Planetary Boundaries Framework Research Articles

National environmental limits and footprints based on the Planetary Boundaries framework: The case of Switzerland

Abstract The Planetary Boundaries concept is a recent scientific framework, which identifies a set of nine bio-physical limits of the Earth system that should be respected in order to maintain conditions favourable to further human development. Crossing the suggested limits would lead to drastic changes in human society by disrupting some of the ecological bases that underlie the current socio-economic system. As a contribution to the international discussion, and using the case of Switzerland, this study proposes a methodology to apply the Planetary Boundaries concept on the national level. Taking such an approach allows to assess the environmental sustainability of the socio-economic activities (e.g. consumption) by the inhabitants of a country in a long-term global perspective, assuming that past, current and future populations on Earth have similar rights to natural resources. The performance of countries is evaluated by comparing the country limits with their environmental footprints according to a consumption-based perspective. An approach was developed to: i) better characterise the Planetary Boundaries and understand which limits can effectively be currently quantified; ii) identify related socio-economic indicators for which both country limits and footprints can be computed; iii) compute values for limits, footprints and performances (at global and country level); and iv) suggest priorities for action based on the assessment of global and national performances. It was found that Switzerland should, as a priority, act on its footprints related to Climate Change, Ocean Acidification, Biodiversity Loss and Nitrogen Loss. The methodology developed herein can be applied to the analysis of other countries or territories, as well as extended to analyse specific economic sectors.

Digitalisation and the UN Sustainable development Goals: What role for design

This paper investigates the relation between digitalisation and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Digitalisation is often presented as a transformative power, changing the way we live and work. The SDGs describe digitalisation technologies such as ICTs as enablers of sustainable development. The unsustainability of these technologies themselves may actually undermine the gains made in digitalisation. This becomes clear when we locate the discussion of digitalisation and the SDGs in a discussion of the Planetary Boundaries framework. The example of one of the most emblematic digital technologies of our time, the smartphone, shows the negative impact of its production and consumption on the biosphere, the basis for all life on our planet, and on many of the social aspects of the SDGs, such as poverty, child labour, decent work, and peace. But rather than promoting sustainable digitalisation, this paper proposes the notion of sustainment as a foundational principle for the sustainability of digitalisation. While sustainability has become a mean to an end, sustainment is about sustaining life itself. With sustainment, digitalisation and its design can strengthen our ability to respond to the challenges of living on a finite planet.

Towards defining an environmental investment universe within planetary boundaries

Science is increasingly able to identify precautionary boundaries for critical Earth system processes, and the business world provides societies with important means for adaptive responses to global environmental risks. In turn, investors provide vital leverage on companies. Here, we report on our transdisciplinary science/business experience in applying the planetary boundaries framework (sensu Rockström et al., Ecol Soc 14, 2009) to define a boundary-compatible investment universe and analyse the environmental compatibility of companies. We translate the planetary boundaries into limits for resource use and emissions per unit of economic value creation, using indicators from the Carnegie Mellon University EIO‑LCA database. The resulting precautionary ‘economic intensities’ can be compared with the current levels of companies’ environmental impact. This necessarily involves simplifying assumptions, for which dialogue between biophysical science, corporate sustainability and investment perspectives is needed. The simplifications mean that our translation is transparent from both biophysical and financial viewpoints, and allow our approach to be responsive to future developments in scientific insights about planetary boundaries. Our approach enables both sub‑industries and individual companies to be screened against the planetary boundaries. Our preliminary application of this screening to the entire background universe of all investable stock‑listed companies gives a selectivity of two orders of magnitude for an investment universe of environmentally attractive stocks. We discuss implications for an expanded role of environmental change science in the development of thematic equity funds.

Target‐setting for ecological resilience: Are companies setting environmental sustainability targets in line with planetary thresholds?

AbstractThe purpose of this research is to explore the extent to which companies are setting organization‐centric versus resilience‐based environmental targets in their sustainability reports. We define ecological resilience through the planetary thresholds identified by the Planetary Boundaries (PB) framework. On this basis, we define resilience‐based targets as corporate environmental targets that are connected (quantitatively or qualitatively) to these thresholds. Sustainability reports issued by 50 sustainability leader firms in Canada were analyzed to identify environmental sustainability targets. These targets were classified as resilience‐based and organization‐centric based on their connection to the PB framework. A total of 303 targets were identified, distributed across eight different corporate performance areas. None of these targets was found to be quantitatively tied to any PB thresholds. A small number of targets did nevertheless make reference to the global/regional ecological processes that underpin some of the Boundaries. These targets made reference to only five of the nine Boundaries described by the framework. This study highlights the extent of organization‐centric environmental targets in corporate sustainability reports. The implications of setting such targets are discussed, along with the challenges of adopting resilience‐based targets. This study also discusses the reasons why companies may not be adopting a resilience‐based approach to set sustainability targets and measure performance, despite increasing calls from stakeholders to do so. On this basis, several recommendations are also provided for managers to guide resilience‐based target‐ and goal‐setting.

Land use options for staying within the Planetary Boundaries – Synergies and trade-offs between global and local sustainability goals

Abstract In this paper we develop and assess alternative global land use patterns, guided by the Planetary Boundaries framework, to quantify land use opportunities for staying within the safe environmental operating space. Through a simulation based multi-criteria land use optimisation procedure, we determine the potential upper bounds of improved terrestrial carbon storage and of biodiversity conservation, while also meeting the Planetary Boundaries of land and water use and ensuring improved food supply for a population of 9 billion people. We present alternative global land use scenarios that could simultaneously yield better outcomes on all of these goals, in particular if substantial increases in agricultural productivity are realised. Terrestrial carbon sequestration potentials reach 98 GtC, whereas the potential reduction of the risk to biodiversity is 53%. Furthermore, we analyse the potential synergies and trade-offs of these global land use scenarios with national- and local-level environmental and developmental goals such as those specified in the SDGs, e.g. related to nature conservation, afforestation, bioenergy, employment and equity. This model-based information on synergies and trade-offs between different sustainability goals at different scales can be used in scientific assessments of transformation pathways, in policy making, in support of improved horizontal and vertical policy coherence and multi-level institutional solutions, as well as in SDG implementation, sustainable production and consumption (SDG 12) and global partnership mechanisms (SDG 17).

Development of a life-cycle impact assessment methodology linked to the Planetary Boundaries framework

To enable quantifying environmental performance of products and technologies in relation to Planetary Boundaries, there is a need for life-cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods which allow for expressing indicators of environmental impact in metrics corresponding to those of the control variables in the Planetary Boundaries framework. In this study, we present such a methodology, referred to as PB-LCIA. Characterization factors for direct use in the LCIA phase of a life cycle assessment, or other life-cycle based assessment, were developed for a total of 85 elementary flows recognized as dominant contributors to transgressing specific Planetary Boundaries. Exception was made for “biosphere integrity” and “introduction of novel entities” where a Planetary Boundary is yet to be defined for the latter and characterization models are considered immature for the former. The PB-LCIA can be used to quantify the share of the “safe operating space” that human activities occupy, as was illustrated by calculating indicator scores for about 10,600 products, technologies and services exemplifying several sectors, including materials, energy, transport, and processing. The PB-LCIA can be used by companies interested in gauging their activities against the Planetary Boundaries to support decisions that help to reduce the risk of human activities moving the Earth System out of the Holocene state.

Underuse of social-ecological systems: A research agenda for addressing challenges to biocultural diversity

Conservation is often operationalized as a minimization of human intervention in nature. However, many social-ecological systems depend on human interventions to maintain characteristics of biological diversity. Therefore, reduced use or full abandonment of such systems can diminish rather than enhance biological diversity and its related cultural diversity (biocultural diversity). We link the definition of “underuse” with the extinction rate used in the planetary boundaries framework to support a more objective use of the term. We execute a structured cross-continental review of underuse in social-ecological systems of regions that contain more affluent countries to frame a global research agenda on underuse. Our working approach delineates causes, consequences, and strategies concerning underuse. Based on this comparative review, we identify causes of underuse that are similar in different continents, including globalization, and demographic or structural change in Europe, Japan and Oceania. Conservation paradigms emphasizing wilderness ideals in policies are characteristic of underuse in North America, whereas post-socialist transformation processes characterize underuse in Eastern Europe. Land abandonment and de-intensification of use are a common result, particularly in marginal and protected areas. Consequences of the loss of biocultural diversity include the loss of ecosystem services, traditional knowledge, or landscape amenities. We identified a pervasive gap in transcontinental comparative research that stymies the development of effective strategies to reduce underuse of biological diversity and thereby maintain related cultural diversity. We advocate for a global research agenda on governance approaches that address the challenges of underuse. Within this agenda, we emphasize the need for an international cross-case synthesis and a trans-continental mapping of state and civil society-based interventions and co-management approaches to re-establish humans as parts of ecological systems. Such comparative work on best practice cases in a real-world context should enhance adaptive management of biocultural diversity and prevent extinction caused by underuse. Thus, this innovative connection between underuse and the planetary boundary extinction rate, along with our new global research agenda on underuse, should initiate much needed support for policy makers and natural resource managers who must decide on appropriate types and levels of human intervention to implement, both inside and outside of protected areas.

Marine plastic pollution as a planetary boundary threat – The drifting piece in the sustainability puzzle

The exponential increase in the use of plastic in modern society and the inadequate management of the resulting waste have led to its accumulation in the marine environment. There is increasing evidence of numerous mechanisms by which marine plastic pollution is causing effects across successive levels of biological organization. This will unavoidably impact ecological communities and ecosystem functions. A remaining question to be answered is if the concentration of plastic in the ocean, today or in the future, will reach levels above a critical threshold leading to global effects in vital Earth-system processes, thus granting the consideration of marine plastic pollution as a key component of the planetary boundary threat associated with chemical pollutants. Possible answers to this question are explored by reviewing and evaluating existing knowledge of the effects of plastic pollution in marine ecosystems and the ‘core planetary boundaries’, biosphere integrity and climate change. The irreversibility and global ubiquity of marine plastic pollution mean that two essential conditions for a planetary boundary threat are already met. The Earth system consequences of plastic pollution are still uncertain, but pathways and mechanisms for thresholds and global systemic change are identified. Irrespective of the recognition of plastic as a novel entity in the planetary boundaries framework, it is certain that marine plastic pollution is closely intertwined with global processes to a point that deserves careful management and prevention.

Planetary boundaries for a blue planet.

Concepts underpinning the planetary boundaries framework are being incorporated into multilateral discussions on sustainability, influencing international environmental policy development. Research underlying the boundaries has primarily focused on terrestrial systems, despite the fundamental role of marine biomes for Earth system function and societal wellbeing, seriously hindering the efficacy of the boundary approach. We explore boundaries from a marine perspective. For each boundary, we show how improved integration of marine systems influences our understanding of the risk of crossing these limits. Better integration of marine systems is essential if planetary boundaries are to inform Earth system governance.

HESS Opinions: A planetary boundary on freshwater use is misleading

Abstract. In 2009, a group of prominent Earth scientists introduced the planetary boundaries (PB) framework: they suggested nine global control variables, and defined corresponding thresholds which, if crossed, could generate unacceptable environmental change. The concept builds on systems theory, and views Earth as a complex adaptive system in which anthropogenic disturbances may trigger non-linear, abrupt, and irreversible changes at the global scale, and push the Earth system outside the stable environmental state of the Holocene. While the idea has been remarkably successful in both science and policy circles, it has also raised fundamental concerns, as the majority of suggested processes and their corresponding planetary boundaries do not operate at the global scale, and thus apparently lack the potential to trigger abrupt planetary changes. This paper picks up the debate with specific regard to the planetary boundary on global freshwater use. While the bio-physical impacts of excessive water consumption are typically confined to the river basin scale, the PB proponents argue that water-induced environmental disasters could build up to planetary-scale feedbacks and system failures. So far, however, no evidence has been presented to corroborate that hypothesis. Furthermore, no coherent approach has been presented to what extent a planetary threshold value could reflect the risk of regional environmental disaster. To be sure, the PB framework was revised in 2015, extending the planetary freshwater boundary with a set of basin-level boundaries inferred from environmental water flow assumptions. Yet, no new evidence was presented, either with respect to the ability of those basin-level boundaries to reflect the risk of regional regime shifts or with respect to a potential mechanism linking river basins to the planetary scale. So while the idea of a planetary boundary on freshwater use appears intriguing, the line of arguments presented so far remains speculative and implicatory. As long as Earth system science does not present compelling evidence, the exercise of assigning actual numbers to such a boundary is arbitrary, premature, and misleading. Taken as a basis for water-related policy and management decisions, though, the idea transforms from misleading to dangerous, as it implies that we can globally offset water-related environmental impacts. A planetary boundary on freshwater use should thus be disapproved and actively refuted by the hydrological and water resources community.

