Levers and leverage points for pathways to sustainability

Kai M A Chan,Josef Settele,Gerald G Singh,Ignacio Palomo,Thomas Hickler,Jianguo Liu,William W L Cheung,Eduardo S Brondízio,Tanya Lazarova,Terre Satterfield,Paige Olmsted,Gladys Cecilia Hernández Pedraza,Robin Naidoo,Jens Jetzkowitz,Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono,Dayuan Xue,David R Boyd,Edward J Gregr,Dolors Armenteras,Ali Kerem Saysel,Rachelle K Gould,John Driscoll,Shizuka Hashimoto,Marcel Kok,Lenke Balint,Rashid Sumaila,Christopher Barrington‐Leigh,Hien T Ngo,Barbara Muraca,John Agard,Ralf Seppelt,Odirilwe Selomane,Ana Paula Dutra Aguiar ,Michael Murray-Hudson ,Amina Mohamed ,Patrick J O’farrell ,Harold N Eyster ,Sandra Dı́az ,Karen J Esler ,Bernardo B N Strassburg

doi:10.1002/pan3.10124

Abstract

Abstract Humanity is on a deeply unsustainable trajectory. We are exceeding planetary boundaries and unlikely to meet many international sustainable development goals and global environmental targets. Until recently, there was no broadly accepted framework of interventions that could ignite the transformations needed to achieve these desired targets and goals. As a component of the IPBES Global Assessment, we conducted an iterative expert deliberation process with an extensive review of scenarios and pathways to sustainability, including the broader literature on indirect drivers, social change and sustainability transformation. We asked, what are the most important elements of pathways to sustainability? Applying a social–ecological systems lens, we identified eight priority points for intervention (leverage points) and five overarching strategic actions and priority interventions (levers), which appear to be key to societal transformation. The eight leverage points are: (1) Visions of a good life, (2) Total consumption and waste, (3) Latent values of responsibility, (4) Inequalities, (5) Justice and inclusion in conservation, (6) Externalities from trade and other telecouplings, (7) Responsible technology, innovation and investment, and (8) Education and knowledge generation and sharing. The five intertwined levers can be applied across the eight leverage points and more broadly. These include: (A) Incentives and capacity building, (B) Coordination across sectors and jurisdictions, (C) Pre‐emptive action, (D) Adaptive decision‐making and (E) Environmental law and implementation. The levers and leverage points are all non‐substitutable, and each enables others, likely leading to synergistic benefits. Transformative change towards sustainable pathways requires more than a simple scaling‐up of sustainability initiatives—it entails addressing these levers and leverage points to change the fabric of legal, political, economic and other social systems. These levers and leverage points build upon those approved within the Global Assessment's Summary for Policymakers, with the aim of enabling leaders in government, business, civil society and academia to spark transformative changes towards a more just and sustainable world. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

Highlights

It is evident that achieving key societal goals associated with sustainability and the environment (Table 1) will require transformative change—‘fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values’ (Butchart et al, 2019; Chan et al, 2019; IPBES, 2019b, p. 14; IPCC, 2018; Mace et al, 2018, Razzaque et al, 2019; Sachs et al, 2019)
Humanity is at risk of losing up to a million species in the near term (Purvis et al, 2019), degrading many of nature's crucial contributions to people (Brauman et al, 2019; Shin et al, 2019), increasing the risk of future zoonoses (UNEP, 2016) and triggering catastrophic climate change (IPCC, 2018)
We present text that differs slightly from that accepted as part of the Global Assessment in May 2019

Summary

Introduction

It is evident that achieving key societal goals associated with sustainability and the environment (Table 1) will require transformative change—‘fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values’ (Butchart et al, 2019; Chan et al, 2019; IPBES, 2019b, p. 14; IPCC, 2018; Mace et al, 2018, Razzaque et al, 2019; Sachs et al, 2019). Intensive food production poses risks to biodiversity (Beckmann et al, 2019), fuels nutrient run-off that can trigger marine hypoxic zones and associated fisheries losses (Donner & Kucharik, 2008) and demands so much water that hydrological cycles and freshwater ecosystems can be undermined (Davis et al, 2015). Given such interacting effects, how might interventions address a broader suite of sustainability goals?

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion