environment. However, thisdoes not mean that the issue should be resolvable in this time period.

In the Foresight Process, UNEP recognized the need to:

qselect issues that i not addressed now will have signicant uture impacts

qocus on threats and direct causality as well as possibility o response due to new technologies

qaddress cumulative - oten local - eects that are chronic in nature

qappreciate that extremes are oten more important than average changes, and

qgive attention to vulnerable people and places

1. Introduction

The UNEP Foresight Process

he approach used to identiy and rank emerging issuesis called the UNEP Foresight Process. Te goal othe process is to produce a careul and authoritative

ranking o the most important emerging global environmental

issues. Trough this process UNEP aims to inorm the UNand the wider international community about emerging issuesas well as provide input to UNEPs own Programme o Work,thereby ullling the stipulation o its mandate: keepingthe global environment under review and bringing emergingissues to the attention o governments and the internationalcommunity or action.

Considering the rapidity at which new issues emerge, it isintended to repeat the Foresight Process every two years.

Te process was designed to encourage the creative input

o participants by stimulating debate and examining issuesrom dierent angles. Tereore the scientists involved in theprocess were intentionally selected to represent a wide range

o disciplines and parts o the world. Tis wide variety oscientists also contributed to the legitimacy o the process.

At the core o the process is a Foresight Panel consisting o

22 distinguished members o the scientic community romdeveloping and industrialized countries (see Acknowledgements),who are internationally recognized because o their expertise inone or more environmental or related issues. Te Panel covers awide spectrum o disciplines rom environmental governance tomarine sciences. Five Panel members were rom Arica; six romAsia and the Pacic Region; three rom Latin America and theCaribbean; ve rom Europe; and three rom North America.Fourteen o them work primarily in the natural sciences andeight in the social sciences or economics. Tere were teen menand seven women on the Panel.

Te Foresight Process consisted o a set o alternating openand closed steps. Te open steps opened up the process toa wide range o views, while the closed steps allowed the


12/60

2 21 Issues for the 21st Century


relatively small Foresight Panel to debate the issues in depthand select a limited set o priority issues. Te Foresight Panelwas guided through the process by a proessional acilitator andthe UNEP Secretariat. Te entire process took eight months.

Te process was divided into six phases:

qCanvass o UNEP Community. Te Process began with a

canvass o the UNEP community to solicit their views andinsights about important emerging issues. Tis canvassresulted in a list o 68 issue which were described in abackground report sent to the Foresight Panel membersbeore their rst meeting.

qPreliminary List o Issues. Beore the rst Panel meeting,Panel members added their own ideas o emerging issues tothe list o 68 issues rom the UNEP community, resultingin a preliminary list o 95 issues. Te Panel then scored theissues based on their perception o their importance andthe scores were used to rank the 95 issues. Tis ranked list

was a main input to the rst Panel meeting.

qFirst Panel Meeting. At their rst meeting, Panel membersdebated the 95 issues in a structured and systematic way,giving more attention to the higher ranked issues. Someissues were combined and redened. Te output o the rstmeeting was a list o21 priority issues.

qElectronic Consultation. An interactive electronicquestionnaire was prepared with descriptions o the21 priority issues rom the rst Panel meeting. Tisquestionnaire was sent to 933 scientists around the worldwho were asked to score the issues between 1 and 10, andto suggest additional issues and issues to be dropped. Tedistribution list had a balanced representation o regionsand expertise. Te response rate and regional distribution

o respondents was considered excellent (see Appendix 2).

qSecond Foresight Panel Meeting. Te Panel consideredthe results o the Electronic Consultation, especiallythe scoring o issues and the suggestions or adding anddropping issues. Tey rearranged and redened someissues and settled on a list o top ten, middle ve, andbottom six issues, close to the results o the ElectronicConsultation. Ater the meeting, the Panel scored each othe issues within the 3 groupings and thus produced a nalranking o 21 issues.

qFinal Documentation. Te issues were then documentedwith short descriptions and reerences.

Tis report presents descriptions o the 21 issues. Te ForesightProcess itsel is described in more detail in Appendix 2.

While many o the issues identied through theForesight Process can be categorized according tothe major themes o global environmental change

water, climate change, the marine environment, and so on the Foresight Panel elt that this sectoral view is becomingincreasingly obsolete (see Box 2). Hence, the descriptions othe issues mention their linkages to other issues or themes andtheir linkages to the various dimensions o sustainability. Forexample an issue related to biodiversity (Issue 008) reers to thelinkage o biodiversity with other environmental and economicactors. Likewise, one o the issues pertaining to the water sector(Issue 011) reers to the impacts o water-land interactions.

Furthermore, about one-third o the issues are truly cross-sectoral and address such concerns as the governance needed to

contend with 21st century sustainability challenges, the relevanceo social tipping points to sustainable consumption, and themigration ows ollowing rom new aspects o environmentalchange. Tese clearly cannot be put into any one thematic box.

As described in Box 2, the Foresight Panel emphasized theneed to think in a holistic and cross-cutting manner. In theollowing description o the issues we begin with the cross-cutting issues and then ollow with the thematic (but stillintegrative) issues concerned with ood, land, and biodiversity;reshwater and marine environment; climate change; andnally energy, technology and waste. able 1 presents the

entire list o emerging issues together with their rankings.

2. Emerging Temes 21 Issues for the 21st Century


13/60

Introduction 3

Box 2. Global Change and the New Generation o Emerging Issues

It is natural and appropriate to identiy issues in terms o amiliar, important themes such as managing ood systems;creating more eective systems governing the uses o reshwater; stimulating environmentally riendly energy sources; or

regulating the development o novel but potentially dangerous technologies. But all these issues take on new dimensionswhen we consider how comprehensively humanity is unintentionally transorming the earth system. Indeed, the earthsystem is entering a new era that diers sharply rom the last 10,000 years, the relatively stable period that has supported theemergence o human civilizations. While the last 10,000 years are known in geology as the Holocene, scientists increasinglyreer to the emerging epoch in planetary history as the Anthropocene, an era dened by the role o the human species as acore driver o earth system evolution.

oday human actions have become major orces in the operation o the earth system. Tey increasingly challenge the systemboundaries o the planet, which will result in undamental, unprecedented and unpredictable changes in the earth system.

Tis is a new situation. It calls or a undamental shit in perspectives and world views as well as a new paradigm to guideaction. It calls or reconnecting human development and progress to the capacity o the earth system to sustain our owndevelopment. It requires planetary stewardship.

It is time to redirect the existing policies that still ocus on sectoral approaches, on steady-state perspectives, and on a view othe environment as something that is outside society. Decision-makers need to recognize people and societies as integratedparts o the biosphere, depending on its unctioning and lie-support while shaping it globally.

Tese changes have multiple elements and dimensions. o name a ew:

qLevels o connectedness rom local to global scales are increasing

qRapid interactions and dynamics between domains are pervasive

qProcesses o change are accelerating

qMore changes are non-linear, abrupt, and irreversible

In short, we are moving into a world that diers in undamental ways rom the one we have been amiliar with during mosto modern human history. Tis transition has proound consequences. It calls or the development o a new paradigm to

guide thinking about emerging environmental issues.

Issues that previously could be addressed individually must now be examined together. Instead o thinking about land,water, energy or biodiversity as distinct issues, or example, we realize that these issues interact extensively with one another.Many emerging issues - such as the production o biouels, the spread o marine dead zones, and the emergence o greenwater teleconnections - are products o these interactions. Tis requires us to re-evaluate old issues in a new light. It inormsour understanding o what the new emerging environmental issues in the 21st century are.

Shocks and surprises that arise as emergent properties o the dynamics o the earth system are becoming regular occurrences.Te consequences o tipping points in the climate system and other planetary boundaries with environmental chain reactionsresulting in the loss o ecosystem services are cases in point. Te pursuit o resilience- the capacity to deal with the interplayo gradual and rapid change and continue to develop - in a setting marked by high levels o uncertainty coupled with theturbulent behaviour o large social-ecological systems is emerging as an overriding concern.

None o this reduces the importance o addressing amiliar issues like managing ood systems, creating more eective systemsgoverning the uses o reshwater, stimulating environmentally riendly energy sources or regulating the development anduse o novel but potentially dangerous technologies. In act many o the 21 issues we identiy in this report have a thematicnature, but others broaden our view o emerging issues to encompass more than the sectors we are used to looking at. Ourcomprehensive role in changing the earth system calls or a new, more comprehensive and cross-cutting perspective. We mustreinvent policies and governance systems to oster stewardship o our uture, as humans in collaboration with the biosphere.


14/60

4 21 Issues for the 21st Century


able 1: Te 21 Emerging issues

Issue ID Issue itle Ranking*Cross-cutting issues

001 Aligning Governance to the Challenges o Global Sustainability 1

002ransorming Human Capabilities or the 21st Century: Meeting Global Environmental Challengesand Moving owards a Green Economy

2

003 Broken Bridges: Reconnecting Science and Policy 4

004Social ipping Points? Catalyzing Rapid and ransormative Changes in Human Behaviourtowards the Environment

5

005 New Concepts or Coping with Creeping Changes and Imminent Tresholds 18

006 Coping with Migration Caused by New Aspects o Environmental Change 20

Food, biodiversity and land issues007 New Challenges or Ensuring Food Saety and Food Security or 9 Billion People 3

008 Beyond Conservation: Integrating Biodiversity Across the Environmental and Economic Agendas 7

009 Boosting Urban Sustainability and Resilience 11

010 Te New Rush or Land: Responding to New National and International Pressures 12

Freshwater and marine issues

011 New Insights on Water-Land Interactions: Shit in the Management Paradigm? 6

012 Shortcutting the Degradation o Inland Waters in Developing Countries 15

013 Potential Collapse o Oceanic Systems Requires Integrated Ocean Governance 13

014 Coastal Ecosystems: Addressing Increasing Pressures with Adaptive Governance 19Climate change issues

015New Challenges or Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: Managing the UnintendedConsequences

7

016 Acting on the Signal o Climate Change in the Changing Frequency o Extreme Events 16

017 Managing the Impacts o Glacier Retreat 21

Energy, technology, and waste issues

018 Accelerating the Implementation o Environmentally-Friendly Renewable Energy Systems 7

019Greater Risk than Necessary? Te Need or a New Approach or Minimizing Risks o Novelechnologies and Chemicals

10

020 Changing the Face o Waste: Solving the Impending Scarcity o Strategic Minerals and AvoidingElectronic Waste

14

021 Te Environmental Consequences o Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors 17

* Ranking based on scoring by the UNEP Foresight Panel and ater considering the polling results o more than 400 scientists worldwide.


15/60

Cross-cutting

Issues


16/60

6 21 Issues for The 21st CenTury


Where we stand

By all accounts, governance or global sustainability isalready a major enterprise. Presently, more than 900

intergovernmental agreements with provisions onenvironmental protection are in orce. Major environmentalsummits such as the Conerences o Parties to the UNFramework Convention on Climate Change regularlydraw several thousand participants and observers. Globalenvironmental policy has become a core item on the agenda othe UN system and o regional organizations alike.

Despite the size o the eort, it is not clear that the currentsystem o global governance is adequate or the necessarytransition to sustainability. In an October 2011 report, Biermannand many other social scientists argue that a core challenge or

environmental policy is to align and revitalize governance, atall levels, to the pressing needs o global environmental changeand the possible disruption o the earth system.

In what way does environmental governance need to berevitalized? Firstly, on the national and local levels, expertshave ound that sustainability concerns are, in general, notwell integrated into the energy, water and other sectors o theeconomy (see the discussion o governance in the coastal zonein Issue 014). Several experts, including Jordan (2008) havepointed out the need or better integration at these levels.

A question being debated by scholars is whether the currentapproach to international decision-making (decisions byconsensus), borrowed rom the 19th century, is appropriate oradequate or dealing with todays environmental challenges.Some say that qualied majority voting, or example, wouldbe more appropriate.

Some also argue that governance is, to a degree, ragmentedat the international level and that more could be accomplishedi dierent institutions would work together more closelyon sustainability issues. (See, or example, the discussion ogovernance o oceans in Issue 013). Several studies, including

one by Young and colleagues (2008), show that the plethorao intergovernmental environmental agreements lacks overallintegration and eective coordination, as well as eectivemeans o oresight, early warning, and proactive developmento policies.

Other researchers, including Newell and Bulkeley (2010),have argued that intergovernmental decision-making todayis marked by too little representation, accountability, andeectiveness in addressing the undamental challenges oglobal environmental change and the needed transition tosustainability.

Regarding the UN, scholars argue that the UN system hasnot suciently addressed the challenge o sustainability. A

number o studies, including those by Young and colleagues in2008, and Biermann and colleagues in 2011, have asserted that

the UN Environment Programme and the UN Commissionon Sustainable Development could provide stronger leadershipon sustainability issues i they received stronger internationalsupport. Although many specialized programmes andagencies o the UN system incorporate sustainability issuesin their agendas, a strengthening o coordination across theseorganizations would make their work more eective.

Other experts believe that the current global governance systemlacks sucient means and mechanisms to help the most vulnerablecountries carry out sustainability programmes. Some believe thatthe reality o global environmental change, which every country

is aected by and which cannot be localized, provides a newethical motivation or richer countries to assist poorer countriesin adapting to climate challenges and other global changes.

Importance/relevanceIn general, national governments typically lack the capacity

to support strong policy actions on environment at theglobal level. Yet the numerous emerging environmentalchallenges acing the world today are unlikely to be resolved

without major, new eorts by governments in addressing theundamental governance challenges that lie ahead.

Incrementalism and piecemeal approaches to globalgovernance may not guarantee the urgently needed transitionto more sustainable means o production and consumption.It appears that we may be seeing the emergence o aconstitutional moment in the development o internationalrelations and governance, comparable in recent times onlyto the major constitutional moment o 1945 post WorldWar II that saw the emergence o a multitude o new, andoten unprecedented, international norms, institutions, and

agencies. Similar undamental revisions in norms, processesand mechanisms o global governance would help address theglobal sustainability challenge.

Issue 001 Aligning Governance to the Challenges of GlobalSustainability (Ranked #1)

Credit: UN Photo/Mark Garten


17/60

Cross-cutting Issues 7

Options for actionPolicymakers have many options or better aligning

governance to the sustainability challenge. A rst step wouldbe to raise awareness about this issue through a public debateabout the actions to be taken.

One action to consider is to streamline intergovernmentaldecision-making by moving towards a qualied majority vote,

which as it turns out, is already common in the 20-year oldregime on stratospheric ozone depletion and several othertreaty regimes. Tis could help speed up decision-makingprocesses.

Another option is to agree on a constitutional rameworkor sustainable development, or example, comparable to thestrong one existing or trade liberalization. Tis could helpminimize overlaps between existing institutions and stimulatethe development o new institutions in areas such as water ornew technologies.

Stronger international institutions could help ostercompromises in international negotiations, initiate thenegotiation o new norms, and encourage the implementationo sustainability policies in smaller and poorer countries.

A stronger and more institutionalized involvement o civilsociety in intergovernmental decision-making could providebroader support or norms on sustainable development andenvironmental protection, and better protect the interests o

marginalized groups and uture generations. Governance inthe 21st century may also require new types o involvementand participation o civil society and other stakeholdersin decision-making. Te ounding o numerous public-private partnerships has provided examples o novel ways ogovernance, including the institutionalized representationo stakeholders in decision-making rom armers to

environmentalist organizations. Te overall eectivenesso such novel governance arrangements, however, is not yetclear, and urther research on the comparative advantages odierent types o governance mechanisms is urgently needed.

Consequences of inaction/action in the next1020 years

Business as usual in global politics is likely to result in urtherdeterioration o negative environmental trends. Te protectiono global climate, or example, was already declared more thantwenty years ago as a common concern o humankind bythe UN General Assembly, and all nations were requested to

take orceul action on reducing emissions. wenty years later,many believe that the actions taken have been ineective inorestalling major climate change impacts.

However, should governments and other actors take the patho undamentally realigning and revitalizing global governancein the area o sustainable development, the transition tosustainability may succeed.

BACKGROUND INFORMAION

Biermann, F., Abbott, K., Andresen, S., Bckstrand, K., Bernstein, S., Betsill, M.M., Bulkeley, H., Cashore, B., Clapp, J., Folke, C., Gupta, A., Gupta, J., Haas, P.M.,Jordan, A., Kanie, N., Kluvnkov-Oravsk, ., Lebel, L., Liverman, D., Meadowcrot, J., Mitchell, R.B., Newell, P., Oberthr, S., Olsson, L., Pattberg, P., Snchez-

Rodrguez, R., Schroeder, H., Underdal, A., Vieira, S.C., Vogel, C., Young, O.R., Brock, A., Zondervan, R. 2011. ransorming Governance and Institutions or a Planetunder Pressure. Revitalizing the Institutional Framework or Global Sustainability. Key Insights rom Social Science Research. Policy Brie 3 commissioned by the 2012London Conerence Planet under Pressure. Lund and Amsterdam: Te Earth System Governance Project. Available at www.ieg.earthsystemgovernance.org

Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., Zelli, F. (eds). 2010. Global Climate Governance Beyond 2012, Cambridge UP.Giddens, A. 2009. Te Politics o Climate Change, Polity Press.Jordan, A. 2008. Te governance o sustainable development: taking stock and looking orwards. Environmental and PlanningC: Government and Policy, 26, 17-33.Newell, P., Bulkeley, H. 2010. Governing Climate Change, Routledge.Young, O.R., King, L.A., Schroeder, H. 2008. Institutions and Environmental Change: Principal Findings, Applications, and Research Frontiers. Cambridge, MA: MI

Press.Young, O.R. 2010. Institutional Dynamics. Emergent Patterns in International Environmental Governance. Cambridge, MA, MI Press.

Where we stand

Society has already conronted a host o globalenvironmental challenges including loss o biodiversity,climate change, water and land degradation among

others, and, through persistence and ingenuity, has oundmany solutions to these challenges. Now the question iswhether society has the right capabilities to implement these

solutions, meet the global environmental challenge andsupport a burgeoning Green Economy.

Many commentators believe that the answer to the capabilitiesquestion is simply no, and that a huge eort is needed on allronts beore society is adequately equipped to deal with thesustainability challenge o the 21st century. Capabilities, inthis sense, means the necessary job skills, modes o learning,management approaches and research eorts. Starting withjob

skills, a UNEP report in 2008 noted that the US, Germany,Brazil, China and other countries, were already sueringrom a shortage o skilled workers in the green sector o the

Issue 002 ransforming Human Capabilities for the 21st

Century: Meeting Global Environmental Challengesand Moving owards a Green Economy (Ranked #2)


18/60



economy (as noted in Issue 018). With regards to modes olearning, Beddoe and others (2009), argue that our currentpedagogic methods, rom schooling to proessional training,are unsuited or achieving sustainable development. Not onlyare more training programs needed to provide workers or the

green workorce, but background education in sustainabilityprinciples is needed or virtually all proessions, so that theseprinciples can be built into the day-to-day aairs o governmentand commerce. Current management approachesalso have theirdrawbacks when it comes to building a Green Economy. Teaorementioned UNEP report also notes that new perspectives,awareness, and managerial capacities are needed or the greensector o the economy. Finally, many question the adequacyo traditional research eforts in meeting global environmentalchallenges. Experts advocate a shit rom independent, curiosity-driven research to a much deeper level o engagement o sciencewith society. As put by the International Council o Science