Environmentally sustainable WASH? Current discourse, planetary boundaries and future directions

The significant challenge of achieving safe, reliable and continuous service delivery has been a focus of the water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) sector in recent years, with less attention given to other important sustainability considerations such as environmental sustainability. The agenda set by the Sustainable Development Goals prompts a wider lens, bringing water resource management and ecosystem conservation together with water and sanitation access targets in one integrated goal. As we grapple with our approach to this new agenda, it is timely to reflect on how we, as a sector, engage with environmental sustainability. This paper reviews recent literature at the intersection of WASH and environmental sustainability to identify current themes and future directions. Analysis of academic and non-academic sources was undertaken and then situated with reference to the planetary boundaries framework as a useful lens to ground the socio-ecological systems and processes upon which environmental sustainability depends. Findings point to both opportunities and gaps within current sector thinking, which can drive leadership from knowledge and research institutions towards better integration of access and environmental sustainability imperatives.

The Right to Food and the Planetary Boundaries framework.

The 'Right to Food' is a legal entitlement owed to all human beings established in international law more than half a century ago. Fulfilment of the right has been entrusted to states parties to the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). However, in practice, the right is often breached because of hostility or indifference from individuals or institutions refusing access to provisions, or because of vicissitudes of nature. Adverse impacts due to human interference in natural processes are increasingly noticeable in the area of food production. These processes have been classified into nine distinct categories, all of which need be kept within certain margins, so-called 'Planetary Boundaries', which delineate a safe operating space for humanity. This paper discusses the impact each of these human-induced developments has on the provision of food as well as the other way round and what the consequences would be if the boundaries were exceeded. Yet there are means of keeping the worst consequences of most of these processes at bay. The paper explores some of these.

The Challenges of Applying Planetary Boundaries as a Basis for Strategic Decision-Making in Companies with Global Supply Chains

The Planetary Boundaries (PB) framework represents a significant advance in specifying the ecological constraints on human development. However, to enable decision-makers in business and public policy to respect these constraints in strategic planning, the PB framework needs to be developed to generate practical tools. With this objective in mind, we analyse the recent literature and highlight three major scientific and technical challenges in operationalizing the PB approach in decision-making: first, identification of thresholds or boundaries with associated metrics for different geographical scales; second, the need to frame approaches to allocate fair shares in the ‘safe operating space’ bounded by the PBs across the value chain and; third, the need for international bodies to co-ordinate the implementation of the measures needed to respect the Planetary Boundaries. For the first two of these challenges, we consider how they might be addressed for four PBs: climate change, freshwater use, biosphere integrity and chemical pollution and other novel entities. Four key opportunities are identified: (1) development of a common system of metrics that can be applied consistently at and across different scales; (2) setting ‘distance from boundary’ measures that can be applied at different scales; (3) development of global, preferably open-source, databases and models; and (4) advancing understanding of the interactions between the different PBs. Addressing the scientific and technical challenges in operationalizing the planetary boundaries needs be complemented with progress in addressing the equity and ethical issues in allocating the safe operating space between companies and sectors.

Collateral transgression of planetary boundaries due to climate engineering by terrestrial carbon dioxide removal

