Healthy living on a healthy planet - Summary

Unsere Lebensweise macht krank und zerstört die natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen. In der Vision „Gesund leben auf einer gesunden Erde“ werden menschliche Lebensbereiche – Ernähren, Bewegen, Wohnen – gesund und umweltverträglich gestaltet sowie planetare Risiken – Klimawandel, Biodiversitätsverlust, Verschmutzung – bewältigt. Gesundheitssysteme nutzen ihre transformativen Potenziale, Bildung und Wissenschaft befördern gesellschaftliche Veränderungen. Die Vision ist nur mit internationaler Kooperation realisierbar und erfordert eine globale Dringlichkeitsgovernance.Our lifestyle is making us ill and is destroying the natural life-support systems. In the vision of ‘healthy living on a healthy planet’, human spheres of life – what we eat, how we move, where we live – are designed to be both healthy and environmentally compatible, and planetary risks – climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution – have been overcome. Health systems harness their transformative potential; education and science promote societal change. The vision can only be realized with international cooperation and requires what the WBGU terms global urgency governance

Genome-wide Association Study of Response to Methotrexate in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy is a common first treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but many patients do not respond adequately. In order to identify genetic predictors of response, we have combined data from two consortia to carry out a genome-wide study of response to MTX in 1424 early RA patients of European ancestry. Clinical endpoints were change from baseline to 6 months after starting treatment in swollen 28-joint count, tender 28-joint count, C-reactive protein and the overall 3-component disease activity score (DAS28). No single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) reached genome-wide statistical significance for any outcome measure. The strongest evidence for association was with rs168201 in NRG3 (p = 10‾⁷ for change in DAS28). Some support was also seen for association with ZMIZ1, previously highlighted in a study of response to MTX in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Follow-up in two smaller cohorts of 429 and 177 RA patients did not support these findings, although these cohorts were more heterogeneous

Promises and risks of nonstate action in climate and sustainability governance

Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement stand as milestone diplomatic achievements. However, immense discrepancies between political commitments and governmental action remain. Combined national climate commitments fall far short of the Paris Agreement's 1.5/2°C targets. Similar political ambition gaps persist across various areas of sustainable development. Many therefore argue that actions by nonstate actors, such as businesses and investors, cities and regions, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), are crucial. These voices have resonated across the United Nations (UN) system, leading to growing recognition, promotion, and mobilization of such actions in ever greater numbers. This article investigates optimistic arguments about nonstate engagement, namely: (a) "the more the better"; (b) "everybody wins"; (c) "everyone does their part"; and (d) "more brings more." However, these optimistic arguments may not be matched in practice due to governance risks. The current emphasis on quantifiable impacts may lead to the under-appreciation of variegated social, economic, and environmental impacts. Claims that everybody stands to benefit may easily be contradicted by outcomes that are not in line with priorities and needs in developing countries. Despite the seeming depoliticization of the role of nonstate actors in implementation, actions may still lead to politically contentious outcomes. Finally, nonstate climate and sustainability actions may not be self-reinforcing but may heavily depend on supporting mechanisms. The article concludes with governance risk-reduction strategies that can be combined to maximize nonstate potential in sustainable and climate-resilient transformations

Global environmental agreement-making: upping the methodological and ethical stakes of studying negotiations

This perspective identifies how recent advances contribute to re-evaluating and re-constructing global environmental negotiations as a research object by calling into question who constitutes an actor and what constitutes a site of agreement formation. Building on this scholarship, we offer the term agreement-making to facilitate further methodological and ethical reflection. The term agreement-making broadens the conceptualisation of the actors, sites and processes constitutive of global environmental agreements and brings to the fore how these are shaped by, reflect and have the potential to re-make or transform the intertwined global order of social, political and economic relations. Agreement-making situates research within these processes, and we suggest that enhancing the methodological diversity and practical utility is a potential avenue for challenging the reproduction of academic dominance. We highlight how COVID-19 requires further adapting research practices and offers an opportunity to question whether we need to be physically present to provide critical insight, analysis and support