(2010) the global scientic community must take on thechallenge o delivering knowledge required to support eortsto achieve sustainable development in the context o globalenvironmental change

Importance/relevanceTere are already indications that the paucity o job skills in the

green sector may be holding back societys ability to cope withglobal environmental change. Lack o personnel, or example,is apparently slowing the growth o the renewable energyindustry, which has the knock-on eect o slowing the control ogreenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants. Hence, society has a

more dicult time coping with climate change and air pollutionimpacts. More generally, UNEP (2008) suggests that currentshortages in skilled labor may rustrate eorts by governmentsto transition to a Green Economy and deliver the expectedenvironmental benets and economic returns. In addition tothe gap in job skills, similar deciencies in modes o learning,management practices, and research eorts all undermine eortsto deal with adverse global environmental change.

Options for actionWhat steps can be taken to build up societys capabilities to

meet the sustainability challenge o the 21st century?

One obvious and important step would be to train workers toll in the gaps in the green workorce, as discussed above. In its

2008 report, UNEP denes green jobs as work in agricultural,manuacturing, research and development, administrative,and service activities that contribute substantially to preservingor restoring environmental quality. New green jobs includevarious technical, administrative and engineering positionsin the renewable energy industry, as well as jobs retrottingresidential and commercial buildings to improve their energyeciency. Coupled to the need or smarter and greener

technologies are new employment opportunities in the eldso housing and spatial planning, and sustainability-related legaland policy issues. Many new managerial and administrativepositions will be needed or handling cross-cutting issues suchas integrated water resources management, ecosystem servicesaccounting, and ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change

How can we improve our modes o learning to make thembetter suited or the sustainability challenge? One way is oreducational systems to extend their curricula and programsto better prepare students or jobs in the Green Economy.It is particularly important to provide interdisciplinary and

multi-disciplinary training that equips students to deal withthe cross-cutting nature o sustainability-related jobs. Beorespecializing in a particular eld, say climate science or windpower mechanics, students should be taught the undamentalso both the natural and social sciences that underlie globalenvironmental change. Based on a poll o proessionals, theInternational Society o Sustainability Proessionals alsoidentied other skills crucial to working in the sustainabilityeld such as strategic planning, systems thinking, and projectmanagement.

What role do managers play in the sustainability agenda?

First o all, managers are needed across the board to managesustainability-related projects in areas such as renewableenergy development, integrated water management, andurban ecological planning. Second, they are needed withinmany larger rms, not necessarily within the green sector, tomanage their corporate programs on Social Responsibility orSustainability. What new capabilities do they need? In bothcases, managers need training beyond standard interpersonalmanagement skills to encompass a strong understanding olocal to global sustainability issues. Tey also need a grasp othe methods to assess the sustainability benchmarks o a rm,such as ecological ootprint analysis, lie cycle analysis, and

others, as well as a strong capability in systems thinking.

Credit: Still Pictures/argus/Peter Frischmuth

Credit: Still Pictures/VISUM/Wolgang Steche


19/60



Beddoe, R., Costanza, R., Farley, J., Garza, E., Kent, J., Kubiszewski, I., Martinez, L., McCowen, ., Murphy, K., Myers, N., Ogden, Z., Stapleton, K., Woodward, J. 2009.

Overcoming systematic roadblocks to sustainability: the evolutionary redesign o worldviews, institutions and technologies. Proceedings o the National Academy oSciences, 106, 2483-2489.

International Council o Science. (ICSU). 2010. Earth system science or global sustainability: the grand challenges. http://www.icsu-visioning.org/wp-content/uploads/Grand_Challenges_Nov2010.pd

UNEP. 2011. owards a green economy: pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication. http://www.unep.org/GreenEconomy/Portals/93/documents/Full_GER_screen.pd

UNEP. 2008. Green jobs: towards decent work in a sustainable, low-carbon world. Washington, D.C.: Worldwatch Institute. http://www.unep.org/labour_environment/PDFs/Greenjobs/UNEP-Green-Jobs-Report.pd

Willard, M., Wiedmeyer, C., Flint, R.W., Weedon, J.S., Woodward, R., Feldman, I., Edwards, M. Te sustainability proessional: 2010 competency survey report.International Society o Sustainability Proessionals. http://www.sustainabilityproessionals.org/system/les/ISSP%20Special%20Report_3.10_nal_0.pd

Where we stand

Meeting the challenge o global environmentalchange requires, among other things, a strong baseo knowledge about environmental issues. Tis

knowledge largely comes rom the scientic community butalso rom many non-scientists. Te important point is thatthis knowledge has to be communicated to a wider audienceo decision-makers and the general public. It is this larger

community that has to make the dicult decisions about howto contend with climate change, deorestation, water scarcity,and other global environmental changes acing society.Because these decisions could be costly and have many otherimplications or society, decision-makers need to have a highlevel o condence in the science behind their choices.