Abstract. The planetary boundaries framework provides guidelines for defining thresholds in environmental variables. Their transgression is likely to result in a shift in Earth system functioning away from the relatively stable Holocene state. As the climate system is approaching critical thresholds of atmospheric carbon, several climate engineering methods are discussed, aiming at a reduction of atmospheric carbon concentrations to control the Earth's energy balance. Terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) via afforestation or bioenergy production with carbon capture and storage are part of most climate change mitigation scenarios that limit global warming to less than 2 °C. We analyse the co-evolutionary interaction of societal interventions via tCDR and the natural dynamics of the Earth's carbon cycle. Applying a conceptual modelling framework, we analyse how the degree of anticipation of the climate problem and the intensity of tCDR efforts with the aim of staying within a "safe" level of global warming might influence the state of the Earth system with respect to other carbon-related planetary boundaries. Within the scope of our approach, we show that societal management of atmospheric carbon via tCDR can lead to a collateral transgression of the planetary boundary of land system change. Our analysis indicates that the opportunities to remain in a desirable region within carbon-related planetary boundaries only exist for a small range of anticipation levels and depend critically on the underlying emission pathway. While tCDR has the potential to ensure the Earth system's persistence within a carbon-safe operating space under low-emission pathways, it is unlikely to succeed in a business-as-usual scenario.

From Planetary Boundaries to national fair shares of the global safe operating space — How can the scales be bridged?

Abstract The planetary boundaries framework proposes quantitative global limits to the anthropogenic perturbation of crucial Earth system processes, and thus marks out a planetary safe operating space for human activities. Yet, decisions regarding resource use and emissions are mostly made at less aggregated scales, by national and sub-national governments, businesses, and other local actors. To operationalize the planetary boundaries concept, the boundaries need to be translated into and aligned with targets that are relevant at these decision-making scales. In this paper, we develop a framework that addresses the biophysical, socio-economic, and ethical dimensions of bridging across scales, to provide a consistently applicable approach for translating the planetary boundaries into national-level fair shares of Earth’s safe operating space. We discuss our findings in the context of previous studies and their implications for future analyses and policymaking. In this way, we link the planetary boundaries framework to widely-applied operational and policy concepts for more robust strong sustainability decision-making.

Crossing “safe” limits for biodiversity loss

Biodiversity The planetary boundaries framework attempts to set limits for biodiversity loss within which ecological function is relatively unaffected. Newbold et al. present a quantitative global analysis of the extent to which the proposed planetary boundary has been crossed (see the Perspective by Oliver). Using over 2 million records for nearly 40,000 terrestrial species, they modeled the response of biodiversity to land use and related pressures and then estimated, at a spatial resolution of ∼1 km2, the extent and spatial patterns of changes in local biodiversity. Across 65% of the terrestrial surface, land use and related pressures have caused biotic intactness to decline beyond 10%, the proposed “safe” planetary boundary. Changes have been most pronounced in grassland biomes and biodiversity hotspots. Science , this issue p. [288][1]; see also p. [220][2] [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aaf2201 [2]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aag1712

Tracking resource use relative to planetary boundaries in a steady-state framework: A case study of Canada and Spain

There is a growing understanding of the biophysical processes that regulate the stability of the Earth-system, yet human pressures on the planet continue to increase rapidly. Here, recent advances in defining Earth-system thresholds using the planetary boundaries framework are translated down to national and sub-national levels. A set of 10 indicators is developed in a biophysical accounting framework that links the sustainability of resource flows from the biosphere to final consumption. The indicator set includes three measures of physical stocks, three measures of aggregate resource consumption, and four indicators of sustainable scale. The four scale indicators are ratios of (i) cumulative carbon footprint relative to carbon budget, (ii) nutrient use relative to biogeochemical boundaries, (iii) blue water consumption relative to monthly basin-level availability, and (iv) land footprint relative to biocapacity. Taken together, the indicators measure how close high-consuming societies are to meeting the conditions of a “steady-state economy”, defined here as an economy with non-growing physical stocks and flows maintained within shares of planetary boundaries. The framework is applied over a 15-year period to the economies of Canada and Spain, along with two sub-national regions (Nova Scotia and Andalusia). Nova Scotia is the only study site experiencing stable or decreasing biophysical stocks and flows. None of the study sites are consuming resources within their shares of all four planetary boundaries. Overall, the set of indicators provides guidance for prioritizing which environmental pressures need to decline (and by how much) for societies to be more effective stewards of Earth-system stability.

