Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries
With the Earth system being about to leave Holocene conditions and thus the known safe operating space for humanity, frameworks such as the Planetary Boundaries (PBs) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide quantitative metrics to guide sustainability transformations. In order to strive...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2021-10-01
|
| Series: | Ecological Indicators |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X21006749 |
| _version_ | 1818723744542097408 |
|---|---|
| author | Lukas Drees Robert Luetkemeier Heide Kerber |
| author_facet | Lukas Drees Robert Luetkemeier Heide Kerber |
| author_sort | Lukas Drees |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | With the Earth system being about to leave Holocene conditions and thus the known safe operating space for humanity, frameworks such as the Planetary Boundaries (PBs) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide quantitative metrics to guide sustainability transformations. In order to strive, not only for compliance with the PBs but also for societal well-being, some approaches attempt to combine both PBs and SDGs within a single assessment.We focus on two prominent examples, the “Doughnut” by Kate Raworth and the #SDGinPB project of the 2018 report to the Club of Rome, which are not only aimed at public outreach, but also at guiding policy-making. To meet these objectives, the approaches should possess a certain accuracy in determining the progress in achieving the SDGs and in complying with the PBs. We evaluate, by using a multi-indicator approach for comparison, whether both approaches’ limited set of indicators can still represent the SDGs’ complexity. This comparative approach estimates the progress in achieving SDGs, especially in the Global North, to be significantly lower.Based on these results and against the approaches’ purposes, we discuss their simplifications and at which point the results are no longer reliable. We conclude that global assessments can be an important factor in initiating transformative processes by stimulating public discourse, but that the actual implementation of these would require approaches with greater recognition of local particularities. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-17T21:15:23Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9b69f73d02e34b13a781fb1359c059aa |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1470-160X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-17T21:15:23Z |
| publishDate | 2021-10-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Ecological Indicators |
| spelling | doaj.art-9b69f73d02e34b13a781fb1359c059aa2022-12-21T21:32:21ZengElsevierEcological Indicators1470-160X2021-10-01129108009Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundariesLukas Drees0Robert Luetkemeier1Heide Kerber2Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE), Hamburger Allee 45, 60486 Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (SBiK-F), Senckenberganlage 25, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Corresponding author at: Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE), Hamburger Allee 45, 60486 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE), Hamburger Allee 45, 60486 Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (SBiK-F), Senckenberganlage 25, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Goethe University Frankfurt, Institute of Physical Geography, Altenhoeferallee 1, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyInstitute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE), Hamburger Allee 45, 60486 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyWith the Earth system being about to leave Holocene conditions and thus the known safe operating space for humanity, frameworks such as the Planetary Boundaries (PBs) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide quantitative metrics to guide sustainability transformations. In order to strive, not only for compliance with the PBs but also for societal well-being, some approaches attempt to combine both PBs and SDGs within a single assessment.We focus on two prominent examples, the “Doughnut” by Kate Raworth and the #SDGinPB project of the 2018 report to the Club of Rome, which are not only aimed at public outreach, but also at guiding policy-making. To meet these objectives, the approaches should possess a certain accuracy in determining the progress in achieving the SDGs and in complying with the PBs. We evaluate, by using a multi-indicator approach for comparison, whether both approaches’ limited set of indicators can still represent the SDGs’ complexity. This comparative approach estimates the progress in achieving SDGs, especially in the Global North, to be significantly lower.Based on these results and against the approaches’ purposes, we discuss their simplifications and at which point the results are no longer reliable. We conclude that global assessments can be an important factor in initiating transformative processes by stimulating public discourse, but that the actual implementation of these would require approaches with greater recognition of local particularities.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X21006749Sustainable Development GoalsSocietal well-beingGlobal indicatorsSocial-ecological transformationsIntegrated modelling |
| spellingShingle | Lukas Drees Robert Luetkemeier Heide Kerber Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries Ecological Indicators Sustainable Development Goals Societal well-being Global indicators Social-ecological transformations Integrated modelling |
| title | Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries |
| title_full | Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries |
| title_fullStr | Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries |
| title_full_unstemmed | Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries |
| title_short | Necessary or oversimplification? On the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries |
| title_sort | necessary or oversimplification on the strengths and limitations of current assessments to integrate social dimensions in planetary boundaries |
| topic | Sustainable Development Goals Societal well-being Global indicators Social-ecological transformations Integrated modelling |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X21006749 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lukasdrees necessaryoroversimplificationonthestrengthsandlimitationsofcurrentassessmentstointegratesocialdimensionsinplanetaryboundaries AT robertluetkemeier necessaryoroversimplificationonthestrengthsandlimitationsofcurrentassessmentstointegratesocialdimensionsinplanetaryboundaries AT heidekerber necessaryoroversimplificationonthestrengthsandlimitationsofcurrentassessmentstointegratesocialdimensionsinplanetaryboundaries |