Unortunately, some experts including Upham and others(2009) believe that public condence in environmental scienceis diminishing. Others see signs o a deepening distrust oenvironmental scientic outputs, such that scientic adviceis sometimes resisted by economic and policy actors, even on

critical issues. A signpost or this is the questioning o climatechange science set o by Climategate and the controversyover a ew errors in the 2007 climate change assessment o the

Issue 003 Broken Bridges: Reconnecting Science and Policy(Ranked #4)

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Some attributethe inability to produce a new binding agreement on emissionreductions at the 2009 Copenhagen climate summit to a newscepticism about climate change science. Others point to a 2010Gallup poll which shows a general slump in concern over globalwarming amongst US citizens since 2008. Te poll shows a 13%increase, between 2008 and 2010, in the number o those who

believe that the issue o climate change has been exaggerated,and a 9% decrease in the number o those who believe that theissue is generally correct. Moreover, the president o the USNational Academy o Sciences, Ralph Cicerone remarked ata conerence in 2010 that he thought the damage to climatechange science has spilled over to other kinds o science.

As to the cause o the broken bridges, some scholars such asHolmes and Clark (2008), believe that ailed communicationis at the root o the problem. Te Arctic Climate Change andSecurity Policy Conerence noted that, a communication gappersists among scientists and policy makers (Yalowitz et al.,

2008). Tis is not too surprising since scientic results areusually dicult to translate directly into actionable policyoptions. Te situation is urther aggravated by the act that

Te research community must also build up new capabilitiesto address global environmental change and support theGreen Economy. Te International Council o Science (2010)argues that this will require basic changes in the structure ocurrent research that promote interdisciplinary research, thatallow or more regional-based research, and that strengthenthe interaction o science with decision-makers and otherstakeholders. Te orm o these changes is now being debated

within the scientic and unding communities, but couldinclude a new governance structure or the organizations thatcoordinate global change research and new research prioritiesor the scientic community.


What are the consequences o not acting to build up humancapabilities? Te International Council o Science (2010) hasstated that the pace and magnitude o human-induced global

change is currently beyond human control and is maniest inincreasingly dangerous threats to human societies and humanwell-being. Extrapolating a decade or more rom now, wemight logically assume that the adverse impacts o climatechange, land degradation and other global environmentalchanges will be even more serious. Ten, perhaps, we willregret our lack o capabilities to deal with these threats.

On the other hand, society could ollow an alternativepathway to the uture and make a special eort to ll in theskills gaps in the green sector. It can also update educationalinstitutions to better cover educational needs or sustainabilitywork, and train managers to better respond to globalenvironmental change, and retool research eorts to betteraddress the sustainability challenge. I society ollows thispathway, then it is likely that a decade rom now we will be in amuch stronger position to contend with global environmentalchange.


20/60



ew scientists are trained to communicate results in a non-technical way. When scientists do try to communicate theirndings they sometimes lean too heavily on alarming results on the growing water crisis, or rapidly disappearing numbero species. But this may work against eective communicationbecause, as noted by scholars such as Garnett and Lindenmayer(2011), people tend to discount bad news.

Campbell and others (2007) suggest that the relativeinaccessibility o scientic results is another actor. Althoughscientic outputs are increasing, many o them are embeddedin grey literature not widely distributed, or in costly scienticjournals which are too expensive or organizations indeveloping countries and many individuals across the world.Another problem is that it is oten dicult to retrieve neededdata or inormation because it is spread out across manyinstitutions and databases.

Importance/relevanceWhat are the consequences o the recent (or continuing)

lack o condence or concern or environmental science sharedby policymakers and the public? Some believe that scientistscontinue to talk mainly amongst themselves and rarely withpolicymakers such that the number o meeting points betweenscientists and policymakers is relatively limited. Whether thisnumber has decreased in recent years or not has not beendocumented, but it appears that most environmental researchis still instigated, designed and delivered by scientists withlittle appreciation or how it can be useul to policymaking.Te upshot, as articulated by Juntti and others (2009), isthat relatively ew policy decisions are based on a balance oenvironmental, economic and social considerations. o close

the circle, this reinorces the opinion o scientists, as observed byChoi and others (2005), that research is not particularly useulor o interest to policymakers. Hence, on one hand only a smallamount o science is driven by requests rom policymakers, andon the other, science is seldom used in the policy arena where itis needed, or at times it is cherry-picked to legitimize decisionsalready taken. Tis is a dilemma because it seriously hampers theuptake o urgent environmental inormation by policymakersand stakeholders at a time when solving environmentalchallenges require, more than ever, scientic results with a highlevel o clarity, accessibility, credibility and legitimacy.

Options for actionA high priority or repairing bridges is to analyze which actor

or actors are contributing the most to the lack o condence.Te task o strengthening or rebuilding bridges between scienceand policy requires a new look at the way science is organizedand how the science-society-policy interace can be improved.

On the issue o communication, this can be improved byorganizing more substantive meetings between scientists andpolicymakers. Examples o such meetings are the regularbriengs given by researchers to the ministerial advisors inthe Subsidiary Body or Scientic and echnological Advice

o the climate convention, and the regular Science-PolicyDialogues on climate issues organized by the InternationalSAR secretariat.