Horses for courses: analytical tools to explore planetary boundaries

Abstract. There is a need for more integrated research on sustainable development and global environmental change. In this paper, we focus on the planetary boundaries framework to provide a systematic categorization of key research questions in relation to avoiding severe global environmental degradation. The four categories of key questions are those that relate to (1) the underlying processes and selection of key indicators for planetary boundaries, (2) understanding the impacts of environmental pressure and connections between different types of impacts, (3) better understanding of different response strategies to avoid further degradation, and (4) the available instruments to implement such strategies. Clearly, different categories of scientific disciplines and associated model types exist that can accommodate answering these questions. We identify the strength and weaknesses of different research areas in relation to the question categories, focusing specifically on different types of models. We discuss that more interdisciplinary research is need to increase our understanding by better linking human drivers and social and biophysical impacts. This requires better collaboration between relevant disciplines (associated with the model types), either by exchanging information or by fully linking or integrating them. As fully integrated models can become too complex, the appropriate type of model (the racehorse) should be applied for answering the target research question (the race course).

Limiting livestock production to pasture and by-products in a search for sustainable diets

A method was developed for designing ‘fair’ diets (not using more than globally available arable land per capita) and for assessing the sustainability of such diets. The diets were based on the principle of ‘ecological leftovers’ for livestock production, i.e. raising livestock on pasture and by-products not suitable for or wanted by humans. The method was applied to Sweden using three different scenarios for livestock production, all taking the starting point that semi-natural pastures should be grazed by ruminants for reasons of biodiversity conservation. The scenarios also included differing use of by-products (from crop production and food processing) to either boost milk production (I-Milk scenario) or produce eggs and pig meat (E-Milk and Suckler scenarios). In I-Milk, milk and meat were produced in intensive systems in which dairy cows and their offspring only grazed to a limited extent, resulting in the human diet containing recommended levels of dairy products (350ml milk per day) and meat twice a week. Milk could also be exported. In E-Milk, pasture was used more for dairy cows and their offspring, resulting in fewer animals and less milk (150ml milk per day) and four servings of meat per week. In the Suckler scenario, pasture was grazed by suckler herds providing no milk but meat four times per week. The environmental impacts of the diets were assessed using the planetary boundaries framework. The results showed substantially lower environmental impacts compared with the average current Swedish diet, but the strict absolute climate boundary and the N and P input boundaries were still exceeded for all diets. The approach adopted, of letting the ecological resource capacity act as the constraining factor for livestock production, is in line with agroecology principles and efficient use of land to improve food security, and could be useful in discussions about sustainable consumption of animal products.

Using the planetary boundaries framework for setting impact-reduction targets in LCA contexts

The planetary boundaries (PBs) framework suggests global limits for environmental interventions which could be used to set global goals for reducing environmental impacts. This paper proposes a procedure for using such global goals for setting impact-reduction targets at the scale of products for use, for example, in life cycle assessment (LCA) contexts, e.g. as a basis for evaluating the potential of interventions to reduce the environmental impact of products. The procedure consists of four steps: (i) identifying the PBs quantified in literature that correspond to an impact category which is studied in the product assessment context in question; (ii) interpreting what the identified PBs imply in terms of global impact-reduction targets; (iii) translating the outcome of (ii) to reduction targets for the particular global market segment to which the studied product belongs; and (iv) translating the outcome of (iii) to reduction targets for the studied product. The procedure requires some assumptions and value-based choices—the influence of these is tested by applying the procedure in a specific LCA context: a study of Swedish clothing consumption. The application of the procedure in an LCA context suggested the need for eliminating all or nearly all impact of Swedish clothing consumption for most impact categories. Thus, it is improbable that a single type of impact-reduction intervention (e.g. technological development or changed user behaviour) is sufficient. The outcome’s strong dependence on impact category suggests that the procedure can help in prioritising among impact categories. Furthermore, the outcome exhibited a strong dependence on the chosen method for allocating the globally allowed impact between regions—this was tested by applying different principles identified in a literature review on the allocation of emissions rights. The outcome also strongly depended on the geographical scope—this was tested by changing the geographical scope from Sweden to Nigeria. The proposed procedure is feasible to use for LCA practitioners and other environmental analysts, and data is available to apply the procedure in contexts with different geographical scopes. Value-based choices are, however, unavoidable and significantly influence the outcome, which accentuates the subjectivity and potentially controversial nature of allocating a finite impact space to certain regions, market segments and products. How to match PBs with appropriate LCA impact categories is an important area for future research.