Communication and an exchange o views can be also beenhanced using the method o integrated assessment whichis a process by which knowledge about a particular topic isassessed by scientists in a multi-disciplinary and policy-relevantway. During the assessment, scientists work closely with

policymakers and other stakeholders to scope the assessment,review and critique drats o the report, and agree upon itssummary and main messages. Major integrated assessmentssuch as the UNEP Global Environment Outlook and theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment have been carried outor climate change, ecosystems services, water and the globalenvironment.

Another method or enhancing communication betweenscientists and policymakers is environmental scenario analysis.Tis approach involves scientists, policymakers and otherstakeholders working closely together to elaborate alternatives

on how an environmental situation may evolve into theuture. As just one example, the Great ransitions Scenario,developed by experts and stakeholders as part o the RwandaState o Environment and Outlook Report, pointed outthe policy steps leading to social regeneration and naturalresources management with participation o all stakeholders.

Tere is also a good argument or raming some science inmore optimistic and positive ways an actively-promotedculture o hope. Furthermore, uncertainties need to be clearlycommunicated, and ways ound or more nuanced predictionsto be actored into policy.

On the issue o accessibility o scientic results, there aremany options to increase access including making internationalscientic journals available at an aordable cost to individualsand institutions in developing countries. Tis is being done,or example, through the Online Access to Research in theEnvironment Programme. Another example is establishingopen clearinghouses to make inormation more accessible - anexample here is the Conservation Commons hosted by theUNEP World Conservation and Monitoring Centre.

Consequences of inaction/action in the next

1020 yearsNot acting to repair the bridge between environmental

science and policy will stie vital cooperation between science

Credit: Shutterstock/olly


21/60


and policy communities. ension may increase between the twocommunities, thereby urther hindering communication. Telikely outcome is that decision-makers will not have adequateknowledge to intervene in environmental problems, scientistswill have ew incentives to make their outputs policy-relevant,and the public will not support the expense o intervening.In sum, society will be less equipped and less successul inmanaging the risks o global environmental change.

such as waste separation and recycling, as well as water and energyconservation. Other transormative changes include the shitingattitude regarding the consumption o whale meat within oneor two generations, or the use o animal urs or clothing. Someargue that the current growth o vegetarianism or the slow-oodmovement might signal urther transormative changes romhighly consumptive to more sustainable ways o lie.

Importance/relevanceTe key idea behind social tipping points is that societal

change is non-linear. As documented in the case o phasing

Issue 004 Social ipping Points? Catalyzing Rapid andransformative Changes in Human Behaviourtowards the Environment (Ranked #5)

Where we stand

he World Business Council or SustainableDevelopment (2008) and a growing number oscholars including John (2004), Conger (2009), and

Schwerin (2010) argue that technological breakthroughsand eciency gains alone will be inadequate or achievingenvironmental sustainability. According to this way othinking, it may also be necessary or society to shit away romits current high consumption levels and polluting activities toa more sustainable mode o behaviour. I this is true, how canthe necessary changes to human behaviour be eciently and

rapidly triggered? An answer to this question may lie in recentsocial science ndings about social tipping points, i.e., rapidand purposeul transormative social change.

An oten-cited example o a social tipping point is thetransormation within one generation o cigarette smokingrom a widely accepted activity to a social anathema in manycountries. Tis transormative change was brought about, orat least supported, by public policy. Tis included a successulmix o economic incentives such as taxation, public awarenesscampaigns, unambiguous statements about health hazards,public-private covenants in areas such as advertisement or

entertainment, and a ban on smoking in some public spaces. Anenvironmental example is the emergence o wide-spread changesin public perceptions and behaviour in many countries in areas

Credit: UN Photo

aking action to improve communication, access to scienticinormation, and other underlying causes o broken bridges,will provide an atmosphere by which the scientic communitycan respond better to the needs o society. Policymakerswill be better inormed, and the public will benet romevidence-based policies. Te scientic community will take itsrightul place as an integral part o society, providing valuablecontributions to the handling o important issues o our day

such as climate change and environmental degradation.BACKGROUND INFORMAION

Anon 2010. Editorial. Without candour, we cant trust climate science. Te New Scientist 207, 2769, 17 July, 2010Campbell, S., Benita, S., Coates, E., Davies, P., Penn, G. 2007. Analysis or policy: evidence-based policy in practice. Government Social Research Unit, HM reasury.

http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/Assets/Analysis%20or%20Policy%20report_tcm6-4148.pdChoi, B.C.K., Pang, ., Lin, V., Puska, P., Sherman, G., Goddard, M., Ackland, M.J., Sainsbury, P., Stachenko, S., Morrison, H., Clottey, C. 2005. Can scientists and policy

makers work together? Journal o Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 632-637.Gallup. 2011. Gallups annual environment poll: In U.S., concerns about global warming stable at lower levels. http://www.gallup.com/poll/146606/concerns-global-

warming-stable-lower-levels.aspxGarnett, S.., Lindemayer, D.B. 2011. Conservation science must engender hope to succeed. rends in Ecology and Evolution, 26, 59-60.Holmes, J., Clark, R. 2008. Enhancing the use o science in environmental policy-making and regulation. Environmental Science and Policy, 11, 702-711Juntti, M., Russel, D., urnpenny, J. 2009. Evidence, politics and power in public policy or the environment. Environmental Science and Policy, 12, 207-215Robertson, D.P., Hull, R.B. 2003. Public ecology: an environmental science and policy or global society. Environmental Science and Policy, 6, 399-410Rwanda State o the Environment and Outlook Report: www.rema.gov.rw/soe/Upham, P., Whitmarsh, L., Poortinga, W., Purdam, K., Darnton, A., McLachlan, C., Devine-Wright, P. 2009. Public attitudes to environmental change: a selective review o

theory and practice. A research synthesis or the living with environmental change programme. Research Councils UK, http://www.esrc.ac.uk/_images/LWEC-research-synthesis-ull-report_tcm8-6384.pdWhitmarsh. L. 2011. Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: dimensions, determinants, and change over time. Global Environmental Change, 21, 690-700.Yalowitz, K.S., Collins, J.F., Virginia, R.A. 2008. Te arctic climate change and security policy conerence, nal report and ndings. www.carnegieendowment.org/les/

arctic_climate_change.pd


22/60



out nicotine abuse in many countries, stronger governmentalpolicies might inuence certain tipping points in socialbehaviour that lead to a more undamental and rapidtransormation o societal norms and standards o behaviourthan might otherwise be expected.

As noted above, many experts believe that behaviouralchange is at the core o many environmental problems.

Behavioural transormations support more eective systems ogovernance and help build human capacities or change. Suchchanges are also vital in addressing many other issues, romthe depletion o water resources by overconsumption, to themitigation o climate change by modiying mobility patternsand lie-styles. Te support o behavioural change is not newper se, and it has been part and parcel o environmental andhealth policies or decades. Yet, Lucas (2008), Crompton(2009) and others believe that previous eorts to encouragesustainable behaviour were not sucient. Te much desiredsustainability transition is less likely, or more dicult, withouta substantial transormation in modern liestyles, rom the rich

industrialized countries to the rapidly developing mega-citiesin the South.

Options for actionWhat can public policy learn rom recent research about

how to encourage positive, rapid and transormative changesin human behaviour? What incentives e.g., economic,inormative, or prohibitive work best to initiate suchchanges? How can international environmental agencies helpgovernments and other actors trigger transormative change?

Where we stand

Researchers including Glantz (1999) and Kelman (2006)have labeled a special category o environmental changeas creeping changes. Tese are human interactions

with the natural environment that have a slow onset, advanceincrementally, and eventually pass a threshold and quickly leadto changes in the environment.

A classic example is the decimation o Central Asias AralSea (the ourth largest inland sea in the world). Te problembegan with the incremental diversion o water rom the

Issue 005 New Concepts for Coping with Creeping Changesand Imminent Tresholds (Ranked #18)

No denitive answers exist to these questions and it wouldbe worthwhile or members o the policy and scienticcommunities to work together to uncover what knowledgethere is to gain. But part o the answer lies in inormation-exchange, joint programmes, and public-private partnerships.For example, the public sector can encourage positive changein consumer attitudes through more concerted inormationcampaigns, more eective economic instruments, and

legislative action. Governments can also urther strengthen civilsociety organizations in their activities on public engagementand behavioural change. Also public-private covenants canhelp develop new products and serve as agents o change.


I public policy and other eorts are unable to moveconsumption patterns in a more positive direction, it islikely that an unsustainable culture o material consumptionwill continue to spread to all countries with a burgeoningmiddle class. Te upshot will be a continuation, and perhaps

intensication, o the environmental pollution and resourcedepletion caused by this consumption pattern.

On the other hand, society has the option o using its new-ound knowledge about social tipping points to encourage moresustainable consumption habits. Eventually, perhaps soon, thecombination o sustainable consumption, together with low-impact technology and eciency improvements, will lead to amore sustainable rate o resource usage, a smaller pollution loadon the environment, and a more sustainable society.


Blackstock, K.L., Ingram, J., Burton, R., Brown, K.M., Slee, B. 2010. Understanding and inuencing behaviour change by armers to improve water quality. Science o the

otal Environment, 408, 5631-5638.Conger, S. 2009. Social invention. Te Innovation Journal, 14. http://www.innovation.cc/books/conger_social_inventions1_09232009min.pdCrompton, ., Kasser, ., 2009. Meeting environmental challenges: the role o human identity. WWF-UK, Surrey. http://assets.ww.org.uk/downloads/meeting_

environmental_challenges___the_role_o_human_identity.pdJohn, C. 2004. Coping with

Documents

21 Issues for the 21st Century: Results of the UNEP Foresight Process on Emerging Environmental Issues